Please tell me you will never... Do this....

[Adam Howard]

Skimlinks and VerticalResponse

So they've added adware and spam into the core product. Nice going Internet Brands.

1) Internet Brands decided to rely on a 3rd party product, rather then code something

2) Internet Brands decided we should be paying a 3rd party provider to use the product we already paid for from Internet Brands (vBulletin)

3) Security software does not like their 3rd party service provider (some individuals will get a warning or not even be able to access the 3rd party provider's site).

4) Use of their services (the 3rd party provider) has been blocked by some mail servers and by association, your community could also be blocked or classified as spam.

5) Some of the ads by Skimlinks have been flagged by security software, so using it can also get your site flagged

A job well done Internet Brands.

So I just want to know... That XenForo.... Would never do this to their customers?!

(The quote is from a post I made on vBulletin's Support Site)

 

[Mark.B]

I have to say, the more I think about Skimlinks the less I like it. Skimwords is awful and any site that uses that sort of thing is one I shan't visit again. Skimlinks itself is not intrusive, however, my problem with it is one of neutrailty and trust.

If I click a link, I want to go to that link, or at least if I am redirected I want that redirection to be at the behest of the site I clicked on.

Skimlinks effectively changes the URL I have clicked, without warning me or notifying me. My click has made someone some money without my consent.

Now, you can argue it doesn't matter. But to some people (and I suspect it's a great many peple actually), it does.

Most on here and on vB are saying it doesn't matter. But we're all webmasters. I bet if you asked ordinary people in the street they'd be horrified.

It's an abuse of trust between a site and its members, in effect. Unless you make it plain and clear in big letters all over the site, which I suspect nobody does. (Note: A tiny clause in a huge rules page doesn't count.)

If I see a link on web page - that's the link I expect to go to. Take me somewhere else (even just inserting an affiliate link) without telling me clearly and I shan't be happy.

 

[Kier]

The site owner can always give their visitors the option to disable the systems.

 

[DoctorWatsOn]

If I see a link on web page - that's the link I expect to go to. Take me somewhere else (even just inserting an affiliate link) without telling me clearly and I shan't be happy.

Even if, as I plan, the money goes to charity?

 

[Mark.B]

The site owner can always give their visitors the option to disable the systems.

That's true...but how many actually will? Given that there's money at stake.

My guess is, most won't, most will tuck this away in their massive rules pages which nobody reads, and silently sit there harvesting the cash.

And when there are threads everywhere bemoaning how "Facebook and Twitter are killing forums", they aren't. This sort of thing is the REAL reason. people are becoming wise to the fact that most forums now seem to be money making, profit-driven enterprises, and not the community-driven "labours of love" they once were.

And this hurts even those like me who don't do "monetisation" at all, because we all get tarred with the same brush.

It's a sad state of affairs and I can only see it getting worse.

Almost every site I go on now...plastered with adverts and no doubt Skimlinks, Viglinks or something else hidden away as well. Many sites now even insert adverts into your posts. It's got stupid. And then everyone wonders why forums are dying?

People used to be quite happy to post content for free in a forum when there was a sense that this was being done to help the community and grow a not for profit site. Now there is a feeling that posting such content is simply putting money into someone's pocket, so people stop doing it. If you're going to make money for someone, it may as well be on Facebook where at least they're up front about it.

 

[Ati]

Skimlinks effectively changes the URL I have clicked, without warning me or notifying me. My click has made someone some money without my consent.

You can include a line in your site's terms saying this is how your site works. That way everyone knows about it, if someone doesn't like it, they won't click on links, or won't use the site at all. But they WILL know about it, and whenever they click a link, they know it is redirected, and by accepting the site terms, they give their consent.

 

[Paul B]

Almost every site I go on now...plastered with adverts and no doubt Skimlinks, Viglinks or something else hidden away as well. Many sites now even insert adverts into your posts. It's got stupid. And then everyone wonders why forums are dying?

I finally put some AdSense adverts on my site after having nothing for 3 years.
I simple can't afford to pay for the running of it out of my own pocket any longer.

As the members said, a site with adverts is better than no site at all.

 

[Green Cat]

<snip>

Great thanks

 

[RobParker]

This sort of thing is the REAL reason. people are becoming wise to the fact that most forums now seem to be money making, profit-driven enterprises, and not the community-driven "labours of love" they once were.

I assume you realise it costs money to run a forum, right? At the minute we have a big banner at the top asking our members to remember to use the affiliate links to Amazon and the like. I'm sure they'd prefer that the affiliate codes were automatically added to the links and we didn't need to remind people with big banner, etc.

 

[Mark.B]

You can include a line in your site's terms saying this is how your site works. That way everyone knows about it, if someone doesn't like it, they won't click on links, or won't use the site at all. But they WILL know about it, and whenever they click a link, they know it is redirected, and by accepting the site terms, they give their consent.

Indeed. Hidden away in hundreds and hundreds of lines of tiny text. Who reads that?

I'm not talking about having a legal defence to fall back on, I'm talking about being honest and upfront with your members, and tucking something away in the small print rules is certainly not that. On vB sites, once you've signed up there is NO easy way to even go back and read those rules. I ended up creating my own rules page and even then, anything important (such as being able to access PMs) is highlighted prominently on the relevant page.

The fact that the software allows members to turn it off isn't relevant, because most admins motivated to use Skimlinks won't allow their users this option at all. they won't even tell them about Skimlinks other than perhaps a tiny sentence in the terms.

This isn't about being legally secure it's about public perception. Public perception is ALREADY that most forums exist to make a fat profit for the owner, and so people start to avoid them. If Skimlinks becomes "the norm" then forums are finished.

 

[Kier]

I finally put some AdSense adverts on my site after having nothing for 3 years.
I simple can't afford to pay for the running of it out of my own pocket any longer.

Yes, this is a harsh reality of the web - if your site becomes successful it will grow to the point where it starts to cost a lot of money in hosting and maintenance. It's all very well talking about providing content for free etc., but those hosting costs have to be paid somehow, and something like Skimlinks is sufficiently discrete that most visitors won't even notice that it's active - and if they don't notice a change to their user experience, where is the problem, really?

 

[Mark.B]

I assume you realise it costs money to run a forum, right? At the minute we have a big banner at the top asking our members to remember to use the affiliate links to Amazon and the like. I'm sure they'd prefer that the affiliate codes were automatically added to the links and we didn't need to remind people with big banner, etc.

If you have a big banner advising of the adding of affiliates to links, then people will have no problem - even if you don't allow members to opt out.

It's the way this is nearly always done "on the quiet" that bugs me.

The rights, wrongs and justifications of it don't matter. When the general public find out that this is going on and feel that sites were not up front about it, when that happens on a large scale (and it will), forums are finished because it'll be one abuse of trust too far.

 

[Mark.B]

Yes, this is a harsh reality of the web - if your site becomes successful it will grow to the point where it starts to cost a lot of money in hosting and maintenance. It's all very well talking about providing content for free etc., but those hosting costs have to be paid somehow, and something like Skimlinks is sufficiently discrete that most visitors won't even notice that it's active - and if they don't notice a change to their user experience, where is the problem, really?

I agree totally...however...my contention is that visitors won't like it if they are not told, and most sites, seeing that money can be made, won't tell them.

And when the practice becomes widespread, and when word gets out to "ordinary users", there is going to be backlash.

I'm not saying Skimlinks is bad - merely that uncontrolled, unfettered use of it is going to be bad for the industry.

 

[RobParker]

Yes, this is a harsh reality of the web - if your site becomes successful it will grow to the point where it starts to cost a lot of money in hosting and maintenance. It's all very well talking about providing content for free etc., but those hosting costs have to be paid somehow, and something like Skimlinks is sufficiently discrete that most visitors won't even notice that it's active - and if they don't notice a change to their user experience, where is the problem, really?

Spot on in my opinion. The fact that it's discrete and doesn't impact on the users experience is the most important thing.

 

[Kier]

The rights, wrongs and justifications of it don't matter. When the general public find out that this is going on and feel that sites were not up front about it, when that happens on a large scale (and it will), forums are finished because it'll be one abuse of trust too far.

I disagree completely. Google and Facebook do more 'hidden' stuff with your data than any of us will ever know, and do they look 'finished'? Far from it.

 

[steven s]

People used to be quite happy to post content for free in a forum when there was a sense that this was being done to help the community and grow a not for profit site. Now there is a feeling that posting such content is simply putting money into someone's pocket, so people stop doing it. If you're going to make money for someone, it may as well be on Facebook where at least they're up front about it.

It must be nice to be able to afford hosting and licenses out of pocket. I paid for hosting myself for years but couldn't do it anymore.
My members realize that hosting is not free. Licenses are not free. They support the site with donations which are supplemented with adsense, vibrantmedia and viglinks.
And like Brogan said,

As the members said, a site with adverts is better than no site at all.

I think I'm going to switch from viglinks to skimlinks.

 

[RobParker]

I agree totally...however...my contention is that visitors won't like it if they are not told, and most sites, seeing that money can be made, won't tell them.

And when the practice becomes widespread, and when word gets out to "ordinary users", there is going to be backlash.

I'm not saying Skimlinks is bad - merely that uncontrolled, unfettered use of it is going to be bad for the industry.

But most large sites already have code that automatically adds affiliate IDs into their links and this is how it's been for years. This isn't anything new, it's just an easy way to implement it.

 

[Mark.B]

Oops I didn't mean to cause a riot....and I should clarify that I'm not saying nobody should use Skimlinks. Nor am I criticising XenForo for their planned Skimlinks integration (nor am I criticising vB for the same actually). I think adding Skimlinks as an option into the forum product itself is a positive move.

And yes it's perfectly valid to use Skimlinks, or similar products, on a forum.

My rant is based on the fact that over time a lot of people will abuse it, as they have done with Google ads and many other monetisation techniques, and I think if we as forum owners aren't aware of the dangers of doing that we will all be in trouble.

 

[Kier]

Don't worry, there's no riot here Mark, just a bunch of people who think that on this one you're well-intentioned, but wrong

 

[Mark.B]

I disagree completely. Google and Facebook do more 'hidden' stuff with your data than any of us will ever know, and do they look 'finished'? Far from it.

Indeed but there's the rub - they can afford to be like that as they are now so big. Even if there was a significant backlash against Facebook they'd still be ok. Your average forum owner certainly can't afford that, any significant backlash would likely kill their site.

The problem forums face now is that, at one time, I could use "no ads" as a selling point for my site because it was obvious we had none. Now though, for all anyone knows I could have hidden affiliate links. So we're all slowly getting tarred with the same brush. This effectively takes the reputation of my site for honesty and integrity partially out of my hands due to people monetising their sites excessively, but without me getting any of the financial benefits of actually monetising it.

 

[Mark.B]

Don't worry, there's no riot here Mark, just a bunch of people who think that on this one you're well-intentioned, but wrong

Opinion seems to be divided on the issue.

Everyone else says monetisation is wonderful, I say it isn't.