Forum Moderators: martinibuster

Message Too Old, No Replies

Anonominity and the net affiliate programs

Anonominitys effect on the net and pay per click advertising

         

walrus

6:35 pm on Nov 18, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



I see every now and then other people post here that are worried that a competitor is clicking on their ads trying to get them booted out of adsense.
This is another example of how anonominity ruins the net.
I know even if you trace an abuser to a server, it may be in another country that has different laws or no laws governing the particular abuse, and here the server may say "well it could be anyone in this postal code, so we cant help ya."

Unless ISP's are held responsible for their clients nothing will change and it may just get worse for Adsense and Adwords users.
Google should use its new financial muscle to get some laws drafted to make the network a better place.

encyclo

6:58 pm on Nov 18, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



That's a pretty weird rant, walrus. If you owned an offline store, would you ask for identification to everybody who passed through the door?

The net is anonymous and will remain so, and it is an incredibly valuable thing that is built like that, even if it might cause you a bit of trouble with your AdSense stats. I can't see why on earth Google should have any "muscle" or even any interest in transforming the net into an anonymity-free shopping portal. And why should ISPs be responsible for their customers' actions any more than the store security guard getting imprisoned because a customer went shoplifting? If the ISP could track and monitor all my traffic, I certainly would never shop online again, and nor would a huge number of other people.

What you are saying is that you consider PPC and the net to be incompatible (I can't say that I agree). However, you are blaming the net rather than the PPC concept. It is up to the PPC market to adapt to the prevailing environment, not the other way round. If you don't like the environment, then all I suggest you do is to cancel your account and find another avenue.

walrus

12:15 am on Nov 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



I expected some disagreements, but did I really have nothing of value in that post?
Sure its a bit of a rant but between all the virus laden spam ,hackers,stalkers etc it seems like anominity has a major downside for all the positves one could bring up.

<If you owned an offline store, would you ask for identification to everybody who passed through the door?>
No, but if they were causing damage id certainly like to talk to confront them about it and how can you?
Then again i would,nt want to confront some of them
as they may well be uncivilzed and possibly ruthless.

I appreciate being corrected on anything, often i refrain from posting cause i dont want to look foolish, i suppose i should have done that again.
I think youre right that its up to PPC to adapt not the other way around, thus making the point of my thread go up in a puff of smoke.
Doh! :)

johnwhitesmith

12:19 am on Nov 19, 2004 (gmt 0)



Send the goog guys an email showing them your log. Point out that there are alot of ip address from INdia or China, and you may get reimbursed. It takes some work though.

encyclo

2:48 am on Nov 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



walrus, I apologize if I was sounding particularly grumpy in my first reply. Your post wasn't "foolish" (to use your expression) in the slightest, and your concern for the underlying issue (click fraud) is entirely reasonable. I'll try to be more constructive this time ;)

The issue, as you have stated, is how to have accurate click-thru stats in an environment which is anonymous by default, and where abuse can by easily orchestrated with virtually zero-risk for the perpetrator. It's a challenge for the PPC providers, as there is no chance of improving the environment.

Perhaps we should ask: what kind of measures should the PPC providers be looking to in order to attempt to address the problem as best as is practicable? If you are able to discern suspicious click patterns via your own stats, what methods should be considered to share and act upon that information?

walrus

3:39 am on Nov 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Thanks Encyclo, no apology necessary but much appreciate the consideration all the same.
Foolish probably wasnt the right word.
More of an embarassment for expressing opinions on things that i,m not really that educated about.

<If you are able to discern suspicious click patterns via your own stats, what methods should be considered to share and act upon that information?>

What i,ve been doing is emailing them log exerpts and the ips in question and a couple months ago I suggested to Adsense that they share with us ips to add to our htaccess.They said its not so easy because many of their publishers cant or dont know how to use it.
I learned a bit about htaccess here at WW and then implemented it, but im on a VMS and im told by my server they cant edit the htaccess.conf to allow a rewrite enginecond to work in my directories as its still shared hosting even with a virtual managed server so thats as far as ive got. I can allow deny and other commands but not rewrite enginecond, which I think is the most effective means of protection so far .