That's why you are not seeing them in the SE forums Ed.
-Lee
![]() | Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years. Thanks, CNET Support |
Discussion is locked
That's why you are not seeing them in the SE forums Ed.
-Lee
I had not seen a single ad on Cnet all of 2007 after creating a nice set of filters, so this is NOT a good way to start off the new year! Due to the way the ad was inserted there's no easy way to remove it entirely, but you can come close using custom style sheets.
Desired code:
#ad_infoboard_box {display: none !important;}
Firefox/Netscape/Flock users:
Browse to your Firefox/Netscape/Flock profile directory, open the Chrome folder, and create a file called userContent.css. (There should be an 'example' userContent file you can rename.) Add the desired code, save the file, and restart your browser.
Internet Explorer:
Create a text file with the naming of your choice and then change the extension from .txt to .css. Add the desired code and save the file. Then in IE go Tools->Internet Options->General->Accessibility, check the box to enable the usage of style sheets, and then browse for your newly created file. OK your way out and the changes should be automatically reflected without a restart.
Opera:
Create a text file with the naming of your choice and then change the extension from .txt to .css. Add the desired code and save the file. Then in Opera go Tools->Preferences->Advanced->Content->Style Options and point it to your newly created file.
Safari:
Create a text file with the naming of your choice and then change the extension from .txt to .css. Add the desired code and save the file. Then in Safari go Edit->Preferences->Advanced, select "Other" from the style sheet drop-down menu, then browse for the newly created file.
Depending on your browser the "Ad Feedback" link may or may not be removed, but it will look something like this: Centro Ad Removed
There's still a 'blank' row in the table of threads, but it's better than staring at that advertisement. Personally, I use a Firefox extension to open multiple links at once, so that ad was opened ever time. It's not a total solution, but it's better than nothing!
Hope this helps!!
John
I didn't know you could override a sites stylesheet like that. That's a powerful tool!
And I'm sure Lee can have this change done in the official Cnet version of the stylesheet in less than one hour if he wants, while his engineers wipe out the new code in the Jive software to insert the advertisement.
Of course, the engineers could easily outsmart your change by using the same style for this box and a part of the page that you wouldn't like to see disappearing. Or by defining a randomly named style in the page itself (not in a css-file) and using that.
In Firefox, by the way, you can remove the Ad Feedback link by blocking i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/Ads/* in Adblock (plus).
Kees
I've been using it on Cnet for a while, mainly for tweaking the colors and stripping out the (sometimes dangerous) Google Syndication ads. On Yahoo I set it to remove all adverts and sponsored results, and finally adjust the width of news stories and search results to fit the width of my screen...no more wasted real estate. They could try to make it undesirable to remove the ads, but I'm hoping they don't consider it worth the time, effort, and money to snag those who have gone out of their way to avoid them. There are far too many issues, in the forums and elsewhere, that need addressed.
John
remove the post about the filters. That way the engineers cannot see how it's done.
Maybe you could do a mod alert on you own post and remove it. LOL!
Rick
I've changed the userContent-example file to include the code you listed yet it still shows the ad. Any ideas?
Win Vista Home Premium
Firefox 2.0.0.11
1.) You renamed userContent-example.css to userContent.css.
2.) You restarted Firefox, beginning a new session.
Those are the two most common causes, though I'd be happy to troubleshoot beyond that if you stop by the Browsers forum.
John
I did those two things. I also started a new thread in the Browsers forum on the issue. Thanks for your help.
then I noticed that I had two folders under "Moxilla", ie;
C:\Documents and Settings\{me}\Application Data\Mozilla\Firefox and
C:\Documents and Settings\{me}\Application Data\Mozilla\Profiles
Each one has a Chrome folder. I tried John's css file in the Mozilla\Profiles\..\..\Chrome folder first but that didn't work.
Then I noticed the Profiles sub-folder within the Firefox folder, and found the Chrome folder inside that, and placed the css file there.
Then I rebooted Firefox and the advert disappeared. There is still a space there, but no advertising.
I wonder if you have done the same as me?
Mark
John, You are too smart and you never cease to amaze me.
WOW!!! Thanks,
-Kevin
randomly in the middle of threads makes it hard to keep up with a thread. IMHO it's a disaster!
Makes me dislike the product advertised!
Glenn
.... and considering that the community is a free service....
.... that, so far, all of the major TV network and cable news internet sites are clogged here, there and everywhere with ads...
..... it appears that advertising is an important source of revenue to keep them going, and perhaps to even keep them free.
This could be especially true after the advent of the ad blockers.
Angeline
it is where this particular ad is appearing that is bringing the objections. Posting it in the middle of the threads is the worst idea I have ever seen here. I HOPE it is just a glitch and not someone's idea of a revenue grabber.
These ads in the middle of the threads are a Pita
The odds of them being corrected IMHO are about the same as the other problems with the forum which we have not been able to have corrected
First is the problem of the "Tracking notification w/subject blank" which has been around since 12/03/07 and still around today
Then there is the read marking on topics which when opened shows already to have been read
And the 1/4 and 1/2 black screens between threads which has been around forever
Or the "NT" that does not remove when edited
When I first joined the forum these items were not a problem. Updates have created them and we have not had any success in getting any corrections
I have tolerated these items because of the member and moderators and the excellent help they offer
But like another member stated this is quickly reaching the point of no return
Hi everyone,
I'm going to be brutally honest with you all.
CNET depends on its ads for revenue, it is our business and it what keeps our content free and areas like the forums open for everyone to use. For many of you who have been around for many years, through the many forums changes, overhauls, ups and downs, etc... You may or may not know this, but the forums do not generate much revenue for CNET.
The truth is that the forums are difficult to sell to advertisers. The ads that you see running in the forums are usually part of package when something is sold else were on CNET to help supplement a sale--"as part of the package deal". The forum almost never generates revenue on its own. However, the forums are important part of our site and while the forums most likely will not sell on its own to advertisers, it does greatly assist in making a deal when we do sell ads on another part of our site.
I know many of you disagree with the placement of these particular ads, and honestly I'm not too thrilled about the one in the threads --which I tend to agree with you as being a bit disruptive.
I'm not going to say "unfortunately" these ads are here to stay, rather I'm going to say we are very fortunate to have these ads in forums, because to me what these ads say to me is that our marketing team is well aware of the forums, and it's not just some part of our site that is not worth a hoot (many of you may remember those days). When ads like these are present here, it creates awareness, awareness creates attention, and attention leads to more resources behind it. While the forums do not generate a lot of revenue for the company, we know how important it is to our members and readers. That's why they exist in the first place. We've put a lot time and resources behind the forums and now it's time to generate some revenue to put back into the expenses.
To be fair to you folks, what I'm going to do is talk to our marketing team to see what possible solution we can come up with to maybe place the ad in a less disruptive position within the threads, yet give our advertisers a good impression on their ad. I'm not guaranteeing you anything, but I will talk to them and give them your feedback about the ads.
Maybe you folks can drum up some ideas on where we can place the ads--just so you know the ads have to be the same size, we can't just simply move it to the left hand column.
I don't think the one in forum discussion listing page is an issue (http://forums.cnet.com/5204-7586_102-0.html?forumID=68), but the one in the thread needs probably some rethinking/repositioning.
Anyways, I hope you folks understand were I'm coming from and understand that we have a business to maintain. Some of these ads and placement aren't exactly ideal, but they serve a purpose which is to keep our site/business running.
I want to thank you all for your feedback! Like Wayne said you can always send feedback of how much you dislike the ads through the "Ad feedback" link. And like I said earlier, I cannot guarantee anything will change, but I will promise to talk to our marketing folks and let them be very aware of your feedback in hopes that we can come up with some sort of solution that will satisfy both you as our valuable members and also our advertisers.
Sincerely,
-Lee
CNET Community
but do they have to be right in the middle of the threads? Seems to me that if people are angry about it, they would be turned off enough to where they wouldn't buy the product anyway.So, there would be no revenue. Why can't it be placed at the very top or bottom of the page? Like another poster said, at first she thought the page had ended. That was also my first thought. Just seems to me that there has to be a better place to put it. If another add comes along, is it also going to be placed in the threads so it will be more visible? It really is very distracting.....Maggie
repositioning of that ad within the thread. It is distracting and can be confusing to readers.
Thanks again for the feedback!
folks and prospective advertisers that, when ads are intrusive or annoying, many people will still remember the product and might link it to an unpleasant experience from that time on. Don't we all have products that we refuse to buy just because we don't want to give in to an annoying sales pitch? I don't think marketers try to appeal to intellect as much as to impulse. I wish this wasn't so.
Honestly, I can't think of a place to move it. The left-hand column is, like you said, obviously out, at the top of each forum page we already have a banner ad, and I doubt Palm would be happy with their ad appearing at the very bottom of a page where people rarely look, down there with Google's text ads. Thus, I don't expect them to disappear until the current agreement runs out, whenever that may be.
The point I keep coming back to is this:
When the forums were overhauled (October 2006) you told us that the revenue was there and the engineering resources had been dedicated to maintain and continue advancement of these forums. Great! However, since then the only advancement has been the inclusion of the real-time forum tracker (which remains in beta), and I have not seen any (noticeable) bug fixes in months. The list is growing. I know they are likely busy performing maintenance on the back end and working on other projects for other parts of Cnet, but work doesn't just have to be done, it has to appear to be done as well.
Now, when I read your reply, I can't help but wonder why we have to accept more advertisements in exchange for less work being done. From my perspective, I see this decision as being made by the executives in the best interests of some other part of Cnet, not for the benefit of the forums at all, possibly under a vague threat of losing the forums entirely, under the guise of being "underachieving," if you and the rest of us do not comply with their demands.
I'm not happy about inline, roll-over, or other forms of advertisements that adversely affect the usability of the forums. I'd be more willing to tolerate them, though, if I saw the positive improvement they brought to the table. Can such be shown in the near future? If not then this decision really did have nothing to do with bettering the forums, just their profit margins.
John
Has any thought been given to paid subscriptions in which the advertising is removed and various novelties, such as a special member badge, been given? Several other of the forums I've tried out offer such options and do quite well at self sustainment.
John
Could it be moved to the very top of the screen, above the universal login and Cnet logo? That spot has used for a tribute to James Kim, and later as an advertisement banner. Never used to house an ad that large, but it would certainly be more appeasing than in the middle of threads and forum listings. And it would be even more prominent than it is now, so Palm should find it agreeable.
Just a thought.
John
P.S. Any response to the two previous posts, Lee?
As for the response to the previous 2 post of yours John, I promise to get back to you on that and Mark's response also... I'm just a bit overwhelmed with work currently. Too many things to do, not enough time in a day
.
Thanks John!
-Lee
Is there any chance that the forums will ever use standard BB code syntax for URL links?
Or that we will get numbered lists?
Or inline images instead of just links to images? (ie, (Invalid img))
You can be sure we would get some very nasty ones posted, as well as avatars, image-links, etc.
I don't think I would want that in these forums.
Mark
Such functionality could be restricted. Perhaps block images from being uploaded by new members for XX posts or XX days. It would also be nice to finally support a warning system where each infraction could limit the member's abilities, such as posting images, contacting others by PM, etc. Off-topic wishful thinking, though. ![]()
John
It might also depend heavily on the context.
I have participated in forums which only allow things like image posting (or even linkable URLs in some cases) for members who have a certain longevity on the system.
There was a time (before this incarnation of the software) when most of the Speakeasy regulars had animated GIF signatures. That was probably a bit over the top, but it did fit in OK in that forum at that time. I don't recall that it caused a lot of problems.
But even if IMAGES aren't going to be allowed the other requests (support for lists and use of standard BB code) would simplify life. I haven't tried it recently, but last time I checked the forum software used a non-standard syntax for URL links and it didn't support codes like [quote] [code] [list] which have significant utility.
My upgrade to FireFox 2 broke the extension I had that automated creating BB Code entries but it was quite useful ... other than the fact that the URLs wouldn't post correctly.