It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What would you pay per-month for an Ad-Free ATS?

page: 25
28
<< 22  23  24    26 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 03:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: zazzafrazz
God this is a horrible idea.

It will turn into a clusterf..k.

Up your ads, every one else just deal with it.



Most definitely - if this is implemented it will be the final nail in the coffin that is ATS.
More ads is the answer, ads are everywhere and the site must make enough $$$ to run from advertizing.




posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 04:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: heineken
...You have face it, you can't and you are not suppose to make any money from this and move on, instead use this site as a portfolio with investors on other projects of yours.


Hell no. Let them make money. Let them make money until it's falling out of their ears and they have to wipe their arses with $50 bills just to find a way of using them all up.

If they can pay all their costs for running the business (because it's an LLC, a proper registered tax-paying business) and still have enough left over to buy a giant gold-plated Ferrari statue made out of hundreds of normal-sized fully-functional gold-plated Ferraris... hats off to them, hope they enjoy it immensely. I want to live in the kind of world where such things are possible.

My position is simply that I don't care enough about other people to change my browsing habits, and I'm naturally contrary enough that I would refuse to change them anyway just because someone was trying to twist my arm/guilt trip me into doing it.

I would also quite happily take food from someone else's table if it suited me. Especially from orphans, as they're too little to fight back. Survival of the fattest, etc.


(post by Taketwo removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 05:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Conspiratron

No it's not. No one has been banned without a fairly long and extensive discussion as long as I've been a mod.



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 05:35 AM
link   
@SO

As per my suggestion:

www.abovetopsecret.com...



As a suggestion, maybe you should create a two tier login structure, free subscription got all the ads, but paying subscribers (low fee would enroll lots of subscriptions) would be completely ads free.


The max fee per year shall be fixed to ~$10.

Frankly, I don't understand the requirement to "support" three persons full time to care for ATS.

As said before, maybe it's time to take a day job if you want to keep your way of life...

There is no need for 3x prog just to serve us nice changing backgroung picture, the code of the site work, keep it as is. You know the meaning of: If it's ain't broken, don't fix it. There are enough of moderators at free pay level to care for the site.

Sight:

Remember that there exist a thing called competition. Your site is not "unique" there is nothing keeping us from going elswhere. I frequent other sites that produce "order of magnitude" less ads.

Also, this place is going thru a serious crisis regarding collective trolling and mob behavior. Continue to ignore these problems as you wish...




edit on 2016-3-3 by PeterMcFly because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 05:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Taketwo
a reply to: EvillerBob

You are a terrible human being...


I'm an honest human being who doesn't need your validation to assess my own self worth.

Unless my wife is asking if a dress makes her look fat, in which case I'm lying my arse off.



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 05:40 AM
link   
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

Honestly? Nothing.

That is nothing against this site (which i adore) but everything to do with my beliefs that the net should be free (unless you are gaining resources, ie academic papers, etc).

If that means i get ads, then so be it.



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 07:31 AM
link   
Without a doubt, regardless of one's posture, this has been a very interesting thread. To see where the many and varied absolute boundaries are drawn is very interesting indeed.

Here are several points to ponder (without any particular posture/opinion, and not directed at anyone in particular)...

- At issue is a subscription, irrespective of form or instrument, for turning off advertisements only, not membership in general.

- It would seem implied that under this model advertising would actually increase on the non-paying compartment of the site.

- Regardless of what the T&C's say, a pay subscription model creates a different dynamic which doesn't exist right now...that of a "customer", and with a 'customer' comes additional responsibilities which don't exist today. (In fact, the T&C's would likely need to be modified under this model as they would likely wither under any serious legal challenge).

- At minimum some form of a dispute resolution process would need to be created, adopted and resourced. This would create an additional financial drain as these services would need to be resourced by paid employees. Unpaid (moderator) staff could not fill this role as it could never withstand any sort of a transparency test (nothing against the mods, but just stating the facts); there can be no fiduciary responsibility/accountability in such an environment despite people's best intentions.

- Adopting a subscription model at this point in time (i.e. at this level of ATS maturity) would need to somehow take into account the content already on the site and the members who posted this content. As has been stated (by myself and others); there would be no ATS were it not for the content posted by members to date. This seemingly "minor" detail would require some serious thought and debate on how to resolve.

- Intellectual property becomes a much thornier issue on a paid site. Again, irrespective of what the T&C's read, in a paid environment there is a certain additional level of autonomy/entitlement which will need to be addressed. This very well can be addressed, the point being it just cannot be overlooked.

- There is absolutely no requirement for a privately held corporation (LLC, etc.) to "open their Books" to paying members, regardless of what some members may 'think'. (...at least not under these circumstances anyway)

Just some thoughts.



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 07:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Great Points that need to be considered.



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 08:15 AM
link   
a reply to: scubagravy

what the?

First, where did your "3 days before you" BS come from? I didn't tout my "status" or time here in the slightest. I didn't tout my membership date seeing as I am a relative newcomer in compared to those real originals. Point is I didn't claim I was special in anyway...like not even a word.

Second, I didn't even once tell you or pretend that you weren't allowed to state your opinion. You stated an opinion that I thought was way off base. Am I allowed to raise my own opinion or is that only for you?

Finally, wth are you talking about "make me pay for concern?" My entire issue with your post was that you were complaining about a completely voluntary action that offered you no special reward (the donation) and I was responding to that directly. The head honchos flat out said DO NOT do this if you cannot afford it or just plain don't want to. I also responded to the idea that an the potential fee (again voluntary) would likely be just to remove ads like many phone apps and websites such as YT Red.

Where you got the rest of it is beyond me



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 08:42 AM
link   
a reply to: stargatetravels

What I don't understand is how we are here at this point, reading Skeptics posts, it doesn't even sound like him.

I'll bow out of thread, and hope hope hope there is a voice of reason in his ear somewhere.



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 09:08 AM
link   
The ads don't bother me enough to pay to not see them.....actually I find reading ATS to be much easier then other sites that overwhelm my computer with ads to the point I just close the site and don't read what ever the subject was, usually News sites. SO didn't state this was to save ATS , which would be another matter, but rather to offer an "upgraded" version of ATS to subscribers.

Interestingly enough my membership to an on-line poker club just ran out, I was a paid member for about 3 years, then I won 2 free years, so I never experienced being a "basic" free member until recently......Oh Boy, talk about a difference in experiences......I will end up paying again because between the ads, lack of availability to cash games and several other perks of membership, it's not as much fun.

So, I guess the questions would be, will paying the fee make your experience on ATS better enough to be worth it ? Would the quality of the "free" ATS change and how?



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 09:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord

originally posted by: Echo007


ATS is spending ad revenue generated from the forums for other projects.

Spending revenue to expand core content or create new content is business 101 for publishers.


ATS forums pay's for itself, but you want members to fund other projects that have ZERO to do with the forums.

I call ATS bluff about shutting down the forums, that won't happen and we know it. You make 20x what it costs to hosts the forums and manage it for a month.



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 09:19 AM
link   
The Best Answer

I must say, this is one of the most interesting threads I've seen in quite a while -- enough to pull me in for a comment even though I feel like I should just read instead.

But I'm a member too, so what the heck.


"What would you pay per-month for an Ad-Free ATS?" would seem like a simple enough question (and grammatically it is), but it's clearly able to inspire more than just simple answers (as well as more than a few not-so-simple questions).

Of course, there is literally no wrong answer to such a question. It's not like any of us can say "no, that's NOT what you would pay" to anyone else and not look silly, but there's still plenty to disagree about.

It's also understandable that a question like that on a site like ATS would generate an awful lot of concern (and conspiracy theories, of course) for an awful lot of reasons, none of which would be invalid either. After all, none of us would bother to be here if we didn't care about ATS to at least some degree, even if just as a passing curiosity, so it's natural for that to show in all the myriad ways we tend to show it.

I know I shouldn't be surprised, yet I find myself surprised anyway, because every honest response I've seen to that question, whatever it might be, reminds me why I love ATS so very much.

Thanks for reminding me.



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 09:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flavian
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

Honestly? Nothing.

That is nothing against this site (which i adore) but everything to do with my beliefs that the net should be free (unless you are gaining resources, ie academic papers, etc).

If that means i get ads, then so be it.


That's the beauty of this! You can absolutely leave it the same. No if's, and's or but's. No penalty's, no admonishments, no pressure. Nobody cares but you!

Go in peace. : )



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 09:37 AM
link   
Do the site owners take a salary or expenses from ATS if not will they?



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 09:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Flavian

But will you, myself, and others get ads? We've posted enough to go basically ad free, as is the practice here. Will that continue if the new paid ATS comes into existence, or will the ads flow like wine into water?



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 09:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: artistpoet
Do the site owners take a salary or expenses from ATS if not will they?




Im unsure how that matters?

They are offering you no ads at a cost. If you don't want it, then don't purchase it.



Had they not asked, you would have just continued having ads.....like you would should you choose to not purchase the ad space from the site (which is, in essence, what it seems is being offered here).

 


Its one thing for folks to be distrusting and/or uneasy. Its another entirely for someone to complain about the ads on one hand, and then complain about an option to buy out the ad space on the other. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. LOL.

[not directed at anyone in particular, just a general observation)



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 09:57 AM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Hi, and thanks for the welcome back earlier. I'm still celebrating Festivus (the Feats of Strength hasn't ended yet). On this stuff, it's not buying out the ad space that should be in play for those who've earned the posts not to see as many ads, as is the current practice. Maybe we can be grandfathered in, via the age old tactic of keeping promises.



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 10:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: zazzafrazz
a reply to: stargatetravels

What I don't understand is how we are here at this point, reading Skeptics posts, it doesn't even sound like him.

I'll bow out of thread, and hope hope hope there is a voice of reason in his ear somewhere.


it is odd that you should say that.

i feel the same way, this is odd




top topics



 
28
<< 22  23  24    26 >>

log in

join