Forum Moderators: martinibuster
so call me Robin Hood if you like. All the people who are at home comfortably, leisurely searching the net for hurricane pictures and news, end up at my site, buy smoething or click on something and then, without having to justify amounts to anyone, I am able to give more to the disaster relief
ye right, is it just me or am I correct in thinking he is after a fast buck?
PM me if youd like to read his story
If the person is making false statements to site visitors about how much he is helping hurricane victims, that's bad. If he has a spammy site that uses spammy SEO techniques to drive legitimate information sites down in the results, that's bad. But simply acknowledging that you are profiting from disaster merely makes you more honest than, say, CNN, who are careful never to say how happy they are to have a breaking-news type crisis that causes people to watch them 24/7.
I have several areas of my sites I can think of where the self-righteous could say that I'm profiting from pain, disease, death or destruction, and that I should be donating my revenue to various charities. I'm sure many of us do. Therefore I'm reluctant to start throwing stones.
There are some crass people out there, for sure. Some vultures that want to scoop in and profit. But most sucessful businesses are businesses that take a long term approach, and for that they need a good reputation, repeat customers, etc.
And if someone is willing to ask for help in stealing money from an advertisers, what does that say about that person's general character and the likelihood that they will, in fact, donate some money to disater relief?
Have you ever actually read the Adsense TOS?
"Web pages may not include incentives of any kind for users to click on ads. This includes encouraging users to click on the ads or to visit the advertisers' sites as well as drawing any undue attention to the ads."
"as well as drawing any undue attention to the ads."
"as well as drawing any undue attention to the ads."
Here's an idea! Will you pay me 10 cents/click if I run an ad on my website that says "Clicking here will help save drowning puppies in NOLA?"
BTW, this thread shows up on Google when searching for the quote, but not the site we are commenting on.
The OP quoted a site as saying:
"so call me Robin Hood if you like. All the people who are at home comfortably, leisurely searching the net for hurricane pictures and news, end up at my site, buy smoething or click on something and then, without having to justify amounts to anyone, I am able to give more to the disaster relief"
The Adsense TOS says, "Web pages may not include incentives of any kind for users to click on ads. This includes encouraging users to click on the ads or to visit the advertisers' sites as well as drawing any undue attention to the ads."
So my "accusation" is that those two statements exist somewhere in the known universe. Screw down your thinking cap real tight and see if you can reconcile them.
So my "accusation" is that those two statements exist somewhere in the known universe. Screw down your thinking cap real tight and see if you can reconcile them.
Yes, some guy said it it a forum! Will wonders never cease! You're some guy in a forum, I'm some guy in a forum, all God's children are guys in a forum.
How in the world can anyone reply to any thread, if it is "wrong" to discuss what some guy said in a forum?
The point is that the OP cited an example of someone with very bad taste, using a disaster to try to fleece advertisers. No one seemed to notice that not only is such an act highly distasteful, but is also against the Adsense TOS.
I did not flame you. Your own stupidity flamed you. Perhaps you'd like to try again?
so call me Robin Hood if you like. All the people who are at home comfortably, leisurely searching the net for hurricane pictures and news, end up at my site, buy smoething or click on something and then, without having to justify amounts to anyone, I am able to give more to the disaster relief by staying with my guard unit and helping in New Orleans (all the meanwhile documenting the trials and tribulations) than I could by returning to my family. Besides, until the flooding has receded and we can move back in we would just be more crowded if I were to stay with them and the thirteen other relatives staying at our cousins 3 BR 2 bath condo in Baton Rouge. Lord I miss my kids though.
The operative words are "click on something..."
Even the scammer knows he's a thief -- note the Robin Hood reference. I like Robin Hood as much as the next guy and stealing from the rich to give to the poor certainly has a romantic quality.
But even Robin Hood did not steal from people with whom he had signed a binding contract and with whom he hoped to have an ongoing business relationship.
Apart from your obvious psychological need to continue to defend your indefensible positions, do you really believe that any advertiser wants to pay for invalid clicks for any reason? Couldn't these advertisers simply choose to donate cash to charity on their own accord rather than wait for some supposedly noble thief to steal their daily bread?
Would you advise WebmasterWorld readers to make statements on their websites to the effect that people should click lots of ads?
Would you pay to advertise on such a site?