 | | | | | |
In lugnet.announce, Sean Kenney wrote:
| |
Hi, everyone...
With the looming shut-down of Brickshelf, I would like to offer
MOCpages as a safe alternative for everyone to
continue posting their LEGO creations. In light of this, MOCpages now offers
free image hosting.
Sean
- - -
MOCpages admin
LEGO Certified Professional
guy on LUGNET since 1997
Friend
And lots more I’m sure...
|
Sean - thanks for coming forward with this. I hope you won’t be reticent in
asking for subscription revenue if you need it to keep going.
May I make a request about something that has put me off MOCpages so far? It
may be already there, but it’s the way some visitors use their comments that put
me right off.
I know a lot of people want them, but I’d like the ability to turn off comments
on the models I myself submit. Maybe have the option of comments/votes only/no
feedback, both per-model and a default setting for all new models.
I like to display my models, and am interested in the feedback from my peers on
a forum like Lugnet, but I’m not remotely interested in the opinion of people
who just stumble across the site and write anonymously at the bottom. I’ve seen
far too many people upset by ignorant or offensive comments, accusations of
plagiarism and the like to submit myself to that.
I’ve heard it said that an infinite number of monkeys sat at typewriters can
produce the works of Shakespeare. I’ve also heard it said that the internet can
be taken as proof that that just isn’t true...
Thanks,
Jason R
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.publish, Jason J Railton wrote:
| |
I know a lot of people want them, but I’d like the ability to turn off
comments on the models I myself submit.
|
Better review maintenence is coming. :) You’ll have the ability to turn them
off, or configure them to stay hidden until after you approve them. You’ll
also have the ability to delete them after they’ve been published.
Sean
- - -
MOCpages admin
http://www.mocpages.com
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.publish, Sean Kenney wrote:
| |
In lugnet.publish, Jason J Railton wrote:
| |
I know a lot of people want them, but I’d like the ability to turn off
comments on the models I myself submit.
|
Better review maintenence is coming. :) You’ll have the ability to turn them
off, or configure them to stay hidden until after you approve them. You’ll
also have the ability to delete them after they’ve been published.
Sean
- - -
MOCpages admin
http://www.mocpages.com
|
Thanks! I know this is the main thing that kept me as just a reader of MOCpages
and not a contributor!
God Bless,
Nathan
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.publish, Nathan Todd wrote:
| |
In lugnet.publish, Sean Kenney wrote:
| |
In lugnet.publish, Jason J Railton wrote:
| |
I know a lot of people want them, but I’d like the ability to turn off
comments on the models I myself submit.
|
Better review maintenence is coming. :) You’ll have the ability to turn
them off, or configure them to stay hidden until after you approve them.
You’ll also have the ability to delete them after they’ve been published.
Sean
- - -
MOCpages admin
http://www.mocpages.com
|
Thanks! I know this is the main thing that kept me as just a reader of
MOCpages and not a contributor!
God Bless,
Nathan
|
what excellent news! I’ve been a very happy user of the mocpages site for a few
years now, after a fellow local lego nut convinced me to jump into it, and like
the voting/comments aspect of it, but the new features you’ve mentioned sound
great! would the comments that have already been made be rolled into the new
framework, or just the comments made after the new functions in place?
some ideas that come to mind off the top of my head, having individual galleries
like how the site runs now and also group affiliations. it would be neat to have
the various regional lugs be able to have outposts on the site where meetings,
conventions, displays could be tagged from galleries within the individual lug
members.
for premium membership mabye special sales in the shop, some sort of e-swag ( a
@mocpages.com email address? ) having a random premium account member picture
highlighted on the front page, along the same lines as the group pages having
those be free/fee pages as well and I’m sure you would have lots of lugs happy
to rally some membership fees towards this!
brickshelf is one of the cornerstone pillars of the community and I support your
efforts in helping to prop the sagging castle back up.
Joseph
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.publish, Joseph Williams wrote:
| |
would the comments that have already been made be
rolled into the new framework, or just the comments made after the new
functions in place?
|
Yes, you’ll be able to delete comments that are on there now. ...a LOT of
people have been asking for this, so it’s a long time coming. :)
| |
it would be
neat to have the various regional lugs be able to have outposts on the site
where meetings, conventions, displays could be tagged from galleries within
the individual lug members.
|
I love your ideas! :) There’s a lot of social networking that can be added to
MOCpages... the framework is there, it’s just a matter of tieing things together
with some good user interfaces. (MOCpages lauched before social networks and
blogs were household names, but that’s basically what it is... a big community
of user generated content.)
Sean
- - -
MOCpages admin
www.mocpages.com
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.publish, Sean Kenney wrote:
| |
In lugnet.publish, Jason J Railton wrote:
| |
I know a lot of people want them, but I’d like the ability to turn off
comments on the models I myself submit.
|
Better review maintenence is coming. :) You’ll have the ability to turn them
off, or configure them to stay hidden until after you approve them. You’ll
also have the ability to delete them after they’ve been published.
|
Hey, Sean-
This sounds great, and that was one of my issues, but here is another-- the
advent of ads. I realize, of course, the reason for them, but if one were a
contributing member, would it be possible for the ads not to appear on one’s
page?
BTW, good to finally meet you at Brickworld:-)
JOHN
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.publish, John Neal wrote:
| |
This sounds great, and that was one of my issues, but here is another-- the
advent of ads. I realize, of course, the reason for them, but if one were a
contributing member, would it be possible for the ads not to appear on
one’s page?
|
I don’t like the ads anymore than you do, it kills me to see them there. But
MOCpages had to shift to an advertising model (from a donation model) to stay
alive. It’s a sad truth. Over 1,000,000 people visit MOCpages every month...
most of them are lurkers (kids, mostly) that would never donate or become
members.
I’d like to see ads disappear if you’re a paying member. Here’s the trick: If
you pay $x to view a web site ad-free, you are removing $y of ad revenue. And
if $y is MORE than $x, we might as well make the whole site free! The trick
will be to balance it out; it’s all part of the cost model.
| |
BTW, good to finally meet you at Brickworld:-)
|
Same! :) I feel like I’ve known you for 5 or 10 years.. it’s weird to think we
never met in person until just last month. :)
Sean
- - -
MOCpages admin
www.mocpages.com
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Hey Sean,
I’ve got a question about ads. Do you gain revenue every time I log onto the
site and see the ad, or do I actually have to click on it? If the latter, I
think we in the community could make the very minor commitment to click on ads
when we see them, if it will help keep great resources afloat.
Thanks for adding the image hosting, btw.
Bruce
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.publish, Bruce Hietbrink wrote:
| |
Hey Sean,
I’ve got a question about ads. Do you gain revenue every time I log onto the
site and see the ad, or do I actually have to click on it? If the latter, I
think we in the community could make the very minor commitment to click on
ads when we see them, if it will help keep great resources afloat.
Thanks for adding the image hosting, btw.
Bruce
|
I don’t think you want to do that. It might get Sean in trouble for
click fraud. Just click on the ads
that you are actually interested in.
Marc Nelson Jr.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.publish, Marc Nelson Jr. wrote:
| |
In lugnet.publish, Bruce Hietbrink wrote:
| |
Hey Sean,
I’ve got a question about ads. Do you gain revenue every time I log onto
the site and see the ad, or do I actually have to click on it? If the
latter, I think we in the community could make the very minor commitment to
click on ads when we see them, if it will help keep great resources afloat.
Thanks for adding the image hosting, btw.
Bruce
|
I don’t think you want to do that. It might get Sean in trouble for
click fraud. Just click on the ads
that you are actually interested in.
Marc Nelson Jr.
|
Hmm, guess I won’t do that then. It does see odd to me. The idea of
advertising is the more eyeballs the better. My TV doesn’t penalize me for
watching the commercials even if I don’t buy anything. To the contrary, they
are hoping that since I watch the commercials I may end up buying something I
wasn’t originally intending to. It seems that if I go to a website it increases
the likelihood that I will buy. Obviously an automated program generating
clicks is fraud, but a real person checking out a real website, even if not with
a pre-formed intent to buy, seems like what advertisers would like.
Bruce
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 03:09:58PM +0000, Bruce Hietbrink wrote:
> Hmm, guess I won't do that then. It does see odd to me. The idea of
> advertising is the more eyeballs the better. My TV doesn't penalize
> me for watching the commercials even if I don't buy anything. To the
> contrary, they are hoping that since I watch the commercials I may end
> up buying something I wasn't originally intending to. It seems that
> if I go to a website it increases the likelihood that I will buy.
> Obviously an automated program generating clicks is fraud, but a real
> person checking out a real website, even if not with a pre-formed
> intent to buy, seems like what advertisers would like.
It's not like you watching a commercial though - it's like you turning
on the TV when you're not home, so that the rating of a show goes up
(and therefor it's revenue from commercials). If you follow a link of
interest, and end up not buying, that IS good for the advertiser. But
if you follow the link just to immediately close the browser (or hit
back) without even looking at the page, that's just wasting the
advertiser's money.
Dan
--
Dan Boger
dan@peeron.com
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.publish, Dan Boger wrote:
> If you follow a link of interest, and end up not buying, that IS good for the advertiser.
On top of this, click padding/click fraud throws the whole system off. The core
concept is based on a system that tracks, reports, and allows advertisers to
respond based on real interest. For instance, if I'm selling widgets and am
using click-thru based ads, I want to know what drives people's interest (free
offers? Product photos?), and what makes them actually click a banner, respond
to a page, then conduct a transaction (online purchase, email signup,
send-to-friend, whatever the metric).
This is why Google (and others) are so hardcore about the various forms of click
fraud. They absolutely will shut your account down, no matter how much money
it's earning for them or you if they catch you encouraging users to do it.
> But
> if you follow the link just to immediately close the browser (or hit
> back) without even looking at the page, that's just wasting the
> advertiser's money.
And it does cost money for those fake/quasi-fake clicks, especially with a
system like Google AdSense.
Jake
---
Jake McKee
Private Citizen
"Keeping hope alive"
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 02:22:32PM +0000, Bruce Hietbrink wrote:
> I've got a question about ads. Do you gain revenue every time I log
> onto the site and see the ad, or do I actually have to click on it?
> If the latter, I think we in the community could make the very minor
> commitment to click on ads when we see them, if it will help keep
> great resources afloat.
IIRC, Google ads actually penalizes sites that end up with many clicks on
ads that do not actually end up in sales? It certainly penalizes the
advertisers that have such ads.
Dan
--
Dan Boger
dan@peeron.com
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.publish, Bruce Hietbrink wrote:
| |
I’ve got a question about ads. Do you gain revenue every time I log onto the
site and see the ad, or do I actually have to click on it? If the latter, I
think we in the community could make the very minor commitment to click on
ads when we see them, if it will help keep great resources afloat.
|
It depends on the ad. Some ads pay out on a cost-per-view, and others pay out
on a cost-per-click. It is up to the advertiser to decide how they want their
ad to work in this regard. This is actually a good thing, because some
advertisers just want their brand to be seen (like on a TV commercial) but other
advertisers want you to visit them (more like a newspaper ad with a sale
coupon).
And as Dan pointed out, never, never, click on ads just to generate revenue for
a site owner. It’s called “Click Fraud” and it’s not allowed. It’s highly
investigated, too.
I’d love to share more about the ads & revenue because I’m normally a very
down-to-earth person, but the ad network’s terms of service forbid me from
talking about how much money I make and other details on clickthrough rates &
things.
Sean
- - -
MOCpages admin
www.mocpages.com
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.publish, Sean Kenney wrote:
| |
In lugnet.publish, Jason J Railton wrote:
| |
I know a lot of people want them, but I’d like the ability to turn off
comments on the models I myself submit.
|
Better review maintenence is coming. :) You’ll have the ability to turn them
off, or configure them to stay hidden until after you approve them. You’ll
also have the ability to delete them after they’ve been published.
SeanÂÂ
- - -ÂÂ
MOCpages adminÂÂ
http://www.mocpages.com
|
Sean, this news has made me willing to try MOCpages as well, (mainly because my
YouTUBE account often gets comments I wouldnt want my mother to read) but I am
also not keen on the “Rating”, any chance of turning that off as well?
Thanks for stepping up to the plate on this one.
As I donated to Brickshelf, because I used it regularly, I am willing to do the
same now that I have opened a MOCpages account... do you have a paypal account
associated with MOCpages, I couldnt find a link.
Thanks,
Janey “Red Brick”
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.publish, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
| |
Sean, this news has made me willing to try MOCpages as well, (mainly because
my YouTUBE account often gets comments I wouldnt want my mother to read) but
I am also not keen on the “Rating”, any chance of turning that off as well?
|
i don’t see why not. :) It’s funny, because all those features (reviews,
ratings) are what drew a lot of people to MOCpages in the first place. Ah, to
each their own I suppose. I’m working on all this stuff right now, so it might
be a week or two before the features show up, but rest assured. :)
| |
As I donated to Brickshelf, because I used it regularly, I am willing to do
the same now that I have opened a MOCpages account... do you have a paypal
account associated with MOCpages, I couldnt find a link.
|
Wow, thank you for your generosity! MOCpages used to accept donations years
ago, so the old link should still work >>
Donate to MOCpages. You really don’t need to if you don’t want, although I
suppose it would help offset the $1800 I spent on the new server yesterday. :)
Sean
- - -
MOCpages admin
www.mocpages.com
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.publish, Sean Kenney wrote:
| |
In lugnet.publish, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
|
| |
| |
I am willing to do
the same now that I have opened a MOCpages account... do you have a paypal
account associated with MOCpages, I couldnt find a link.
|
Wow, thank you for your generosity! MOCpages used to accept donations years
ago, so the old link should still work >>
Donate to MOCpages. You really don’t need to if you don’t want, although I
suppose it would help offset the $1800 I spent on the new server yesterday.
:)
|
Thanks Sean, and as they say “cheques in the mail”... smile. Looking forward to
the updates, and some free time to upload a few of my MOCS.
Janey “Red Brick”
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.publish, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
| |
In lugnet.publish, Sean Kenney wrote:
| |
In lugnet.publish, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
|
| |
| |
I am willing to do
the same now that I have opened a MOCpages account... do you have a paypal
account associated with MOCpages, I couldnt find a link.
|
Wow, thank you for your generosity! MOCpages used to accept donations years
ago, so the old link should still work >>
Donate to MOCpages. You really don’t need to if you don’t want, although I
suppose it would help offset the $1800 I spent on the new server yesterday.
:)
|
Thanks Sean, and as they say “cheques in the mail”... smile. Looking forward
to the updates, and some free time to upload a few of my MOCS.
Janey “Red Brick”
|
I bet he gets the cheque before I get my toothpicks. ;-)
Jude
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
| |
In lugnet.publish, Sean Kenney wrote:
Wow, thank you for your generosity! MOCpages used to accept donations years
ago, so the old link should still work >>
Donate to MOCpages. You really don’t need to if you don’t want, although I
suppose it would help offset the $1800 I spent on the new server yesterday.
:)
|
|
In lugnet.publish, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
| |
Thanks Sean, and as they say “cheques in the mail”... smile. Looking forward
to the updates, and some free time to upload a few of my MOCS.
Janey “Red Brick”
|
Janey, thank you. 5 additional people saw your post and took it upon themselves
to send donations as well. I really appreciate it, everyone... every little bit
helps.
Sean
- - -
MOCpages admin
www.mocpages.com
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.publish, Jason J Railton wrote:
| |
May I make a request about something that has put me off MOCpages so far? It
may be already there, but it’s the way some visitors use their comments that
put me right off.
I know a lot of people want them, but I’d like the ability to turn off
comments on the models I myself submit. Maybe have the option of
comments/votes only/no feedback, both per-model and a default setting for all
new models.
|
You can now delete reviews that were written about your LEGO creations.
It’s a first step. Eventually, when you add your LEGO creations to MOCpages,
you’ll be able to say “Let (1)Anyone, (2) Only MOCpages members, or (3) No one,
review this LEGO creation”. But for now, at least you can delete ones you don’t
like. And as always, MOCpages automatically (and I, manually) :) delete
vuglar, attacking, and rude reviews before you ever see them. :)
Sean
- - -
MOCpages admin
www.mocpages.com
| | | | | | |
