So, The Escapist is in the news again...

[Dastardly]

I'm guessing this doesn't happen very often.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140306/06471226459/escapist-website-content-creator-puts-up-video-about-adblock-moderators-warnsuspend-people-discussing-adblock-comments.shtml

Interesting read. I thought I'd share it with people who hadn't seen it.

Any thoughts on this whole fiasco? (And for the love of god, keep things civil in this thread, and don't mention that thing that starts with "a" and ends with "lock".)

EDIT: The thread they're talking about:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/6.843934-Jimquisition-The-Adblock-Episode?page=26

I simply do not understand how people cannot understand one simple thing:

You can talk about adblockers without using phrases that directly state that you use them, or directly advocating their use. You can talk about them in the abstract just fine. For instance:

"I can understand how some people might believe adblockers to be their only defense against loud ads, or ads that cause webpages to crash, or OMFGTITS ad images on a computer in the family room."

In that quote, I'm expressing the idea that there may be reasons beyond "I'm a selfish dick" that people would use an adblocker. But nowhere did I advocate their use or admit to using them. I didn't have to personalize it.

 

[prpshrt]

I honestly don't mind ads even if they're not very relevant cause that's how the website makes money in the first place. The only reason I feel people run the web extension is because a lot of times they slow down the webpage and a lot of times even get in the way of navigating through the webpage. Trying to visit this website through safari on my iphone was a colossal nightmare because the ad's sorta shoot the website's accessibility in the foot with random ass banners that scroll with the page (Then again, this was a while ago and I never bothered trying again).

 

[Deadcyde]

Not sure how to feel honestly... I sympathize with both the users and the mods.

That thread got more flaming then ANYTHING i've ever seen. I admit, I haven't been here as long as other members have, like the ones from 2008 ... but I think we can all agree that might of been the nastiest turn of events in years. My UN Group talked about it with concern and the best thing was to avoid talking about the topic afterwards.

No lie, I totally understand why Jim requested that people take account what they're doing to publishers by having the A-word. It stops their checks from coming in and makes it even harder to run content, or hire employees to display entertaining videos per week (per day actually, since there's always new videos from Monday to Friday, but I am pointing out employees like Jim whom distribute a video per week instead, and takes time working out the next one.)

Felt bad when reading what Techdirt had to say. I also wonder what will happen to this thread?
Are we allowed to discuss this by any means? Thread wise that is?

Surely as consumers what we take in is our decision, not something we should stand for being foisted upon us merely so they can get paid. Many of us work shit jobs doing stuff we hate and you're saying we should have to put up with more so someone who gets to do their dream job has an easier time of it? Hell no. What i spend my hard earned money and time on is my decision.

Now that being said, I'm happy to flick my eyes over a few banners and what not, non intrusive ads aren't that bad, sometimes they actually appeal and i'm quite happy to give them a click. But i will not stand for having my user experience ruined because someone else wants some cash.

The way i see it, if you want to get paid for what you do; do it better, don't expect my charity to get you through it.. that makes you a parasite, just like those AAA companies that fuck with our beloved gaming and get away with it under the veneer of "but it's a business". It's honestly that style of thinking that lets companies destroy our environment and fuck people over. Like they're naive or cute or something and have just pissed on my carpet. NO, BAD!

Far as I'm concerned, this is haggling, if i don't like the price, i won't pay it and you cannot force me to.

Yes i'm reminded of the monty python skit.

As for how that thread got out of hand, it's because the Mods decided that even an admission of an adblock is advocating it, even if you explain why and offer constructive advice as to what would make you stop using the adblock. So instead of taking the advice and making a product better, they promptly slapped down any debate. As far as I'm concerned, that's bullshit and bad moderation and why they earned my ire.

 

[TerribleAssassin]

That said, the Escapist handled that thread really, really poorly. Really took the wind out of the sails for Jim's well-reasoned, good-natured argument.

I didn't look at the thread because I expected a shitstorm, but I bit the bullet and indulged and holy fuck it was a complete train wreck.

"Hey, I've got this interesting discussion point and it'll be interesting to see to hear or see if I change anyone's opinions."

"Well, funnily enough, we're gonna stop any kind of discussion about the content matter. That'll encourage discussion right?"

It's complete incompetence when you consider a forum is for like-minded people to share ideas and opinions.

 

[DanDanikov]

Yeah, so openly admitting to using adblock (which I did) results in a warning, which is madness . I'm out [shrug] Don't think I'll be missed, but who cares.

Enjoy your broken empire, Escapist.

 

[IceForce]

You can talk about adblockers without using phrases that directly state that you use them, or directly advocating their use. You can talk about them in the abstract just fine.

But doesn't that defeat the entire purpose of having that rule?

What's the point in having a forum rule that can be circumvented by "talking in the abstract"?

 

[Griffolion]

I looked at the first few pages of that comments section, and then just ran. No way was I getting into any of that. Everyone just turned on each other, and what's worst was that even those who were reasonable and gave reasons for their use of that-which-shall-not-be-named got the warning-hammer. Absolutely nobody won in that thread. What started as a considerate, reasonable video from Jim became perhaps one of the worst threads ever known to the Escapist. Perhaps the WGDF Critical Miss strip was worse.

 

[Britisheagle]

It is the fact that some (most ads) on sites like this and other gaming websites are often quite long and, more importantly, repetetive. I have a life and come to the Escapist only occassionaly as a break to catch up on the week's videos and articles. Problem is that in order to do this I have to sit through the same advert over and over and also deal with the hassle of constantly being bombarded with ads at the top, sides and bottom of the screen. It looks messy and you add the addition of autoplay ads and so on it becomes not a nice place to be anymore.

I study consumer buying behaviour and these ad agencies need to realise that harrassing consumers is not the right way to go to drum up hype around a product and influence them to purchase it. Equally sites such as this one need to find a way of making ads more palitable to put people off using blockers to support the site. Youtube allows you to skip adverts and they vary. Some times I even sit right through them because they are new and quite amusing (see: James Corden Cadbury ad).

I am very disappointed with the way in which Escapist have handled this situation and if I am honest it makes me feel as though I shouldn't support them...

 

[thewatergamer]

I do love the way that the author claims Jim "whines" "about that program we must not mention" even though if you actually watch the video he respectfully asked his viewers to support him and whitelist the escapist

other than that, already said my feelings on the thread in question,

Aside from that really moderators? People complain about legitimately annoying ads and you respond by banning them? Get some clarification on what we are allowed to talk about, Jim started the thread I assume to let us openly discuss how we feel about "that program" and about ads on the escapist, so mods banning people for discussing it feels kind of backwards, apparently mentioning the program="warning don't say "that word" again or YOU WILL BE BANNED" something seems a little backwards here moderators of the escapist

 

[scw55]

My only problem with the ads on this site are the Audio ones.

I boot up a video. It opens an overlay player. I start watching. A few moments in I get blasted with "TO TREAT MY POO PROBLEMS I TAKE SUPERDRIN". To mute this advert which is impeding my enjoyment of the website, I have to close down the overlay and pause/mute the advert. I then have to open up the overlay again and reload the video and find my place again.

It. Is. Bloody. Annoying.

That is one thing which probably does drive a few users to Ad block.

 

[thewatergamer]

From the beginning of the thread in question:

Can mods give clarification on how we're to discuss this? Normally adblock threads are instantly closed with participants warned and if there's to even be a comments section for this video they'll have to be some sort of exception.

Briefly discussed with a moderator yesterday that exceptions would have to be made here. I cannot speak for the admins, but I would like to believe they understand that, in order to comment here, an armistice is gonna be needed.

So, about that armistice, Jim?

Are you blaming me or something?

I don't have the time or the mental wherewithal to get into a big discussion, but I stand by what I said. I requested exceptions, I wanted an armistice, but could not speak for the moderators. Believe it or not (and some people have a hard time believing it) I neither create nor enforce any policy at The Escapist. I'm a freelance content producer. Even my reviews editor position is technically freelance. I offer advice and make requests, and the site is generally gracious in its response to such things, but I wield no authority when it comes to community policy. That's the simple fact of the matter.

I have said on Twitter that I would not have issued warnings in that particular thread. I am sad things happened the way they did and, as a result, am rethinking a future video I'd planned which would be about a different, but similarly contentious issue. I will probably have to cancel that episode unless I make a very official request that gets very officially recognized beforehand.

In any case, I'm sorry things happened the way did, but the forum has a policy and, in all fairness, the mods did what they could to minimize the negative effects.

As for that Techdirt article, "dirt" is right. I am greatly disappointed that my video was so woefully misrepresented.

THANK YOU JIM

Also as a side note Fuck that article completely misrepresented the purpose of the video

 

[Raioken18]

Uhh... so... The Escapist might want to check out the quality of the advertisers they are accommodating before getting all snippy about adblock users.

Currently this page has 6 advertisements, 2 of which have been flagged as leading to unsafe sites by my antivirus...

Front page has 8 advertisements, no flagged pages.

Videos generally get between 9 and 12, with varying amounts of unsafe links, mind you they are usually tracked more in comment sections than in video content.

Mind you, mostly tracking cookies and links to a few trojans...

But... the video adverts... at least equalize the sound or something, or put them at the start or end ovf videos so they aren't interrupted...

 

[thewatergamer]

Uhh... so... The Escapist might want to check out the quality of the advertisers they are accommodating before getting all snippy about adblock users.

Currently this page has 6 advertisements, 2 of which have been flagged as leading to unsafe sites by my antivirus...

Front page has 8 advertisements, no flagged pages.

Videos generally get between 9 and 12, with varying amounts of unsafe links, mind you they are usually tracked more in comment sections than in video content.

Mind you, mostly tracking cookies and links to a few trojans...

But... the video adverts... at least equalize the sound or something, or put them at the start or end ovf videos so they aren't interrupted...

(dear mods this is not meant as a personal attack or anything so please take my opinion with a grain of salt even though it seems ridiculous I have to say this but here it is)
Don't bother it seems the mods don't intend to listen to criticism, as I did complain about their policies and how they are somewhat bullying people on the forums with their powers, and their response was warning me about my "behaviour" regarding "respect for the mods"

Look mods I know you are going to read this, do I respect you? Usually yes up until this thread came along I have had few problems with your policies, but when you start to somewhat bully the people using your website and not accepting legitimate criticisms about your advertisements, thats when i start to question if you really should be the ones modding the site, *sigh* shame because I normally really respected this websites staff... but now you get all pissy when people complain about advertisements on the site, (and some can be really offensive/annoying)

now should people use adblock because they don't like the ads? Probably not since that doesn't really help the situation at all and just leads, as Jim said, to worse and more intrusive advertisements which just leads to more people using adblock and its an feedback loop of lost money for the site and therefore, paycuts for its staff, but maybe consider dropping auto-streaming video ads on your website and see if people are more willing to whitelist the site

Hoo boy what a mess... on one hand you have the mods who to me look like they are bullying people, but then on the flipside you have people hating the moderators and *sigh* and don't even know what to think anymore... maybe Jim will respond this monday, assuming i'm not banned before monday because one of the mods mistakes me for a troll who must be banned...

*sigh* oh well i'm dropping out of this thread before it gets even worse...

 

[Strazdas]

I saw that its going to be a shitstorm, made a single post and didnt came back. Looks like this thread is going the same route. I would express my opinion on the article in the OP, but then i would be breaking other forum rules as well becasue now its illegal to say anything negative about escapist. so take that as you will.

And while im typing this im watching a autoplaying unstoppable yoghurt ad. yoghurt that isnt even sold in my country.

There is a reason why escapist is marked in the blacklist as "As bad as it goes" when it comes to advertisement. You should learn something from it instead of trying to sweep it under the rug.

Then again, i guess you suceeded here Escapist, after all i like being on this site enough that you managed to gag me.

 

[Strazdas]

snip

I would argue that you would sadly be in the minority and all these site policies add up to putting people off viewing this site and especially put people off joining to community and posting here. We've learned we can't openly discuss this so I'll leave some of the reasoning out but needless to say if you didn't have a pub club membership i can imagine someone would feel very strongly compelled to do something about ads. Being able to or not being able to discuss the fact does little to effect the outcome outside of stirring up bad community feeling. Open discussion might get both sides somewhere but it is sorely lacking.

Most consumers don't care, they simply don't. All they want in convenience. The Escapist inconveniences people whilst banning people from directly and honestly discussing it. I've said it before and I've said it again, a better policy towards people who are justifiably angry about browser-breaking adverts is to direct them towards to publisher's club.

Co-operative is much better than combative.

I have been planning to get a Pub Club membership, but certain things happened that made me rethink that choice.

Honest discussion and being willing to work with thier community would certainly help them heaps, alas looks like they are more likely to ban you for criticizing them instead of listening to criticism.

Capcha: Swirling vortex of entropy

Oh, yes, capcha, it is.

 

[LeQuack_Is_Back]

I don't like the article because they totally took Jim out of context, and ironically enough, I find him one of the more reasonable people on teh internets.

But gosh darn it, that thread was scary. I understand the policy of the site, but if dozens of people are saying "I use X because the ads are just that darned obnoxious" maybe that should get some further examination? Maybe? I don't claim to know how the ad system works, or how feasible weeding out the bad ones would be.

 

[WarpZone]

What's weird is I made it through that thread smelling like a rose, despite discussing the actual topic of the Jimquisition Episode. Other users were replying to me and everything. I just followed the site rules to the letter and didn't call the moderators dipshits. This isn't hard to do. It's just basic common sense and respect.

I think the real problem was that some users got caught up in the momentum of Jim Sterling's bombastic character and delivery, and started thinking "oh, I'll talk to the mods like Jim talks to us." And that's just not how it works. For better or worse, not all communication is treated equally on a moderated site like this one. Just follow the rules and treat other users with respect and you'll be fine.

Also, there's a difference between saying "I committed crime X on such-and-such a date," and saying "I agree with the opinions expressed by Brian Griffin in this episode's first musical number." The former is much more likely to evoke a response from law enforcement than the latter.

 

[Deadcyde]

From the beginning of the thread in question:

Can mods give clarification on how we're to discuss this? Normally adblock threads are instantly closed with participants warned and if there's to even be a comments section for this video they'll have to be some sort of exception.

Briefly discussed with a moderator yesterday that exceptions would have to be made here. I cannot speak for the admins, but I would like to believe they understand that, in order to comment here, an armistice is gonna be needed.

So, about that armistice, Jim?

Are you blaming me or something?

I don't have the time or the mental wherewithal to get into a big discussion, but I stand by what I said. I requested exceptions, I wanted an armistice, but could not speak for the moderators. Believe it or not (and some people have a hard time believing it) I neither create nor enforce any policy at The Escapist. I'm a freelance content producer. Even my reviews editor position is technically freelance. I offer advice and make requests, and the site is generally gracious in its response to such things, but I wield no authority when it comes to community policy. That's the simple fact of the matter.

I have said on Twitter that I would not have issued warnings in that particular thread. I am sad things happened the way they did and, as a result, am rethinking a future video I'd planned which would be about a different, but similarly contentious issue. I will probably have to cancel that episode unless I make a very official request that gets very officially recognized beforehand.

In any case, I'm sorry things happened the way did, but the forum has a policy and, in all fairness, the mods did what they could to minimize the negative effects.

As for that Techdirt article, "dirt" is right. I am greatly disappointed that my video was so woefully misrepresented.

Yeah, I'm going to stop you right there.

Not only do you get space on a premiere banner, you have at least 3 major contributions that sit on the front page of the site. If you said jump, there's no way the escapist would not say "how high". Because, simply put, if you left they would lose their cash cow and probably a third of their income. So please stop pretending like you had no say in the matter and you're an innocent party. You posted something and your viewers were punished for it, and what did you do to salve the matter? What did you do to even minimize damage? Nothing, certainly not till after the fact.

So whatever Jim. I stand by what i said. Your bottom line means more then any of your opinions and that means your opinions can simply be bought and therefore are worthless. Good day.

 

[shrekfan246]

Yeah, I'm going to stop you right there.

Then you're probably going to miss the point.

Not only do you get space on a premiere banner, you have at least 3 major contributions that sit on the front page of the site. If you said jump, there's no way the escapist would not say "how high". Because, simply put, if you left they would lose their cash cow and probably a third of their income. So please stop pretending like you had no say in the matter and you're an innocent party. You posted something and your viewers were punished for it, and what did you do to salve the matter? What did you do to even minimize damage? Nothing, certainly not till after the fact.

You do realize that he has the same amount of space as the likes of MovieBob, Yahtzee, or LoadingReadyRun? And that none of them have any say in the matters of how this website is run because they're, for all intents and purposes, freelance content producers who are simply currently providing their wares to The Escapist in exchange for a bit of cash and publicity?

They're not part of the website staff. Jim might be the closest because he's the current reviews editor, but that still has absolutely nothing to do with the rules or moderation of the website. There's nothing he could have done. And that's completely disregarding the fact that the rules were enforced less harshly, because people only got moderated for admitting to blocking The Escapist.

So whatever Jim. I stand by what i said. Your bottom line means more then any of your opinions and that means your opinions can simply be bought and therefore are worthless. Good day.

Sorry, I'm just leaving this in so I can point out how many laughs I'm going to get out of this over the course of the day. Thanks, man, I needed that.

Or, to put it another way, you're basically using the "The publisher paid for this review" argument on a discussion about a program that directly prevents people who provide content free of charge from getting paid. Not only is the argument completely baseless to begin with, but Jim's opinion on the matter in question was "I don't blame you for using this program, but could you please turn it off at least just for us?"