Suggestion: Remove "Sponsered Links" From the Threads
 

There are other places to advertise. In the threads themselves is very disruptive. Usability used to be one of the better attributes of FT. Let's try and get back there.

I just attempted to start a thread in "Only Randy Petersen" expressing this exact same view, but it wasn't posted -- apparently in that forum, all new threads are either discarded or held (unposted) until they are blessed.

Unless there are HUGE economic benefits, I hope this is re-thought as well.

Lame. Instead of figuring out how to get ads to appear in the middle of posts how about fixing the search. People would use the search, the ads are a nuisance. :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

BigKing.....forget political correctness here. How do you REALLY feel about the ads...;) ??

I tried posting in ORP yesterday morning when I was delivered a "learn how to flirt" ad that was less than appropriate for me to have on my screen at work - much less accidentally click on :eek:

My note didn't post either. I, too, suspect that posts to ORP are being filtered by someone.

However, how are we supposed to communicate if the notes don't get posted? I understand some people have used ORP as a place to bash moderators and those types of posts are not allowed - but shouldn't everything else be allowed to post?

I think it's just new threads getting censored in ORP, not posts to an existing thread.

There is a thread about charging a fee to stop ads which has become a kind of unheralded thread about these "sponsored links" between posts, and my posts (and others) about getting rid of ads in Firefox got through.

This is a private board so censorship by the owner is both allowed and completely valid, but doing it secretly seems a bit off target. Also, with this approach, the whole ORP forum will stagnate. Maybe that's the intent.

As I understand it, Randy has moved ORP to a "moderation queue" model, where new threads are first sent to him for approval to be posted (or not).

Censoring?????????????????????????????????????

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Mary2e writes:

Mary2e, have you actually ever seen a post where anyone actually "bashed" a moderator? Could you please provide a link.

I have seen several threads where FlyerTalkers did question certain actions of moderators, which seems eminently reasonable, but never seen any instance where a FlyerTalker "bashed" a moderator. Maybe I just missed it.

:rolleyes:

Actually, Punki, I have - or at least what I considered inappropriate communication regarding moderators particularly when Randy specifically requested that no one comment about moderator actions publicly.

As for providing a link - sorry, without search and lacking time to use the google alternative, I can't. But you've been around long enough that you should know exactly what I'm talking about.

Mary

I'm confused here. Were you posting on a thread when a separate ad popped on to your screen? How do you know that this popped-up ad came from something on FT?

No, I was reading the thread, and the sponsored links were for "flirting" dating services.

Here was the text

How to flirt Tips for Men
Flirting Tips – Learn how to Flirt & Seduce any woman you want

How To Flirt With Women
Learn The Sexual Secrets You Can Use When Flirting With Women

Not exactly something I'd want on my work computer. My concern was with what would pop up if I clicked on either of the 2 links.

I personally don't care what the links are, as long as I'm not on a business PC - once I'm at work, I'm real careful.

Please provide these links immediately. :D

You were probably in the womans forum browsing the "flirting" thread.

Google AdSense delivers ad's based on what you are reading.

If you were to make a thread about cars, then expect ads for cars or car products...