Category: Zone BBS Suggestions and Feedback
Hi everyone. I'm not trying to start any disagreement about how revenue, might have screwed that up is gotten for the site, but i have a suggestion. The ads I find anyway are quite redicculous and annoying and although I see why they are there, I was wondering if it would be a personal choice in the account settings to show or not show the adds. I have no problem with the adds, their content but I do think some of them are wasting time, they for instance want captcha to be accessible with Yahoo and i for one think it's absolutely stupid. Yahoo hasn't cared now, neither will a petition or whatever the link clicks too. basically maybe just some code to say would you like to block adds? Combo box and it's done. I hope this is taken into consideration, Its a valid suggestion I think. Thanks.
ads aare a fact of life these days. I think this feature, if implemented at all, would be a premium featur only. this site has to generate revenue after all. As for the potition about yahoo, no comment on that.
If this were to be implemented at all it would have to be a premium feature only.
Adverts generate revenue for the site. If users were given the opportunity to block the adverts, the advertisers would have no reason to pay, and therefore the site would lose revenue which would either mean that the cost of premium memberships would have to go up, or that the features would have to be reduced.
I think you raise a good point, but I tend to be on the side of the later two posts. To me, it isn't much different than TV or radio, in that you simply tune out the ads when you're moving through stuff on a page.
Lou
My isue has never been with the adds if it was ok to have them, hwy tey're posted, etc. What i have a big problem with is right now, it's mainly what i considder pathetic blind stuff. As Yahoo to make themselves accessible, insist on accessibility, why not try and go for real sites, such as Amazon or circuitcity. I realize this isn't possible to ask a major corporation to pay for a little known site such as this, but my suggestion is put real adds up not just things that deserve to be skipped. As for this being a premium feature, instead of blocking every add, why not just offer during the session you're logged in, block adds. I can give you a site right now that has a choice if you're logged in. I'm actually surprised I wasn't flamed on this, but I wo't count my chickens yet, I'm sure the judgmental population will show it's head.
madam vel., let's discuss this for a minute. you call web accessibility pointless and stupid? You must not have a visual impairment or be blind yourself then. Web accessibility for blind and disabled people is sadly lacking on the internet, and a good number of this site's members are blind or vi. this means, that ads important to indeviduals who populate this site will come up from time to time. To say they are pointless and worth skipping is just your view. Web aaccessibility should be for all, not just for the few. This is what the ads on the site at the moment are saying, hopefully galvonising the part of an already small blind community who surf on here a chance to amake a diffrence to their web surfing experience. Web accessibilty is not pathetic. Now I'm going to say something heree. the web is fine for sighted people, but for blind or vi it often isn't fine. if you are sighted, and can use the pc as is, then you may think campaigning for accessibility is pointless. if you are sighted, may you never go blind, for your comments will come back to haunt you, for you will be foreced to use a screen reader to access the pc and internett. Screen readers are good, but they can never allow a blind/vi person to do what a sighted person takes for granted.Please do not call these ads pointless, for they are not.
As i said before zone only displays one single add per page which is no problem in my oppinion. It doesn't even display google adds like a lot of websites do these days.
I like the way that zone is displaying adverts. In other sites adverts take a section of a website not just a single link.
In my oppinion this is the most cleen interface i ever had in a website.
But i have to say i disagree with the yahoo advert as well but i expressed my oppinion in a different board why i disagree.
But i will explain it again for people who didn't read my other post.
We ask yahoo to introduce audio for the characters. The audio could be a good solution if we could understand it. Hotmail has it and it is totally useless to me. I don't understand if it says five or nine for example and it is very distorted. Yahoo might not have audio but it has an excelent customer support in my oppinion. They never disappointed me. When i contacted them they signed my up to groups or other services i needed. Hotmail's support is not as good. Go and read the bleh hotmail topick to see how they treet customers. So i appreshiate what yahoo does even if they don't have audio and i have to wait for a day or two. At least i will get what i want eventualy.
I personally would like a petition asking hotmail to have nicer customer service or to make clearer their audio. It is not good just to say you provide audio. It has to work as well and be understandable. But i don't have a problem with this advert. People are free to advertise whatever they like as long as they support the site. If i don't want to read it i will skeep it.
Sorry for changing the subject a bit.
nicos, you did not change the subject. you explained our view on the yahoo thing, but brought it back to the topic under discussion here, which is the removal of adverts for everyone regardless of membership status.
It's just one link, honestly. I don't even notice the ads most of the time. Is it really such a big deal? Just don't read it if you're not interested.
First off yes i'm blind. I still believe accessibility is pointless to a degree. People who want things spoonfed to them, such as a site like Amazon. If you can't just page down, find what you want, and add it to your cart and you're done, then in my view, those who demand accessibility for usable sites are pathetic and worthless so called humans. Do I have trouble with captcha? Yes, I just give a call and that's it. You know though I'm sorry i ever brought up the add thing, it was one idea that yet again the zone has so wonderfully said nothing but negativity. If I were a lesser person I would stoop to levels of immaturity. Yet I think my labotomy has started already being here.
accessibility is not just being able to arrow about in one mode or another. it is also the way sites are set out, how cluttered they are. and as for spoonfed? I find that comment offencive. if a site is not easy to use, for whatever reason, non disabled computer users boycot the site. there are some sites that are soo flash or graphics driven that blind users can't use them at all. I am talking as equil access as there can be for as many ppl as possible. As for everything being negative, that's what happens if you get total disagreement with a position, lose a vote etc. is making the net as accessible as we can for as many people as possible a good thing? we ask, The I's to the right, the whole site, the no's to the left one person, the I's have it, accessibility to the internet is important for the majority of users. Please remember the strides programmers have made to make pcs and the net accessible enough for us to even discuss this. I'm not saying we should be greatful for what we have and not suggest ideas, or submit bug reports, but we need to understand sometimes that access technology is made by a few, for a few. I for one am amazed at what I can do with my pc today and could not live without my computer. it's my pen and paper, and never a day goes by when I don't think of those innervaters who first made computers talk. Those who had a go because they felt disabled people needed to be part of the digital revolution they knew was coming. I used BBC computers in the early days of access technology, and still rate them, even now. They were wonderful machines. I come across bad sites sometimes, and when they're bad, they're almost impossible. Badly written sites can result in us putting the wrong things in our basket, not being able to put things inn the basket at all, or not being able to shop at a paticular site. How would it be, for example, if you walked into a shop and was told, no, we won't help you because you are blind? wouldn't you be angry and want change? for that shop to become accessible? if it didn't, you'd not go there any more, and they'd lose customers. it's only by talking to these shops either in the real world, or online that we get equil participation, and that needs to be available to as many people as possible.
Look carefully, oh Zone Children. Here we have a zonehead railing against any proposals, suggestions, or demands that concern the alteration of any web site solely for the purpose of fulfilling one's own personal preference. But, and here's the really good part, it would appear madam vel at least temporarily stepped upon the wrong soapbox before making this post--a post that, might I add, suggests removing a single link in an obscure portion of this site (well, it can be obscure if you know how to navigate the web with your screen reader of choice). So, would you not fall into the same "pathetic and worthless so called humans" category you yourself have forged?
On a serious note: I think actual zone users pay to advertise on the site. So, it probably stands to reason that the yahoo accessibility and related adds that sparked this post weren't put in place by Chris or JJ.
Oh, and about the yahoo petition itself? I ain't biting! lol. Suffice it to say: there're much, much better services.
What started off as a possibly decent request to remove the ads from the web site. I don't agree with it, after it's one small link at the top of the page, but madam vell had a possible argument for it.
However, when she said, "I still believe accessibility is pointless to a degree. People who want things spoonfed to them, such as a site like Amazon. If
you can't just page down, find what you want, and add it to your cart and you're done, then in my view, those who demand accessibility for usable sites
are pathetic and worthless so called humans." I'm guessing now, but I'd bet she wrote that on her state given computer, and perhaps is lead around by a seeing eye dog that was free to her, and, if she works she probably takes the blind exemption every year on her income taxes, she reads free books from the national library. These were not God given rites given to the blind, they were the result of people working together to get these things for her. Therefore, I ask, which of us isBob a pathetic human being, so-called.
Excellent points Jim and Bob. As for myself, I'm not ashamed of taking advantage of perks for the blind. After all, being blind is not a mere nuisance as some people say - it is a major pain in the ass. And as for the ads at the top of the screen, I hardly notice them unless I choose to pay attention.
Siobhan I agree with you. We should have the right to block the adds. They are pointless. I have no probblems using any web site. I have 2 screene readers. I use both Jaws and Nvda. Siobhan you have to stand up and fight for what you believe in.
What I have to say, concerns only the initial argument of this topic, as posted in post number 1.
The ads that are displayed on the top of each page, provide a necessary form of revenue for this website, that together with money generated from premiumships, help pay for the bandwidth consumed by the Zone and it's users, the hosting of this site, features such as Ventrilo, Zone by Phone, and a lot more.
You may not realise this, but each voicemail that is sent on Zone By Phone from one user to another, takes up bandwidth, (judging by the length of some of these voicemails, it's nothing for one single message to consume more than 1 megabyte at a time).
People are paying for their ads, and as long as they pay, they can have advertised on this site whatever they like, even if it's a proposal to marriage.
In my view, it's either this, or a whole bunch of Google ads that are annoying, not only because it takes up a couple of lines, but also because, depending on where on the website it's placed, it can make your browsing of such a website one hell of a schlepp.
i'm going with q here. it makes good sense. even though i don't agree with the yahoo add, people have the right to make adds on this site if they so choos.
There are two separate arguments here.
The first is for the blocking of adverts, adverts which generate a portion of the site’s income. Now the reality is that no-one is going to get rid of something that makes them money, which is what will happen if everyone is given the chance to block adverts, so that’s a non-starter. But it seems that the op didn’t have issue with the adverts as such, but with the types of adverts, so she wasn’t wanting all ads blocked, just the ones she didn’t agree with? I.e. wanting the site to be particular about what they advertise?
Fact is, there will always be adverts we don’t agree with. On tv/radio/in newspapers/on websites. we all have our own agendas, and we all have our own limits as to what we think should/shouldn’t be advertised.
I know for instance of a group that are campaigning for the advertising of baby milk (inphant formula) to be banned because they are pro breastfeeding and don’t believe that any other means of inphant feeding should be promoted as it undermines breastfeeding, and as breast is the best means of feeding your child, they feel that formula feeding is wrong and should therefore not be promoted. Doesn’t matter that some women are unable to, or choose not to breastfeed, who, without the advertising wouldn’t know which formula to choose. Breast is best and the rest doesn’t matter…
I know of people who do not feel the armed forces should be allowed to advertise because of the war in Iraq, and that we shouldn’t recruit people to go and invade other countries, but they seem to forget that the armed forces is about much more than that, but because of their political agendas, they seem to lose sight of everything else.
Ultimately we live in a free society and we can choose to have the opinions we do, and can choose to ignore the opinions of others that we don’t agree with. And that applies as much to advertising as anything else.
The second argument appears to be for web accessibility, and whether we should fight to make the internet accessible. The answer in short is, of course we should. There is a huge difference between expecting the world to hand you everything on a plate, and wanting technology to be as accessible as possible so that you can be as independent as possible.
Fact is, that as visually impaired people, there are certain things we are unable to do without certain adaptations. If you have a screen reader, it makes your computer accessible to you. So would you be pathetic if you were unable to use your computer without your screen reader? No of course you wouldn’t. Your disability means that you are unable to use the computer without the screen reader, therefore you have had to take steps to make the computer accessible.
The same applies to websites. Some websites are inaccessible because of their design,i.e. they have graphics, or some have capches which make it impossible for visually impaired users to sign up to them. So why is it wrong to ask for an audio capcha/a customer help line to help sign up? Why is that pathetic? Surely it’s more pathetic to admit defeat?
What if people hadn’t campaigned for guide dogs to be allowed in shops/in taxis/in restaurants? Guide dog users wouldn’t have had the same leve of independence as sighted people, because they wouldn’t have been able to eat out/go shopping/get a taxi home. Was campaigning for that wrong and pathetic?
As technology evolves, it becomes more and more inaccessible. And it’s only because of those that want to make it accessible that it will be. Without assistive technology such as screen readers/access software for mobile phones/even Braille, the visually impaired run the risk of being left behind, and having to relinquish their independence and having to depend on others for help. None of us wants that do we?
Regarding that technology is getting more accessible (I have little to say on the original topic except that I don't see the issue of having a single ad on top of page and also that we're not exactly a big target group for major corporations so as a matter of supply and demand it stands to reason that we get blindness related ads), it is not necessarily true any more that technology progress means better accessibility. Well, not to say it hasn't been the case but I am worried about the latest trends of verification codes and, especially, flash based web pages with no accessibility built in. In addition, for instance, Vista is doing away with the video display drivers Jaws and other screen reaaders have always used, Apple and Linux are becoming viable alternatives to Windows on the world market and neither of those have a screen reader that rivals Jaws or Window Eyes, although we are definitely seeing a lot of developments (and, yes, I realize people can argue with this point and it's not the right venue, I am not slacking off either platform and I am excited about developments), basically the software world is going through a lot of changes and we blind users must stay on the ball and constantly voice our concerns. We may have to use all means, petitions, legal proceedings, the big organizations like the NFB or RNIB as well as individual users. Basically we must not relax and think that we don't have to keep fighting for improvements, if we do we will be forgotten. I have written to quite a few web page admins in Iceland when pages are not accessible (they both have very Flash based pages where Jaws sees nothing or they have picture or png based formats that are also impossible to interpret) and I have gotten exceptionally positive responses, they simply have not been made aware of our needs and what we can and cannot see. I've seen a lot of modifications and pages become more accessible. We must somehow fight for having our needs and knowledge of our screen readers become more of the standard education for html guys and admins etc, the technology solutions are out there, they are simple, but if we don't get the word out they will be useless.
So, to wrap it up, I'm a little disappionted in Vel for her attitude and her putting down people who disagree with her, it's a bit pathetic in my opinion, I know she's not like that and must conclude she was just having a bad day or something.
cheers
-B
Okay my answer to this topic is going to be short and sweet. First off the adds aren't that big a deal, I have been known to click on ones I found interesting such as radio station's who broadcast on the net etc. The second thing I feel is if you're going to block the adds, only do it for premium members. After all we did pay our $25 and it would be one more nice little thing to add. ON the other hand this is one small link at the top of the page and isn't a huge deal to me. I could care less if I had the option to block them or not. Personally seeings as I find a few of the adds meet my interest, I'm gonna click on the ones that target me and I'm not about to block one link.
I'm not going to even way on the issue of how stupid they are, or web accessabillity. I think somehow the blocking adds thing zeared off into another topid which I feel should be covered someware else on the boards.
John
Q pretty much said my thoughts. The site is sponsored by other people. So, those people have the right to display their ads on the site, because they're actually paying to help keep the site alive. Ads should stay as they are. You can avoid them very easily if you cared to find out the smallest and simplest command for whatever program you use to skip them. If you don't choose to utilize said feature in your program, well then, that's your problem, but I see no reason that we should take the ads of those who choose to support the site down for some users.
In my opinion, this post is as pointless as a post that would ask public TV stations to get rid of TV commercials.
Basically we will let you advertise anything as long as it's legal and not rated X. We have received several ads for blindness-related items, but look at the make up of the site. If I were a blindness company, I would advertise here too. BTW, you don't have to be a bisuness to advertise. You could propose, as someone said, or even link to your favorite board post. If guess if you want an interesting ad, pay the $10 to put it there. I'll try to work in some new ads as well to increase the variety.
man can we please take away the zone bbs community at the top of the page. I serious hate it waaaaaa. stop freaking wining people.