Who here has

[Pubey]

Just wondering who actually does this... i've started doing it now and its quite cool as makes the threads load quicker

 

[wrongun]

If this poll is not favourable there would be no point in me having the advertising that i will be paying for. I hope Jontosh hasn't cost Shrimperzone a nice few quid by running this poll.

 

[Pubey]

seeing as this has already been discussed quite a bit i dont think it will be a problem.. and also thats not my aim.. it will probably prove useful however for people like you to see how much your adverts are view by SZ members.

 

[Matt the Shrimp]

Pandora's box appears to have been opened. It strikes me that it's only fair to Essex Car Rentals to see whether or not people block their signatures, or whether they're not too fussed - and thus happy to allow the owners of the site a small opportunity to raise a little revenue.

That the thread has been opened by someone who his own signature, but who has then blocked signatures (so, presumably, he can't see his own...?!) begs a few questions.

Hey ho.

Matt

 

[wrongun]

Quote[/b] (jontosh2001 @ Dec. 13 2006,12:47)]seeing as this has already been discussed quite a bit i dont think it will be a problem.. and also thats not my aim.. it will probably prove useful however for people like you to see how much your adverts are view by SZ members.

Thats another way of looking at it. Even tho you think it's good for me to know it would seem as though what i didn't know wouldn't have hurt me !! If everyone has the sig blocked off then what's the point in the AD. The only loser will be Shrimperzone. Without them you wouldn't even be able to cast your point of view because the site would not be running.

 

[Matt the Shrimp]

Quote[/b] (wrongun @ Dec. 13 2006,12:58)]The only loser will be Shrimperzone. Without them you wouldn't even be able to cast your point of view because the site would not be running.

Spot on mate, as always.

 

[Pubey]

does it matter that i have a sig but dont look at it?? seems like nit picking..
I explained why i have blocked sigs, to speed up loading times and so its easier to read posts

ive pm'd you matt and feel free to forward it to Wrongun
feel free to delete this if you want, of course i dont want for SZ to lose out on money, and for it to be able to run

 

[McNasty]

As this site will rely almost completely on income from advertisers I think this thread will be quite harmful , as what advertiser is going to pay for sig adverts when people will just turn them off willy nilly.


Not best pleased.

 

[DTS]

I cant see the harm in having them on.

Wrong Un has put a lot of money into the club and this site which benefits me in a roundabout sort of way so I have no problems seeing his company logo.

I dont think many people bar XS/ Sudden in Out/Whatever he is called today have any issues.

 

[Matt the Shrimp]

Oops, and it doesn't help that in my slight displeasure, I voted "yes" when I meant "no"...

Good to see that most people don't block signatures; and as for having your own sig, but then blocking it... that is surely totally perverse?!

Matt

 

[The General]

I dont block them. Perhaps you should turn the option off then?!

 

[Jonny_Stokes]

Quote[/b] (The General @ Dec. 13 2006,13:14)]I dont block them. Perhaps you should turn the option off then?!

You'd have to have a poll on it. The owners have to be unilateral on occasion, but this isn't one of those times, IMHO.

 

[MC BLUES]

I have to say that I often wonder why the owners of this site bother.

This is a great facility and yet it seems some just want to criticise, or explore ways to attract criticism from others!

I noted on another thread that someone was moaning that it probably only costs the owners £50 a Month, "so why should they worry about funding"!!! I wonder if he/she would be prepared to pay £600 a year largely for the benefit of others?!
This is assuming these figures are even remotely accurate, which I seriously doubt!

Add to this the time the owners put into this site, with such apparent little appreciation from a very small minority, who could really blame them if they just decided to pull the plug?

Truth is I suspect, we all know they won't. Can we really be so sure though?! Maybe a little further thought and consideration would help to show that the overwhelming majority who enjoy this site do appreciate their efforts.

 

[Mad Cyril]

I have blocked avatars and signatures because I don't need pictures of chesty women, Nick Griffin or overweight, shaven headed, Lacoste wearing blokes throwing chairs displayed on my desktop when I am supposed to be working...........

Cheers

 

[McNasty]

Quote[/b] (Mad Cyril @ Dec. 13 2006,13:37)]I have blocked avatars and signatures because I don't need pictures of chesty women, Nick Griffin or overweight, shaven headed, Lacoste wearing blokes throwing chairs displayed on my desktop when I am supposed to be working...........

Cheers

I fully support your reasons for doing that , as we know quite a large number of posters use their work computers and we certainly don't want bosses copping the hump.

 

[McNasty]

Quote[/b] (MC BLUES @ Dec. 13 2006,13:25)]I have to say that I often wonder why the owners of this site bother.

This is a great facility and yet it seems some just want to criticise, or explore ways to attract criticism from others!

I noted on another thread that someone was moaning that it probably only costs the owners £50 a Month, "so why should they worry about funding"!!! I wonder if he/she would be prepared to pay £600 a year largely for the benefit of others?!
This is assuming these figures are even remotely accurate, which I seriously doubt!

Add to this the time the owners put into this site, with such apparent little appreciation from a very small minority, who could really blame them if they just decided to pull the plug?

Truth is I suspect, we all know they won't. Can we really be so sure though?! Maybe a little further thought and consideration would help to show that the overwhelming majority who enjoy this site do appreciate their efforts.

The monthly costs are nearly double that quoted and the costs of the on-going up-grades etc make the running of this site far more than just a hobby.
I find it quite funny that some of the site's biggest critics have never offered any help whatsoever , and I often wonder why the owners of this site bother.

 

[Napster]

Quote[/b] (mcnasty @ Dec. 13 2006,13:54)]I find it quite funny that some of the site's biggest critics have never offered any help whatsoever , and I often wonder why the owners of this site bother.

It's never changed, Kenneth

 

[Pubey]

As I have found out from MtS, apparently just deleting this thread isn't the way forward... so perhaps leaving it to sink down is smart.  I've never been a critic of the site and if I wasn't a pennyless student then would offer some time or resources to help.  My intentions were never to undermine the hard work of the SZ owners, but purely to find out how common it was that people blocked sigs.  I believe it is interesting, in the communities interest and also valuable to potential advertisers.  I don't know if Wrongun knew about the ability to block sigs?  But it is probably important that either the option is removed if you feel sig-ads are the future, or that potential advertisers know this is possible and then maybe other methods of raising revenue are looked at.

Also the question of me having a sig but not looking at it, well because the option is there i don't really need to see what songs i listen to. I have frequent convos with people due to the last.fm signatures and believe them to be interesting, but am not going to get offended if people chose not to look at them!

I hope you all accept my apology and understand my intentions... I hope this subject(thread) can be closed or if not left, so that any damage to SZ is minimal

Cheers lads, up the blues!

Jon

 

[Beefy]

Quote[/b] (Mad Cyril @ Dec. 13 2006,13:37)]I have blocked avatars and signatures because I don't need pictures of chesty women, Nick Griffin or overweight, shaven headed, Lacoste wearing blokes throwing chairs displayed on my desktop when I am supposed to be working...........

Cheers

Same here.

Fair play to wrongun for advertising here, but if paying for the site is becoming a problem just stick a paypal link up.

 

[Leeboy]

Quote[/b] (jontosh2001 @ Dec. 13 2006,14:02)]I hope you all accept my apology and understand my intentions... I hope this subject(thread) can be closed

ok then