Forum Moderators: martinibuster
Welcome to the new members.
SysRq, one click per IP is not a good idea. You do know that AOL, compuserve etc use one IP for thousands of visitors? You stand to lose a lot.
I am making a pretty decent income from adsense, but because of the nature of my site (information), I find that most of the adsense contain the same information that I have on my site. It would be nice if i could try some other keywords that are related to the information I have.
The algorithm that provides contextual advertising is wonderful and works pretty well - especially for google search. But in the adsense world, publishers have the time and interest to try out different keywords and they should be given an option to have more control over what appears on their site.
I think this will create a win-win situation for all involved - advertisers, publishers, Google, users.
The algorithm that provides contextual advertising is wonderful and works pretty well - especially for google search. But in the adsense world, publishers have the time and interest to try out different keywords and they should be given an option to have more control over what appears on their site.
I think what's really need is an option for advertisers to control where their ads appear (in part to avoid being victims of "made for AdSense" pages that deliver low-quality leads).
If a site is made for Adsense and Adsense is contextually served then how can traffic from those sources be anything but quality leads? When I hear things like this it makes me think the poster is upset their long standing site doesn't do any better traffic-wise than a site thrown up to snare traffic for Adsense. Fair enough, but how can you say either site delivers less quality traffic when both are obviously driving traffic off similar keywords?
I think this is a difference of what is true and what you'd like to be true, but whatever works best for you :)
A pedestrian walking past my shop is more likely to buy something from me if he liked the display in the window and walked in of his own accord than if you grabbed him by the scruff of his neck and flung him through my door. Trapping someone by giving him no content except ads (grabbing him by the neck) gives him the options only to comply (click) or fight back (hit return). In any event you've probably annoyed/frustrated him and even if he needs a widget he probably won't buy it from me now.
These cr*p websites do the customer no favours, do the advertiser no favours and this practice is ultimately not in Adsense's long term interest - nor yours or mine. With a shortage of publishers now they may tolerate it. There'll come a time when they have enough publishers and need to weed some out. It'll be interesting to see what they prefer - your model, or EFV's.
>>I don't have any American visitors
And what makes you think this is unique to American ISPs?
I think what's really need is an option for advertisers to control where their ads appear (in part to avoid being victims of "made for AdSense" pages that deliver low-quality leads).
I agree. We are losing a lot of good ads because advertizers are opting out of having their ads on content sites.
I don't think it's just a matter of trash pages sending poor leads. I think some companies just don't want their ads seen on such sites. It hurts the reputation of the company.
I don't want ads on phony poetry contests or snake oil medicine either. It reflects poorly on my sites. Fortunately for me as a publisher I can filter out sites like that.