On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 10:35 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 7 November 2010 00:34, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
I'm sure they'd be willing to work out a deal where people can opt-in to Wikipedia ads (which wouldn't be subject to the anti-porn rules). I doubt they'd allow non-opt-in ads on [[tit torture]], though.
I'm not convinced opt-in ads would get any significant revenue. Very few people would opt-in and those that do would probably be people that are just doing it to get us money and aren't going to click on the ads, so we wouldn't actually get any money.
Oh, sorry, I just realized how incredibly confusing I phrased that. What I meant by "people can opt-in" was that the advertisers could opt-in to allowing their ads to appear on Wikipedia, so that unsuspecting advertisers didn't wind up having their products displayed on an illustrated article about [[tit torture]].
Yes, that's how Google works, like a machine gun spraying all over the place, missing 1,000 times for every one time it hits. Google, however is a straw man for the purpose of this conversation. Totally unacceptable, except on an ad page linked to articles about them and their services.
Fred