Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2002 10:29:29 -0400
Message-Id: <200206031429.g53ETT226729@envy.delorie.com>
X-Authentication-Warning: envy.delorie.com: dj set sender to dj AT delorie DOT com using -f
From: DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: RFC: ads on delorie.com
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com


[I apologize in advance for any potential off-topicness this thread
may produce - please reply only to dj AT delorie DOT com]

The delorie.com site is funded by advertising (those annoying banner
ads you all see when you visit www.delorie.com ;).  At the moment, I
elect to only host ads that I feel are suitable for the wide range of
visitors I get.  Unfortunately, the revenue from these types of ads
has been dwindling.

The types of ads I've been excluding (I can include/exclude by
category, these are some of the categories) are:

* Gambling
* Alcohol
* Provocative (doesn't mean p*rn)
* Extreme animation
* Pop-ups
* Pop-unders

Unfortunately, these are the types of ads that are currently offering
the most revenue.  Enabling these ads would provide extra revenue to
keep the site running in the black (ads currently cover about 60% of
the monthly ISP costs).

So my question to you is: should I allow these types of ads?  I hope
that my visitors are intelligent and rational enough to simply ignore
ads inappropriate to their personal preferences, and/or to disable
javascript if pop-unders bother you, but is that an acceptable
assumption?

Another option I've thought about is a subscription service, which,
for a token fee, would remove all ads for subscribers.  Thoughts?

Thanks,
DJ