Jeffers,
I've got no problem at all with people voicing their opinions and I think SI listens contrary to those who believe that "they don't care about the members' concerns". As you said, there are lots of SI long-timers and supporters on the bandwagon -which is good- as they've seen the transformation and transitions over the years. New users are also important though as they typically come from other sites and don't want to see SI become a Foolish Yahoo board. <g>
I was just surprised that demands were being made to immediately shut off the ads and when those demands weren't met in less than 24 hrs., Brad was basically accused of being a liar. The green was changed quickly to purple/blue and because a color code was easily swapped out, some assumed that a button to shut off ads would be instantly available as well? I think that the problem here might lie in the fact that we are perhaps too accustomed to immediate responses on problems with new implimentations and are dissatisfied with anything that takes longer than what? A few minutes? A day? A week?
To assume that they sold out to the highest bidder and slit the members' necks in the process is pretty severe, IMO. "TO HECK WITH YOU MEMBERS! WE WANT MO MONEY MO MONEY MO MONEY! [followed by sinister laughing]" :) Maybe it was more like, "Well, we are going to test this green thing on the members' page and implement the option to turn it off within a day or so when we roll out some other site changes that they're gonna like... WHAT? It's been less than a day and sh*t happens and we've now got a little problem to fix with that function, but they're already damning us? Sheesh!" Disclaimer: (Total speculation on my part in the preceding quotes. :)
Now, yes... maybe someone should've said something somewhere to calm the natives if problems had arisen in the master plan. But then, wouldn't they be accused of simply having made 'the change' in response to 'having broken a promise'? "See! They're a bunch of lying wimps and they weren't gonna shut off those ads unless we all threatened to leave and trash the site on the way out! WE WON! WE WON!! AHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA we won!!" <gg>
Whether or not an option to eliminate ads on members' pages had ALWAYS been in place but hit a snag in actual practice, it seems that some prefer to insist that Brad lied. Period. That members' opinions don't count. Period. That SI sold out to the man (Hey Russ! ;) and is chasing ONLY the almighty buck. Period. I think that's unfair.
As far as paying to use a site with no ads - right on. The revenues can and will come from the nonmember pages and other avenues. Last I checked, the advertising department of Go2Net was alive and well and expanding to a total of ten offices, I believe. That's a lot of ads <gg> but not on the members' pages of SI. And, as far as joining a site being different than getting all warm and fuzzy for the SI team - get real. SI's success is largely due to the community among the users. I don't think anyone could deny that. LOTS of friendships have been made through SI among users***, so why wouldn't some folks feel friendly toward the people who made it all possible? I think it's only natural among friends to speak out and be supportive when something goes awry, and to bask in the glow when things are going along well... I'd defend any of my friends if I felt they were being wrongly accused and I have.
We may all be very surprised at what's been cooking. That was what I meant in my 'wheels are turning' comment. Not that they are out to use the members' page to reap big advertising bucks, but that changes have been in the works well before the Datek ad ever hit the site. Give them a chance to prove that the promise has not been broken, and don't be so quick to judge because it didn't happen simultaneously with the addition of the ad.
V.
P.S.
***Have you eaten any shrimp lately, Jeffers? ;) hehe |
