Skimlinks trial on MSE forums

thelawnet

off-site discussion: http://www.onelittleduck.co.uk/affiliate-marketing/moneysaving-tries-moneymaking-with-skimlinks-1648.htm

PhiltheBear

MSE_Martin wrote: »

There are many misunderstandings above

The aim of this change is of course to generate money......

'nuff said

Someone about wrote that we should only be spending £100s on running this forum. That made my laugh aloud. If anyone knows how a forum of this size (the 8th biggest social networking site in the UK) with 5 million users a month can be hosted for £100s without any staff - please do tell me how?

For my normal consultancy fee, I'd be delighted. (Although the 'few hundred pounds I was quoting was for equipment/bandwidth rental from a commercial server farm).

Remember the bandwidth and processing power used to maintain these forums is enormous. We have an industrial strength set up with very limited down time allowing thousands of people to interact at the same time.

Having run banking computers which have a far higher demand than a forum and which require absolute uptime/very fast response etc. I do believe I have the knowledge of what would be required.

I'm not going to go into all the rest. Yes, I understand you need staff. Yes, I can see the need for a lawyer. But the MSE site must make very large amounts of money which will easily cover these things. (Although, if your technical people can't work out how to email everyone to tell them of a change I have some doubts about the capabilities of the staff you are paying).

The objection is that the 'Martin Lewis' brand stands for honesty and this Skimlink introduction isn't up to those standards. You go to great lengths to talk about "How this site is funded" in its own page on the main site.

You specifically say that "Unlike many sites that use affiliate links, we're very deliberate about including a * after every one of them". With Skimlinks that doesn't seem to be true.

I've already said that I run my own affiliate sites and, bizarrely, I was just starting to look at Skimlinks on some of my sites as a money maker. Having looked at the responses here I won't be doing so.

By the way - although I'm heavily criticising this action I resent the implication that I'm from the same small negative vocal group who try and attack me and the site in all it does. I've only crossed swords with you once - and that was over a particularly poor weekly poll. On the contrary, I've often recommended this site to other people - because of its reputation which, until now, I've regarded as unimpeachable. However, this whole thing is making me wonder what I now can and cannot trust.

Have a good holiday.

Horlock

PhiltheBear wrote: »

'nuff said

By the way - although I'm heavily criticising this action I resent the implication that I'm from the same small negative vocal group who try and attack me and the site in all it does.

Have a good holiday.

Likewise I hope you're not including me. I said from the start that I hope you make loads of money - you've saved me a fortune. I have no objection to MSE becoming more valuable than Microsoft. I've recommended you countless times to people who I know have subsequently joined. I've even recommended alternative sources of income for the forums which I believe would be less offensive (although a know a number of people don't approve of them either). Afraid I have nothing helpful to add to the discussion at this point (ie everything I want to say has been said I believe - often not by me - I've tried to thank where I believe the comments have represented important points). I do think that the main reason that people are focusing on the same core of issues is that they do not feel they have been properly addressed.

I do have a question - sorry if it has been answered - I may have missed it:

There is now an option to "opt-out" - my question is what does "opting-out" actually do? Ie does it stop the links I click generating money, does it stop the links I post generating money, does it do both, does it do something else. Really sorry - I probably missed it.

---

I've just had an idea - it may not be of interest to MSE but why not do a survey (and publish the live results) of forum users along the lines of:

MSE are currently considering various options to raise money for the good of the forums please indicate all of the following statements which represent your views:

MSE forums should remain completely free funded entirely by the MSE main site
I would be willing to pay a small subscription fee for a noticable improvement
I would be willing for MSE to use googleads to generate extra money
I would be willing for MSE to use skimlinks to generate extra money
I would be willing for MSE to use any method Martin deams appropriate to generate extra money
I would be willing for MSE to raise extra funds provided it is all done "in house"
I have no idea what googleads are
I have no idea what skimlinks are

Obviously I don't expect you to use my survey verbatim

You might get a feel for a number of things from the general populus rather than the few of us with strong views (including how many people actually know what skimlinks are and that they are being used - finding this out might be useful for a number of reasons including whether people have actually noticed any changes as a result - which may well support the argument for their introduction, but also whether lack of comments in this thread is apathy, support, or lack of knowledge), it might also lead to more people investigating the impact of skimlinks (ie rather than just the very inquisitive and those who have been burned by them).

ThomasK31ly

Is this like that thing a few months ago, If you put a cross on Conservatives..you get a Coalition :wall:

Mobeer

MSE_Archna wrote: »

....We're also seeing if it's possible to let all users know initially at registration about the opt-out. MSE Ian is currently looking at the technicality of this....

Easy fix - have users initially not participating, then in a welcome email, offer them the opportunity to opt-in.

kermitfrog

Mobeer wrote: »

Easy fix - have users initially not participating, then in a welcome email, offer them the opportunity to opt-in.

And why would they choose to opt in?

jamesd

Mobeer, few would opt in and none who don't have accounts and come here via search engines would opt in. Offering opt out means that those who don't have accounts still get the links, so it would greatly decrease the number of people not getting them, compared to an opt in approach.

PhiltheBear, having the code rewrite the links a little differently so that there was a * and a (non-affiliate link) version after modified links is probably possible and would be an improvement IMO, in both disclosure and easy choice on a per-link basis.

thelawnet

Mobeer wrote: »

Easy fix - have users initially not participating, then in a welcome email, offer them the opportunity to opt-in.

The way to do an opt-in would be very simple - returning users coming to the forum for the first time after skimlinks addition would get a pop-up asking the user to opt-out or opt-in, and they would have to choose one or the other to continue; for new users it could be a box to tick when signing up.

kermitfrog

What wonderful ideas everyone has for making the whole exercise pointless!

Angelaberyl

Firstly, love the site:T
Secondly, you need to proof read your article!!!! 'If your user experience changes as all because of this, please reply to this thread and report it.':cool:
Thirdly, I tried to take the MSIQ test, but the formatting is wrong, I have half of q1 and half of q2 showing on the first page. Can't read or answer either:eek:
Hope this helps:D
Keep up the good work:beer: