Forum menu
Cheers Scotroutes.
A thought/test is to delete cookies. May have to delete them all which would be a pain having to log back in to a lot of sites, but it would flush out all the ad tracking cookies which may be influencing which ads are being served to you.
Ensuring Do Not Track is enabled may (or may not) help also. Though a lot of sites can ignore this request header, it in theory instructs sites to not add tracking cookies, which are then picked up by advert code to show relevant ads. Likely only works having flushed tracking cookies first.
It's not blocking adverts but could explain why some people get particular problematic ads more than others. It could be the type of sites you browse regularly also. Keep off the porn and dodgy download sites 😉
Only on STW, obvs.
Now you tell me 🙁
@deadkennedy
Doesn't make a difference. Private browsing session in Safari, which Safari stopped loading in this instance:
[img] 
[/img]
Only way to stop them is P, content blocker or not use the forum.
...although, purely anecdotally, it does seem Safari as a browser may be more susceptible.
Sorry, I've been away for most of yesterday, just got home.
Ensuring Do Not Track is enabled may (or may not) help also.
By all means try, but tread carefully here as it might do the opposite. My understanding is that on your first visit you get served the "quality" adverts, and should only see the lower quality ones once they've been exhausted (it's a little more complex than that, but that's the gist I think). If you block the tracking cookie, you're potentially breaking the algorithm which is responsible for prioritising what you see.
I could be talking out of the top of my head here. My point is, keep an eye on it if you're going to do that.
Android mobile for me (quickly typed before redirect
So I assume there is an ad engine being used and STW has little/less control over what the engine serves up (which will be client driven based on tracking cookies stored on each PC, so not everyone gets the same ads).
Yes. When I talked to the team about it earlier this year, I was told that they (then) currently used three advertising companies who deliver the ads. How much actual granular control they have over content I'm not sure. This is under constant review - I know STW have disabled entire engines in the past when this has happened previously.
And yet I'm not having that problem(when not logged in). I do wonder what other factors are influencing it. Can you browse ok if you're not logged in?myti - Member
Android mobile for me (quickly typed before redirect
Cougar - I've read previous explanations regarding ad engines but they don't explain why the problem is so prevalent on this particular site given that it's a common approach.
I suspect that a key underlying cause/enabler of this problem is a market where website advertising space buyers are able to get away without doing sufficient due diligence and their own active monitoring to weed out and block those who pay them to deliver ads containing malware etc. Presumably they can get away without doing this because their customer base, i.e. forum owners like STW, are numerous, fragmented and individually so small that they have fairly weak bargaining power.
I would have expected it to make sense for forum owners to talk to one another and form a trade body, to help each other both to identify the sources of problems like this, and also to give themselves more clout when dealing with those who buy the ad space from them (i.e. 'if you don't do more to stop delivering these ads/malware to our users, then we [STW, pistonheads, Mumsnet etc. etc. will collectively stop using you]')
If STW does not already talk to other forum and website owners, then it should start doing so.
Road.cc has similar problems currently [url= http://road.cc/content/news/230562-bad-ad-update-2-its-all-about-code ]and is now showing the code on its webpages to help users help them to identify the source[/url]. I found that link by looking on the [url= https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&f=24&t=1701241 ]Pistonheads website[/url], where, surprise surprise, they too evidently have similar problems.
Cougar - I've read previous explanations regarding ad engines but they don't explain why the problem is so prevalent on this particular site given that it's a common approach.
It's not just this site, STW is in no way unique here. There's a few factors at play though I think.
1) I'd imagine the most vocal contributors use this site more than they do other forums. Ipso facto, they're more likely to experience issues on here than they are elsewhere.
2) Relating to 1), the more often you use the site, the more likely it is that you'll churn through the 'good' adverts and start hitting the backfill.
3) STW is a commercial endeavour. The revenue from magazine sales, [P]remier subs, merchandising and yes, advertising has to pay for staff wages (and hopefully turn a small profit). You cannot compare the STW forum directly with somewhere which has to cover their bandwidth and hosting costs and not much else. It's a different 'business model' (for want of a better term) and so the advertising requirements will also differ greatly I'd have thought.
I would have expected it to make sense for forum owners to talk to one another and form a trade body,
Totally agree that a Forum Owners Society would be a cool thing. How viable that is in practice, I don't know.
But we're not just discussing annoying ads here. We're talking about redirects and attacks that should have no place in any advertising stream. The FOS might just be a pipedream at the moment but surely shutting off these ad engines should be an instant response while problems are resolved? I pay a whole £15 per year in support of the forum and so it could be argued that I have no skin in the game but not taking the nuclear option with ad feeds does smack of lack of consideration for the users.2) Relating to 1), the more often you use the site, the more likely it is that you'll churn through the 'good' adverts and start hitting the backfill.
[b]£15 per year[/b]
Doesn't seem much given how often many of the complainers are on here. Barely buys a bag of coffee....
STW is a commercial endeavour.
Is the key. I use other forums and they don't have this issue - but they are only trying to cover forum costs not pay staff wages
That's an assertion rather than a known fact though (unless Mark has said so)? I doubt it's absolutely possible to distinguish as much of the content is shared between print and web.the main issue is that this forum has to make money as its the only part of STW that does
surely shutting off these ad engines should be an instant response while problems are resolved?
And I expect that's exactly what will happen as soon as they get back to work on Monday. (-:
My point is that it should be configurable - something that can be done at the weekend by interested volunteers 😉
That's an assertion rather than a known fact though (unless Mark has said so)? I doubt it's absolutely possible to distinguish as much of the content is shared between print and web.
I've no idea how that's broken down. I do know that they're not all sitting there like Smaug on their piles of gold, and I also know that relatively minor changes to the site / forum can have a vast impact on its revenue (I've seen some of the analytics).
There is no "can't you just" with the STW forum, despite appearances it's a massively complex beast.
My point is that it should be configurable - something that can be done at the weekend by interested volunteers
It's a nice idea but see my previous comment. Even if we were entrusted with the keys to that, there is no way in hell I'd agree to it. A little click here, a little click there, and Mark can come in on Monday to work out who he needs to lay off this month.
Maybe my definition of configurable is different from yours. I'd be surprised/shocked if stopping an ad feed for two days had such an effect on overall revenue - and even then it should be weighed up against pissing off regular users (the same folk advertisers pay to reach).
Anyway... [b]£15 For a whole year of ad free browsing[/b]
Used to get this problem all the time, don’t have a ‘P’, just don’t use Google; I use DuckDuckGo as my preferred search engine through Safari. Simple.
None of which explains why STW is the only ONLY website I use that suffers from this nonsense. Couldn't report this last night due to rapidity of redirects.
I'm off to Mumsnet to ask about Centreparcs
£15 a year.
Fix the forum, mobile especially, and I would happily give them £15.
And I expect that's exactly what will happen as soon as they get back to work on Monday. (-:
Would someone, related to IT, not be ready to leap into action at the weekends/outside of the 9-5?
None of which explains why STW is the only ONLY website [b]I use[/b]
As above, both road.cc and Pistonheads have the same problem.
Chicken and egg?Jamie - Member
£15 a year.
Fix the forum, mobile especially, and I would happily give them £15.
I'd be surprised/shocked if stopping an ad feed for two days had such an effect on overall revenue
I have no idea, but I wouldn't be shocked in the slightest. It's kinda like the butterfly effect.
- and even then it should be weighed up against pissing off regular users (the same folk advertisers pay to reach).
And believe you me, any change is weighed up very carefully indeed.
One of the reasons for me visiting STW towers was to offer to help more with the technical side of the site. To which the answer was essentially "no you can't, and here's why."
Is the key. I use other forums and they don't have this issue - but they are only trying to cover forum costs not pay staff wagesSTW is a commercial endeavour.
There's nothing wrong with this: it's a business. On that note, I would have thought that the so called backfill class of ads in which the redirects etc. are hidden would be ideal for groups of fora and websites to combine together when selling ad space, since they are presumably fairly generic and unrelated to the nature of the forum. In other words STW sells primary ad space to CRC, Merlin etc. and Pistonheads to BMW etc., but I imagine both sell space to the same or similar 'backfill' ad space purchasers.
If so, even if it is impossible to get those ad space purchasers to weed out the redirects themselves, it would make sense for multiple fora to combine together when selling space to those purchasers, since the greater collective bargaining power should enable them to drive a harder bargain and get more money for the same amount of ads (or the same amount of money as currently but for fewer ads). Moreover, if multiple fora have sold space to the same provider, then their combined IT staff being able to compare notes with each other about problem ads will collectively give them all much greater resources when it comes to identifying those problem ads.
An attitude that the hordes of IT consultants on this site will have seen/dealt with countless times 🙂One of the reasons for me visiting STW towers was to offer to help more with the technical side of the site. To which the answer was essentially "no you can't, and here's why."
None of which explains why STW is the only ONLY website I use that suffers from this nonsense.
Aside from my post from less than an hour ago where I tried to explaine it, you mean?
Would someone, related to IT, not be ready to leap into action at the weekends/outside of the 9-5?
Dunno. I'd assume that would have to be a commercial decision. If you were part of Tech@STW, how much extra money would you want to be on standby every weekend? Meanwhile, let's turn off a revenue stream, it probably won't matter.
I'm not disagreeing with you BTW, just that simple solutions aren't always as simple as they appear.
slowster - I agree nothing wrong with that - its just a reason why this site is more prone that say the rugby forum I am on which only needs to cover hosting costs.
Scotroutes - IIRC it is what mark said in a similar discussion yonks ago.
part of
One guy innit?
Give the guys a break; STW is a small operation and to continue with their current business model requires revenue generation.
The model has been explained several times - see this thread and others.
If you want a guaranteed ad/pop-up free browsing experience, pay to become a P and turn the ads off.
By all means comment if you have problems but stop going on and on and....
How many additional Premier subscribers would STW need to remove their reliance on digital ads/pop-ups?
Frank. Serious talk now. Who is saying we need to get rid of the adverts? Most are perfectly happy with supporting the site through adverts. It's the redirects and browser hijacking people are not happy about.
It's all explained in the first post, and throughout the thread if it helps.
To which the answer was essentially "no you can't, and here's why."
What was the why?
How many additional Premier subscribers would STW need to remove their reliance on digital ads/pop-ups?
It's catch-22 isn't it. As Jamie said, [i]"Fix the forum, mobile especially, and I would happily give them £15."[/i] People (understandably) don't want to subscribe because they perceive issues with the forum, yet without more people subscribing there's less resource to improve the site and somewhat perversely a heavier reliance on advertising revenue.
What was the why?
Read back, I've already explained this, albeit briefly. TL;DR, "it's complicated."
Do any premier subscribers have the problems referred to throughout this thread?
"It's complicated" is a either reason for simplifying it or it's dogma.
And with that I'll bow out as I'm obviously upsetting Frank by "going on and on".
You are a touch virulent on the subscribe topic though 🙂
And with that I'll bow out as I'm obviously upsetting Frank
If the government ever taught us anything, it's to talk to Frank.
Give the guys a break
Do any premier subscribers have the problems referred to throughout this thread?
frankconway, I suspect that you might be missing the bigger picture. STW needs - and I am sure wants - to know about these issues and also the extent to which they are affecting users, and how users are reacting. Nothing would be worse for STW than for users and ad hits to disappear or fall off a cliff and [i]not to know the reason why and so not know how to fix the problem[/i]. Many other types of businesses, e.g. manufacturing or retail, would consider the sort of user feedback that threads like this provide to STW to be priceless.
With regard to Premier vs non-Premier users, I suspect it's far more complicated. It was stated on a previous thread (by Cougar I think) that the STW website attracts a very large number of visitors, presumably very many more than the number who have accounts. That is presumably because of the content that forum users provide, which I've occasionally noted can appear surprisingly high up in google searches about subjects not directly related to cycling. STW has to strike what is probably an extremely difficult balance between the nature and amount of ads it accepts vs. making the forum user friendly, given that it is the users themselves who create the content which brings people to the forum.
Scotroutes - suggest you re-read my post; no, you're not upsetting me - must try harder to achieve that 🙂
Bear - not 'virulent' about subscribing or anything else; you should know that the government never taught us anything 😉
Many other types of businesses, e.g. manufacturing or retail, would consider the sort of user feedback that threads like this provide to STW to be priceless.
Oh, absolutely.
Personally I get a bit frustrated with feedback of the "wah wah it's all bollocks" variety, simply because it's not constructive (but then I'm a grumpy git). Feeding back [i]why[/i] you think it's bollocks, that's helpful, unless it's the same thing fifteen other people have already said.
In the case of the rogue advert issues here, knowing where they're coming from is half the battle I believe, which is why screenshots and URLs are useful.
The flipside to that coin, is that despite submitting/reporting when things go sideways, nothing comes back. Which I guess can lead some to just vent frustration rather than detailed bug/event logs.
For example, the thread on the forum changes asking for feedback just got unstickied and ignored.
For example, the thread on the forum changes asking for feedback just got unstickied and ignored.
Maybe just maybe it wasn't ignored.
With regard to Premier vs non-Premier users, I suspect it's far more complicated. It was stated on a previous thread (by Cougar I think) that the STW website attracts a very large number of visitors, presumably very many more than the number who have accounts.
Exactly. I remember seeing a work mate looking at a STW thread about coffee machines. He'd never heard of this place before.
Really, as soon as you log in the ads should be removed (whether you're a P user or not).
Really, as soon as you log in the ads should be removed (whether you're a P user or not).
And stw closes for lack of revenue?
Cougar - ModeratorAside from my post from less than an hour ago where I tried to explaine it, you mean?
I didn't read it.
But what's the use of a forum you can't read due to redirects happening as soon as you open the forum? Google even throws up a "Whoa! Are you sure you want to go there?" Message. It's spammy crap, advertise with a better class to match the wood burning, coffee snob level of user.
Do any premier subscribers have the problems referred to throughout this thread?
I don’t, and I haven’t been a Premium, or any other sort of subscriber for years, and neither do I use any sort of ad-blocking system, I still get regular adverts.
I’m using my iPad Pro now, with iOS 11, at home, on wi-fi, and I’m just not getting these issues.
I [i]used[/i] to, and as I point out every time this topic comes up, I used to complain about redirects, or those equally irritating whole-page ads that used to block out the entire page, and couldn’t be got rid of, then I just changed to default browser in Safari from Google to DuckDuckGo, and I’ve never had a problem since.
Seems like a simple solution, Cougar has commented when I’ve mentioned it that he doesn’t understand why it works, but it does, at least in my experience over the last eighteen months-two years.
I'm not a premier subscriber and don't see any of the problems noted. Very rarely access the site on my iPhone but do so daily on my iPad (using Safari). Both devices have fairly old OSs as they can't deal with the latest versions of IOS. I get fairly regular "This operation could not be completed" dialogs when an ad fails to load or it's been coded badly.
I am not a P and although I have had the redirects / prony stuff etc in the past both on my desktop and phone ( firefox desktop, android / chrome on the phone, google as default search engine on both) this time around I have had none. given that I use a lot of pirate streaming sites to watch sport which are riddled with these sort of things I doubt the link to previous browsing history ( but ain't techy enough to really know)
Clean your history, delete cookies and stop looking at pron’.
My antivirus is always detecting stuff on sports webpages from dodgy flash pop ups.
To be honest the best hackers are not detected and have been surfing your stuff for years without notice.
CountZero - MemberI’m using my iPad Pro now, with iOS 11, at home, on wi-fi, and I’m just not getting these issues.
I'm not sure nipping out and spanking >£600 on an Apple product is an ideal solution though...
Yeah. I mean, that's a Premier sub for the next 40 years.
My antivirus is always detecting stuff on sports webpages from dodgy flash pop ups.
If it's "always" doing it then that probably speaks more about your AV TBH. Either that or your definition of "sports webpages" is not what it first appears.
To be honest the best hackers are not detected and have been surfing your stuff for years without notice.
Huh? How do you mean?
I've stopped getting redirects I think, I know how this works as I work as a desktop engineer. Someone rings up and I try to help with an email issue with them thinking I can just fix it, but it doesn't work that way when other parties are involved too, wherever has been done it seems to have worked so nice one!!
Our will I get a redirect when I try to post this hahaha
Maybe just maybe it wasn't ignored.
Explain.
Yeah. I mean, that's a Premier sub for the next 40 years.
I wonder if there would be a new forum in that timeframe?
Redirects seem to have stopped on iPhone 6 running latest OS...
Explain
Could be they’ve actually taken some of the feedback. 2007 is almost upon us.
I wonder if there would be a new forum in that timeframe?
You're still good on your promise from page two if there is, yeah?
Could be they’ve actually taken some of the feedback. 2007 is almost upon us.
So have they or haven't they? Or are you in the same camp as Cougar and treated like a mushroom?
You're still good on your promise for page two if there is, yeah?
Might need something in writing.
Might need something in writing.
Eh, we already have that. On page 2. (-:
Is the 'hers why's because the people who created the forum are no longer involved with STW and those that are have a real fear of impacting something negatively?
Given the volume of users and the way the forum is now designed to work (generates more clicks and views and therefore shows more ads and generates more revenue), STW aren't likely to be rushing to get this fixed.
It won't be easy but it is entirely possible to get an update (or new) solution that improves the end user experience and maintains the inordinately large number of ad views that are enforced.
For something that is apparently so involved in paying wages, it seems odd that the tech support isn't available until Monday.
I've not read all these posts but I'm guessing people are moaning about the site and redirects and lack of response. I think it's pretty unfair as the website may be hosted by another company, it's likely looked after by one-two people regarding maintenance...... If those people are on call even on a Sunday they have to be paid. Deb's and admin's are far from cheap so that would just increase STW's outlay putting more pressure on the mag to succeed. It shouldn't matter that much that a site has a temporary issue for a few days.
Just my opinion, it's possibly been classed as not critical so doesn't need out of hours work, if it was a DDoS attack which brings down the site then that would be classed as something being urgent attention.
So have they or haven't they? Or are you in the same camp as Cougar and treated like a mushroom?
If I tell you they have would you believe me?
They have.
Malwarebytes is having a field day blocking hijacks in the last ~10 minutes, but that "Ready to play?" advert (no idea what it's selling, I have sound muted) is doing my head in, auto-scrolling the page to either the top or bottom (even if I'm in the middle of writing a post). 👿
Avast dropped two connections due to suspected malware in last 30 mins www.completeshredding.com.au
Emailed tech
And written to my MP. TWICE.
The fact the forum keeps bouncing around to ram these stupid adverts down my throat is beginning to really p1$$ me off...
What gives, I pay my dues for the 'P'
[quote=Paul B ]The fact the forum keeps bouncing around to ram these stupid adverts down my throat is beginning to really p1$$ me off...
What gives, I pay my dues for the 'P'
Do you have the adverts switched off?
Do you have the adverts switched off?
You can switch them off? 😮 😳
Found it! I'm happy now. Thanks