[Tesseract]

I added a link/notice to my sig.

As others have stated, the people who suffer the most from this incredibly stupid advertising scheme are the newcomers to the forums. Already, newer members have complained about their posts being modified (one thought that his/her MacNN account had been hacked into for the purpose of modifying posts) or been tricked into clicking what they thought was a legitimate link added by the original poster.

I, like others, will reduce my participation in these forums (and especially, I will not be able to provide technical assistance to new users) should intelliTXT continue to be enabled by default.

[mkbhatia]

The posts were not constructive and in fact destructive in nature. There's no reason to provide feedback anywhere else (or to anyone else), as we are still evaluating the ads and their effectiveness. That said, post that "disappear" are not necessarily destructive the community and/or the forums. Users/moderators who step outside normal lines of feedback and try to circumvent the system are destroying the very community they are trying to protect. Scott's post was bad move that was doing a lot more harm than good.

m.

[porieux]

...

[Silky Voice of The Gorn]

Heh my post didn't last long. Oh well.
So I wonder, if someone posts in another forum innocently asking about Google adsense and their policies, will that one get removed too?

[Tesseract]

Originally Posted by mkbhatia

Scott's post was bad move that was doing a lot more harm than good.

A lot like putting intelliTXT in the forums.

[Mastrap]

Originally Posted by mkbhatia

The posts were not constructive and in fact destructive in nature. There's no reason to provide feedback anywhere else (or to anyone else), as we are still evaluating the ads and their effectiveness. That said, post that "disappear" are not necessarily destructive the community and/or the forums. Users/moderators who step outside normal lines of feedback and try to circumvent the system are destroying the very community they are trying to protect. Scott's post was bad move that was doing a lot more harm than good.

m.

Scott's post was doing a lot less harm than you are doing. It might be worth remembering that this community is providing you with the means to create a sizeable part of your income.

We are not beggars, we give you the content you need to attract readers to the forum. No readers, no ad revenue.

Originally Posted by Mastrap

Scott's post was doing a lot less harm than you are doing.

You have no idea what you're talking about so stop.

[ryaxnb]

Just want to chime in that although I haven't seen any IntelliTXT this sucks. People are only going to these ads by accident. That sucks. And if spyware or adware starts being advertised by IntelliTXT, then I might be outta here.

[Silky Voice of The Gorn]

NFN, the redesign, now IntelliTXT. MacNN is reaching Quark-levels of contempt for its core users. Fun times!

[mkbhatia]

1) SVOTG: NFN was years ago (and was out of my control for while), so I'll leave it at that and move on.

2) IntelliTXT has been removed pending a discussion with Google Adsense; thanks to Scott's post our entire account may be in jeopardy.

3) Mastrap: you have no idea how much harm Scott's call did. In fact, it may be detrimental to the entire forums. IntelliTXT was trial (and will probably come back in some form for a longer trial), so while you THINK you may have a good idea of the entire picture, you only see stuff from your end--I have to take that into account along with other views as well. Your views are simply limited and your thoughts are based on incomplete information.

4) A lot of changes take time to get used to. In general, the actual change is not big, but people are used to things a certain way, so the initial reaction is to scream, rant, cry, etc. While I am not saying that IntelliTXT has a completely seamless and positive UI experience, newbies/users who report the posts are just not used to seeing it. Over time, they will understand the new sponsored links.

5) There's been a lot of talk about "cheapening" the site and how it detracts. One reader even mentioned creating an Amazon.com advertising section (like some other site). I'd be curious to hear why listing a bunch of Amazon links--amounting to 2-3 paragraphs-- in the middle of a news section is not more detrimental than 3-4 double underline links per page. The ad is not even displayed until uses choose to mouse over the relevant word.

Thanks again for your support and thoughts. Again, the IntelliTXT ads have been removed as we try to work with Google Adsense.

best,
monish

[analogika]

Originally Posted by porieux

I have yet to see any green links...

You're in Europe too, right?

Cause I have yet to see a single one, too.



****ing Intrusive Advertising Hates Our Freedom!


What next, I ask?


What next?


Will I no longer be informed of the sensational Viagra deals to be had online?


The horror!

[dreilly1]

It's good to hear that the IntelliTXT has been removed. I logged into my old account to change my sig there, as well, and decided to look back at this thread to see how things are progressing. I'll still stay away for a little while to see how the dust settles, but I had to respond to something you posted earlier, Monish.

Originally Posted by mkbhatia

2) IntelliTXT has been removed pending a discussion with Google Adsense; thanks to Scott's post our entire account may be in jeopardy.

It's unfortunate that your account with Adsense is in jepoardy, but Scott's post has nothing to do with it. Whoever in your organization made the agreement to use IntelliTXT without understanding the terms of the Google agreement is the person who put your account in jepoardy. If anything, Scott may have helped you out by bringing the matter to a resolution sooner, minimizing the amount of time your site was in conflict with Google's terms. He could have done it in a less public manner, to be sure, but his post did not cause your problem.

[Tesseract]

Originally Posted by mkbhatia

IntelliTXT was trial.

Why wasn't this made clear in the beginning? A sticky in the lounge explaining this new intelliTXT thing and with a rationale for its introduction would have been nice (and would probably have cut down on the initial "This sucks!" type posts too).

Originally Posted by mkbhatia

4) A lot of changes take time to get used to. In general, the actual change is not big, but people are used to things a certain way, so the initi]al reaction is to scream, rant, cry, etc. While I am not saying that IntelliTXT has a completely seamless and positive UI experience, newbies/users who report the posts are just not used to seeing it. Over time, they will understand the new sponsored links.

There will always be an influx of newbies (hopefully, anyway) and they will continue to be confused by the intelliTXT links. Obviously, those of us with more experience can ignore them or turn them off... so what we think of the links is not really the issue here.

Originally Posted by mkbhatia

5) There's been a lot of talk about "cheapening" the site and how it detracts. One reader even mentioned creating an Amazon.com advertising section (like some other site). I'd be curious to hear why listing a bunch of Amazon links--amounting to 2-3 paragraphs-- in the middle of a news section is not more detrimental than 3-4 double underline links per page. The ad is not even displayed until uses choose to mouse over the relevant word.

I'm not opposed to seeing the intelliTXT links in the news section where the content is MacNN's. I don't want my own words, here in the forums, to be randomly subverted by some script for advertising purposes.

I am among the group who did not even see the Amazon referral/Paypal donation links before they were mentioned a couple of days ago, due to their fairly obscure location at the bottom of the page. Now that I know about them, I plan to support MacNN with my future Amazon purchases (assuming this intelliTXT issue is resolved peaceably, that is). I imagine other users would do the same if the links were somewhere visible.

[Mastrap]

Originally Posted by mkbhatia

3) Mastrap: you have no idea how much harm Scott's call did. In fact, it may be detrimental to the entire forums. IntelliTXT was trial (and will probably come back in some form for a longer trial), so while you THINK you may have a good idea of the entire picture, you only see stuff from your end--I have to take that into account along with other views as well. Your views are simply limited and your thoughts are based on incomplete information.

Monish, where you and I disagree is that you think that it is acceptable to insert spam links in user generated content. I don't. It degrades the content itself, because it makes it difficult for readers to differentiate between what is unbiased advice and what is a commercial message.

Originally Posted by dreilly1

If anything, Scott may have helped you out by bringing the matter to a resolution sooner, minimizing the amount of time your site was in conflict with Google's terms. He could have done it in a less public manner, to be sure, but his post did not cause your problem.

No, we were already researching the matter.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Nick

You have no idea what you're talking about so stop.

Now see, here's a case where having a good reputation would be useful to you. As it is, many people here don't respect you and are not inclined to do what you want. If anything, it'll just inflame things further. (Obviously I'm not talking about me, since I wasn't involved in the posts you're addressing. I'm just trying to help you see how your aggressive style isn't helping things.)

[porieux]

...

[porieux]

...

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by mkbhatia

5) There's been a lot of talk about "cheapening" the site and how it detracts. One reader even mentioned creating an Amazon.com advertising section (like some other site). I'd be curious to hear why listing a bunch of Amazon links--amounting to 2-3 paragraphs-- in the middle of a news section is not more detrimental than 3-4 double underline links per page. The ad is not even displayed until uses choose to mouse over the relevant word.

I don't think you're understanding people's objection. It's not about how much advertising there is, but how it's incorporated. It's about separating ads from content. For instance, in a newspaper, there may be pages that are 2/3 ads with a news hole on top. Does this degrade the integrity of the content? No. But it would degrade the content if the editors randomly started throwing blatant shills into the middle of stories. "Today the cab drivers union went on strike. Call YELLOW CAB for GREAT SERVICE and LOW PRICES. The drivers said they weren't getting a large enough portion of company earnings. FEELING GREEDY? Visit POKERKING.com!!"

Not only that, but to change what people write so that it expresses support for things they have no control over might bother some people. How would you feel if MacNN were hacked so that random words in your articles linked to bestiality and pedophile sites? Would you say, "Oh well, people will get used to it. Nobody will associate us with these links"?

That's what people are getting at. I hope this offers some useful perspective.

[Gamoe]

Originally Posted by Dork.

I am very sorely tempted to only frequent forums which let posters keep the copyright on their posts from now on, precisely so stuff like this won't happen.

As I understand it, even by law (of course this may vary according to country, but I believe it is the norm) what you write is yours-- automatically copyrighted. I understand it is the same for the usenet, and web forums. So, I consider what I post on these forums to belong to me. Even if it were licensed under an "open-source license", I would not allow unauthorized commercial use.

I believe I speak for most of us when I say that we all generally post here for entertainment, community, to be helped by others, and to help others out when we can, but certainly not for our posts to be turned into unsolicited advertisements.

Now, if MacNN disagrees with posters' ownership of their posts, I would like to know, because I have a serious problem with that. And to any melding staff members (by no means, all inclusive)-- stop moderating the board, and let the respectable mods do their jobs properly.

Originally Posted by m a d r a

hey folks! - let's not forget we already support macNN by writing the vast majority of the site's content on a regular, voluntary basis.

Agreed. Excellent point, m a d r a.

[Drakino]

I'm glad to see the ads gone for now, but I will leave these boards, and the news if they return to the forums. I've tolerated the flash ads that raised my CPU to 100%, I've tolerated the front page changes, but I won't tolerate having my own posts turned into spam. This has been the only web community I have looked to for my Mac needs since I switched to the platform in 2001, but it definitely isn't the only one out there.

Sorry to the mods for my report abuse issue. I got a bit pissed about the ads, and felt that using the built in system to fight them might make an impact. It did prove a point though, some users are bound to see these as abuse, and report them without knowing, thus increasing the work load of the volunteer moderators. How long will this site last without the volunteers helping out?

[King_Rat]

A few thoughts on the INtelliTXT issue:

- I am going to compare INtelliTXT to google adds because google adds are some of the best that I ever see. I hate most adds with a vengeance; I accept that they have their place in generating revenue, but that does not mean that I like them. Google adds are some of the only internet adds that don't bother me. That is because: 1) they are straight to the point ("we sell ipods" instead of "shoot the monkey"), 2) they are low bandwidth (I use a modem connection at home and hate it when I spend 60 sec. downloading adds and 10 sec. on the content), they are are relevant (when I need to buy something they are very useful), and 3) they are not in my way (when I don't want to buy something it is easy to ignore them).

- Now think about INtelliTXT. It is a winner on the low bandwidth (which is not an issue for many people here). However, it looses big time on the other 2 points. It is very intrusive. It is also unlikely to appear when you are looking to buy something unless you are browsing the marketplace. Even when you are in the marketplace, it is improbable that it will actually advertise something that you are looking for. As a result, INtelliTXT annoys users more than other adds.

- Most users in this thread seem to be having a problem with the adds because of where they are; they don't have a big problem with adds on the top, bottom, left, right and sometimes middle of the page. This supports my above point that overly intrusive adds are a problem.



Now some thoughts on the political side of the issue:

- When you are testing a new item in the forums it is best to be talking with the users throughout the entire process. In the case of INtelliTXT I would have recommended a chain of events something like this:

*Start a thread in the feedback forum saying something like "We want/need to increase revenue, and we think that INtelliTXT may be a good way to do it." Be sure to provide a description of exactly what it is, how it works, what the payoff is, and some samples (either a sample thread with and without it or a link to some sights that use it).

*When you decide to implement it for a limited time trial make sure that there is a new thread saying something like "We are testing INtelliTXT for <however many> days. Please leave any feedback that you may have in this thread. Here is the previous discussion of what it does: <link to previous thread>" Note that this would have avoided the flood of threads on the topic.

*You may end up putting the topic up to a vote. After the test post a poll that is something like "INtelliTXT - Yes, No, or do not care." This would give you a very good idea of how people feel about it.


- Throughout the above procedure you should make brief announcements outside the feedback forum. Until the current discussion the feedback forum was one of the least frequented forums because people normally come here is they have something to complain about, so they may not notice any pending changes until it is too late to have a say.


- On the deleting posts issue: I did not see the posts in question, though I have a rough idea of what they were (but am curious as to exactly what they were), so I don't know how appropriate they were. However, deleting posts that are not a clear violation of the stated rules is very dangerous. The purpose of visiting a forum is to discuss things. When people feel that the discussion is being censored they are very likely to just leave. In this case it is especially bad because it gives the feeling that you are attempting to oppress dissent, even thought that may not be what you were trying to do. Suppose that you were to now to do the previously suggested vote, and it were to come up that 10% users say no to INtelliTXT, 30% say yes, and the rest don't care. In that case, some users would be left wondering if the vote was rigged. I am NOT suggesting that you would do such a thing. Rather, I am saying that many people will no longer trust you when you don't abide by your own rules, or when you delete posts that they believe questioned your actions.

- We do not own this forum; we can not stop you from doing whatever you want with it. However, we can & will leave if we stop liking it here. You depend on volunteer input for your existence, and right now all your volunteers seem to be very upset. It is clear that nobody seems to like what is going on; I have not seen one non-administrator post supporting INtelliTXT. If you persist in this the forum use will drop, and your advertising income with it.



I think that a big issue that we are not quite getting to is that we have to be able to trust the forum administrators; the current issue is making forum members question that trust because 1) they feel that their contribution is being used inappropriately, and 2) they are unsure if their feedback is being respected.. Sure, we will always have some disagreements, but if it decide that I can not trust the forum administration then I will leave.


I have read these forums for many years, and I hope that we work this problem out.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by Nick

You have no idea what you're talking about so stop.

Originally Posted by mkbhatia

3) Mastrap: you have no idea how much harm Scott's call did. In fact, it may be detrimental to the entire forums. IntelliTXT was trial (and will probably come back in some form for a longer trial), so while you THINK you may have a good idea of the entire picture, you only see stuff from your end--I have to take that into account along with other views as well. Your views are simply limited and your thoughts are based on incomplete information.

You guys are incredible.

You hardly ever write and when you do it's pissing off everybody else. You have no rep whatsoever, yet you feel the urge to defend yourself by throwing dirt at contributing forum members.

Stop blaming others for your own blunders. You screwed up with this whole moronic green crap thing and if anything Scott should get a reward for forcing you into some sense. If you are too narrow minded to see the greater picture, I applaud Scott for giving you the slap that brought you out of your hallucinations.

This all started because you thought filling your pockets was more important than treating your volunteer content providers with a minimum of respect. You're lucky if you get away with it the way it is now. If this forum goes down, everybody here will know which two geniuses are to blame.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Simon

You guys are incredible.

You hardly ever write and when you do it's pissing off everybody else. You have no rep whatsoever, yet you feel the urge to defend yourself by throwing dirt at contributing forum members.

To be fair, I wouldn't say Monish always pisses people off when he writes. He has generally been fairly reasonable and polite in his responses. He does seem out of touch with the forums, but aside from this IntelliTXT bullshit, he's hardly going around wreaking havok, chaos and destruction. The few other responses he's provided that I've seen have been fairly constructive.

[Simon]

Yes, you are right about that.

The comment was more directed towards Nick (see link). Monish just seems completely out of touch with the daily forum activity.

If these people had read the discussions and uproar this whole green nonsense caused they would have turned it off within hours. Instead they just sat it out. And now their dilatoriness is causing some real trouble. Instead of excusing themselves for the mess they got us in, they chose to insult contributing members of this board. I find that highly offensive.

[Chuckit]

Like King Rat said, I'd like to try to work this out reasonably, and Monish seems like a decent enough guy that it's possible. I feel kind of sorry that people are going behind his back and ratting him out to Google, even though he was violating their TOS. I think what we have here, as they say, is a failure to communicate.

[Gamoe]

Originally Posted by Nick

You have no idea what you're talking about so stop.

Nick, if you wish to be treated like a respectable administrator, I suggest you make more mature replies and not meddle with forum.

Originally Posted by mkbhatia

1)Mastrap: you have no idea how much harm Scott's call did. In fact, it may be detrimental to the entire forums.

If you've violated an agreement with an advertiser, then that is your own doing. Though I cannot read Scott's post, because it was deleted, I can't see how he could seriously "jeopardize" your Google Adsense account unless you were really doing something against the agreement you had with Google in the first place. Scott merely disclosed the violation. I don't see how you can blame him for your errors.

Also, I have always appreciated how MacNN does not engage in senseless censorship (unlike other boards) and practices only locking of threads for everything but the most detrimental of posts. I hope this is not a trend to the contrary.

Originally Posted by mkbhatia

IntelliTXT was trial (and will probably come back in some form for a longer trial)

Oh, yeah... great idea...

Originally Posted by mkbhatia

so while you THINK you may have a good idea of the entire picture, you only see stuff from your end--I have to take that into account along with other views as well. Your views are simply limited and your thoughts are based on incomplete information.

Next time, you should consider actually consulting the community before you make significant changes that affect the community itself.

Originally Posted by mkbhatia

4) A lot of changes take time to get used to. In general, the actual change is not big, but people are used to things a certain way, so the initial reaction is to scream, rant, cry, etc. While I am not saying that IntelliTXT has a completely seamless and positive UI experience, newbies/users who report the posts are just not used to seeing it. Over time, they will understand the new sponsored links.

Over time, a people may become used to being conquered, but it doesn't mean it's a good thing. There are enough evils in the world as it is. Please don't bring back the IntelliTXT ads-- they are sneaky, intrusive, violate people's authorship rights and are generally negative for the community.

Originally Posted by mkbhatia

5) There's been a lot of talk about "cheapening" the site and how it detracts. One reader even mentioned creating an Amazon.com advertising section (like some other site). I'd be curious to hear why listing a bunch of Amazon links--amounting to 2-3 paragraphs-- in the middle of a news section is not more detrimental than 3-4 double underline links per page. The ad is not even displayed until uses choose to mouse over the relevant word.

All I suggested was placing sponsor links on the main page, and when I realized that MacNN already does that, I suggested merely placing them atop instead. The biggest issue with the IntelliTXT ads are the lack of separation between content, particularly user generated content, from advertisement.

Originally Posted by mkbhatia

Thanks again for your support and thoughts. Again, the IntelliTXT ads have been removed as we try to work with Google Adsense.

That should not be your only, or in fact, your biggest, reason for removing and re-considering the ads.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Gabriel Morales

If you've violated an agreement with an advertiser, then that is your own doing. Though I cannot read Scott's post, because it was deleted, I can't see how he could seriously "jeopardize" your Google Adsense account unless you were really doing something against the agreement you had with Google in the first place. Scott merely disclosed the violation. I don't see how you can blame him for your errors.

Scott's post was basically, "MacNN is breaking the rules. Here's the link if you want to tell Google about it."

[Since EBCDIC]

What I find incredibly amusing about this whole debacle is that the powers-that-be are so stunningly clueless about the whole gestalt of this community that this advertising scheme (to put it politely) seemed like a good idea at all.

How deeply into believing your own press releases do you have to be to think that adulterating volunteer content is a sustainable plan?

Does it require an almost complete ignorance of recent history to think this might work? Are there no MacNN staffers who thought of Microsoft's debacle with the SmartTags when this bomb of a revenue idea was mentioned? Why think you could go where a company with real resources couldn't?

There seems to be some serious comprehension issues amongst the paid staff. It's amazing that anyone involved in this kind of community wouldn't run screaming from an opt-out intrusive scheme like this. Doesn't seem like a good employment match to me (and I've been employing tech people since 1977).

This will be my last contribution to these forums until I see an unequivocal promise that these sorts of intrusive post-altering opt-out shenanigans will permanently cease. (I'm SinceEBCDIC at the Apple Boards, where I'll be until local sanity is restored. Ciao.)

[Dr.Michael]

Originally Posted by mkbhatia

1)
4) A lot of changes take time to get used to. In general, the actual change is not big, but people are used to things a certain way, so the initial reaction is to scream, rant, cry, etc. While I am not saying that IntelliTXT has a completely seamless and positive UI experience, newbies/users who report the posts are just not used to seeing it. Over time, they will understand the new sponsored links.

best,
monish

I don't agree.
There are two things that drives me to use the internet less: Spam and ads. Intellitext is both. It makes the pages less readable and cannot be ignored (thats the idea). I wouldn't be online any more if I had to use a browser without popup blocking. I accept ads where they are so decently placed that it is MY choice to read or ignore them. It is unacceptable to change the content of a post without permission of the intellectual owner. It may be your choice to infest the editorial contributions of macnn, but it is not your choice to manipulate our posts in the forums.

And you think people will get used to spam?
Currently I don't have an internet connection a home and spend some evenings a week reading books (remember these paper things?).

Its great!

I will not hesistate doing this more frequently instead of spending my time here if macnn does not remain a pleasant experience.

[analogika]

In a support forum, where a large part of the point of posting is to provide HELPFUL links within the replies to a query, you want to start embedding sponsored ad links?

I'm sorry, but: Which complete MORON could even BEGIN to think that this is a good idea?

If I were to reply to a post, voluntarily endorsing and linking to a product that I think is the best-fit to do a job, and somebody or something were to go through my post and randomly add commercial links to related products, I would lose interest in providing this place with any sort of content at all VERY quickly.

I realize it's easy to forget if all you do is watch the ****wits in the Lounges, but the reason the MacNN forums exist USED TO BE because they were a great source for support information. Content.

If you start manipulating that content, there is no reason to visit the forums anymore.
I can go do a google search and weed through extraneous spam links and ads there.

[Person Man]

I agree with everyone here about the intelliTXT. Those ads are intrusive and edit other people's content with things they have no control over.

I do NOT want the word "desktop," for example, to link to Dell, or HP, or Compaq, or ANY OTHER COMPUTER COMPANY that is not Apple. This is an APPLE forum, NOT a generic PC forum.

I'm sure CharlesS doesn't want the word "Pacifist" to be linked to some anti-war site or to a product competing with his.

I can think of many other examples. I've never had problems with the ads at the top or even the Google AdSense ads.

Place as many ads OUTSIDE the content as you want, but please DON'T start placing ads into the content. I guarantee you that the people who say they're leaving WILL leave, and you will NOT have the community that makes this a great place. And that includes me.

[DeathToWindows]

Ok, I've been on these forums for six years now and have been a witness to several interesting events (i.e. the NFN debacle, the redesign, the death and resurrection of many hamsters) and I must say I find the intelliTXT ads to be on par, in terms of annoyance, with the NFN issues. I have blocked them via the /etc/hosts route and am really rather miffed that I had to do so.

I am encouraged by what the mods have posted here - and discouraged by what the administrators have posted. I realize that an ad-free internet is an impossibility and I came to terms with that years ago, but the idea that my own works can be stolen and used as an advertising medium galls me.

The banner ads are fine - the AdSense ads are fine - but the intelliTXT ads must go.
If the ownership wants to test out new ways of generating revenue, let us know about it before hand - put a sticky in the lounge and/or in each forum.

[m a d r a]

Originally Posted by DeathToWindows

....the NFN debacle...

<homer simpson voice> the what now? </homer simpson voice>

[subego]

Originally Posted by mkbhatia

3) Mastrap: you have no idea how much harm Scott's call did. In fact, it may be detrimental to the entire forums. IntelliTXT was trial (and will probably come back in some form for a longer trial), so while you THINK you may have a good idea of the entire picture, you only see stuff from your end--I have to take that into account along with other views as well. Your views are simply limited and your thoughts are based on incomplete information.

4) A lot of changes take time to get used to. In general, the actual change is not big, but people are used to things a certain way, so the initial reaction is to scream, rant, cry, etc. While I am not saying that IntelliTXT has a completely seamless and positive UI experience, newbies/users who report the posts are just not used to seeing it. Over time, they will understand the new sponsored links.

It's difficult to maintain goodwill in the face of such arrogant and condescending statements.

Your issues are completely sympathetic. Your attitude belies an opinion of us that is not.

[baw]

Wtf is NFN?

[euphras]

Originally Posted by tooki

Just an FYI to you guys, it was a staff member that deleted those posts, not a forum team member. We're on your side.

tooki

So the staff guys are the paid ones?!?

Oh, and:

Originally Posted by chris v

There's the meat of the situation. So long as this ridiculous idea is implemented at all, I will demur from adding any such future content. Regardless of whether I can disable the links personally for my browser, so long as they continue to show up in posts to viewers who haven't disabled it, I won't be posting any further content to any of the help forums. I will not have my knowledge turned into crass advertising. Period. I'll keep an eye on the issue from time to time, but pretty much understand that you've lost me as a useful member.

Second that, we spend our time for free and the few who profit due to our content dare to annoy us. I would even go further. The lounge also is part of the well, that brings the money. Maybe time for a break.......

[Chuckit]

NFN is NewsFactor Network, which bought MacNN for a short time. It drove everyone crazy and eventually Monish took the site back.

[m a d r a]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

NFN is NewsFactor Network, which bought MacNN for a short time. It drove everyone crazy and eventually Monish took the site back.

i must have been off that week [or it was before my time], coz i dinnae remember that at all. what happened and why did it "drive everyone crazy"?

[Chuckit]

http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.p...66#post1204326

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by baw

What a mess.

Seconded.

And the hampstor is unhappy as well. WTF ?

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by analogika

I'm sorry, but: Only a greedy-a$$ MORON could BEGIN to think that this is a good idea !

Fixinated !

[Chuckit]

Witty.

[Weyland-Yutani]

I too express my utter contempt over the IntelliTXT idea. It is awful in the forums. Use it on the material you (MacNN) make yourselves, but keep us *out* please.

I don't want to see this crap again.

I've been a member since 2001 and don't know if anything as daft was tried before that time but no ad-stunts you've come up with can compare with this .. please shelf this idea permanently for the forums.

cheers

W-Y

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by baw

Wtf is NFN?

NFN is the NewsFactor Network.

A short summary of the whole debacle can be found here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macintosh_News_Network

[zro]

Another site mining the forums for ad fodder... great.

I don't have any "street cred" around here, but as a long time Mac user I'd like to think I have a thing or two to contribute. Which sure as hell isn't gonna happen if you bring back Intellitxt. I haven't seen an Intellitxt link in months (thanks to PithHelmet ) so that isn't the problem. Like everyone else it's having my knowledge, ideas, and opinions used against me and other users. Not cool.


Funny thing is, I opened the feedback forum to say thanks for changing your redirect URL structure to include the target. That's bugged me forever. Thanks.

[Love Calm Quiet]

Dang! I hate that I missed those green underlines. Can I actually have been off the forums that long?!?

Anyway, who R those INTelliTXT guys? Is that "Vibrant Medea"? (the goddess who killed all her own children)

Is that the design/development company that think the classy way to design an entire site is FLASH etc? (Looks smooth, of course. Does dropdowns nicely. But (*my* beef) with that FLASH (that is the Macromedia product employed isn't it?) design is that I cannot even hover over a dropped-down menu item and see the address in status bar. (We paranoids like such little hints about where a commercial site is going to hijack us.)

Ya gotta love the load time on those FLASH sites, eh? :/

[King_Rat]

Originally Posted by Love Calm Quiet

Dang! I hate that I missed those green underlines. Can I actually have been off the forums that long?!?
:/

You may have been off that long, but I don't think that the things worked with all browsers. I never ran across any of them when using OmniWeb on my mac at home, though that may have been due to my ad blocking settings (I never felt like turning them off to find out).

[demograph68]

What did Scott do? Adsense doesn't allow for the use of intelliTXT? Why? I don't understand.

Blah...

[Chuckit]

AdSense doesn't allow for competing contextually targeted marketing schemes, apparently.