Susan Tully

I knew what the thread was about as soon as I saw the title because I too have been swamped by these particular ads.

Ditto. It just makes the site look like a cheap tabloid newspaper imo.

As above, this is the filler crap you find on local newspaper sites and, of course, the infamous sidebar of shame.

Honestly, the ads have been much better lately from a technical standpoint but clickbait aimed at the lowest common denominator isn’t a good look.

Ironically it appeared 8 times through this thread – although it mercifully disappeared when I logged in.

She was great in the Human League 😂

I too have no idea who she is, but have 8 adverts for her on page 1 of this thread.

STW (as much as I love it) it’s also the only website I’ve visited that makes my macbook try to take off, and I spend plenty of time on MS Teams, which seems pretty heavy on the old CPU usage versus a regular Web forum in theory…

BTW it’s “I single mom” that apparently ‘sponsors’ the advert, if that helps the dev team

I grew up with Grange Hill so I know who she is (never watched Eastenders) Irrespective of these shitty click bait ads it’s ace to see she became an accomplished director though I only spotted it earlier this year watching the credits for Line of Duty (??).

STW (as much as I love it) it’s also the only website I’ve visited that makes my macbook try to take off, and I spend plenty of time on MS Teams, which seems pretty heavy on the old CPU usage versus a regular Web forum in theory…

Distributed cryptocurrency mining, just saying…….

No but I’m sure someone would mention the fact you get signed out when you move between devices if they did

It’s that still a thing, mine seems to have fixed itself and I only need to log on occasionally, not sure if it’s once a week or once every three, but it’s not twice a day any more!!!

I’m a proper skinflint and even I subscribe.

But I didn’t think STW directly controlled the advertising content anyway do they? They hand over some banners to what essentially is an agency who populate that based in the type of site, and the cookies in your browser…

If you get nasty clickbaity objectifying shite it may, in part, be down to what you’ve been looking at elsewhere and partly due to the main user demographic for STW being ‘gentlemen of a certain vintage’…

It’s that still a thing, mine seems to have fixed itself and I only need to log on occasionally, not sure if it’s once a week or once every three, but it’s not twice a day any more!!!

Yes, every time I move to a different device I need to log in.

But I didn’t think STW directly controlled the advertising content anyway do they?

All internet publishers are accountable for the content they publish. They sometimes try to hide behind the “we just provide the space” defence, but STW have banned other adverts.

If you get nasty clickbaity objectifying shite it may, in part, be down to what you’ve been looking at elsewhere

I’m 99% certain that advert was not served to me because of any previous browsing history. Some of the ads I see are, but some are definitely not. Suggesting it’s the users fault is not helping STW to get high quality advertisers who might actually get clicks and maximise revenue.

I know its just a crappy advert but what a hateful thing to say about anybody. It’s amazing how people think they can say/write anything they like whilst hiding behind the anonymity of the Internet.

Yes, every time I move to a different device I need to log in.

I seem to be able to bounce between my phone and desktop and only have to log in once a month or so?

If you get nasty clickbaity objectifying shite it may, in part, be down to what you’ve been looking at elsewhere

I assumed this kind of dross was what was served up after you’d rejected all cookies and the advertisers were scraping the barrel for advertisers who would pay peanuts to put them in front of anyone.

may, in part, be down to what you’ve been looking at elsewhere

Nope, I can guarantee those clickbait links are not targeted advertising. They’re not even advertising anything, just take you to some shitty sub-reddit type website and usually to something nothing to do with the actual piece of garbage you’ve just clicked on.
Maybe STW gets a few pence for everyone who accidentally clicks on one as their phone screen is refreshing?

Just to clarify, as far as I know STW don’t sell ads on a singular basis. Like most websites of this type (and I also work in this industry) the ads are handled by programmatic exchanges. Essentially STW pass their collateral onto programmatic exchanges whereby advertisers bid for the right to occupy the available space, based on content, user type etc. It’s all automated and STW have very little say into the add that actually run (though I believe that they would be able to ban certain types or class of ads, though the process would be time consuming).

The reason websites like STW do this is that the alternative (salaried salespeople flogging ads) isn’t cost effective. So the ads that run are the ones that bid the highest for your attention. As I understand it some aspects of it can be tailored to your particular browsing history, particularly if you’re permanently signed into Google or facebook.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. The fact that there are people out there who are willing to derive such benefit from a forum such as this and yet are unwilling to cough up a couple of quid A MONTH to support it is shameful. It reflects far worse on you than it does on a business like STW which occasionally has to make commercial accommodations in order to keep the lights on

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. The fact that there are people out there who are willing to derive such benefit from a forum such as this and yet are unwilling to cough up a couple of quid A MONTH to support it is shameful. It reflects far worse on you than it does on a business like STW which occasionally has to make commercial accommodations in order to keep the lights on

You forgot to mention the failure to understand/remember what is explained every single bloody time the subject comes up.

But seriously, if you don’t like the ad content, stop visiting the forum. If you want to visit the forum, pay the pittance so that ads like these go away.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. The fact that there are people out there who are willing to derive such benefit from a forum such as this and yet are unwilling to cough up a couple of quid A MONTH to support it is shameful

Why is that, then?

THIS THING I GET FOR FREE AND USE FOR SEVERAL HOURS A DAY EVERY DAY ISN’T GOOD ENOUGH!

Aside from the morally bankrupt adblocking choice, all readers have three options. They can subscribe to support the site, or they can put up with the adverts.

Faulty adverts are a different matter. Report them and they will be hunted down.

I’ve spoken with Mark about this previously and there is little more he would like in the world than to do away with a reliance on third-party advertising networks. It is a massive pain in the bollocks but a necessary evil.

Aside from the morally bankrupt adblocking choice, all readers have three options. They can subscribe to support the site, or they can put up with the adverts.

Who is saying that there shouldn’t be adverts?

I thought @Mark had maybe blocked this ad, but I see it’s back again.

Does anyone know if there is a time delay before the close button works on the between pages ads on mobile? I keep thinking my device has frozen…

Are the freeloaders moaning again?

Is the service they’re not paying anything for not living up to their expectations?

As I said it looks more in place in the Daily Mail site so if you think that’s a good look crack on by all means. I was just under the impression STW had a little more moral fibre than that.

I’d also like a direct quote where I asked for no ads.

Thanks for the usual unsurprising level of attentention. Rant on.

I use to subscribe and still got ad’s. so cancelled.

I only use the forum, no interest in the articles

Maybe you could compile a list of adverts you approve of and deem worthy of your delicate sensibilities, then email it in to the STW staff for them to make it so?

Alternatively, you could pay the less than 2 quid a month so that you don’t have to look at any adverts at all, and also support the mag/site you spend so much time on?

Just a thought…

I see disapproving of generally offensive and demeaning ads is worthy of ridicule now.

It’s all your own fault, apparently.

How many subscription services is too many for everyone screaming for everyone to just pay for it then? Ten? A hundred? A thousand? Shall we just keep throwing money at everything that asks us to subscribe?

I’ve picked my subscriptions and STW didn’t make the cut. Partly because other bike websites I visit (Pinkbike and Cycling Tips) also offer news and discussion for free and without looking like the Daily Mail website.

Well, if you’re not funding it, stop whining about what’s on it, and head off to the forums that are worthy of your support.

Well, if you’re not funding it, stop whining about what’s on it, and head off to the forums that are worthy of your support.

If everyone did that you would end up with the tumbleweed of the members forum throughout the site…..

See that thing where you’ve stepped in dog shit and not noticed until someone pointed it out?

I’m not sure I can really make my point clearer. You might be happy enough walking about with shite on your feet and trouser legs but don’t be surprised if people judge you for it.

I’ve picked my subscriptions and STW didn’t make the cut.

I want a t-shirt saying that.

See that thing where you’ve stepped in dog shit and not noticed until someone pointed it out?

I’ve paid to make sure I don’t have to deal with the dog shit, and if more people did that, there wouldn’t need to be any dog shit. This gets explained every time people complain about the number and/or content of the ads.

I’m not sure I can really make my point clearer.

Well, if you’re not funding it, stop whining about what’s on it, and head off to the forums that are worthy of your support.

Err, the audience for advertising does fund it.

I’ve paid to make sure I don’t have to deal with the dog shit, and if more people did that, there wouldn’t need to be any dog shit.

If I actually thought I’d never see it again I might. But I will, every other sodding day. But that’s immaterial, because its still there and every new visitor sees it, and judges.

Partly because other bike websites I visit (Pinkbike and Cycling Tips) also offer news and discussion for free and without looking like the Daily Mail website.

For now

https://www.pinkbike.com/news/letter-from-the-editor-pinkbikes-next-chapter-with-outside.html

I’ve honestly never seen the ad. I have to log in every so often but it’s more like weeks than days.

Maybe you should cancel your subscription then you can join in with the whining?

Remember, in internet land, if you aren’t paying for the product then you are the product. Same is true here. I hadn’t realised my subs was not a direct debit, I just thought the ads were now here. Painful as it might be. Especially the one that blocks the whole screen.

Any way I too was delighted that she’s a successful director.

For now

https://www.pinkbike.com/news/letter-from-the-editor-pinkbikes-next-chapter-with-outside.html

But then if you go to Outside Magazine’s website there is loads of content for free and the only ads I get are for Hoka, which is pretty relevant to the site content. It also doesn’t make my computer fan spin up to warp speed unlike here.

I don’t really have much time for this ‘well we have to have scummy adverts’ stuff. If STW don’t want to let people use the site for free then don’t, but don’t compromise your integrity by regularly serving up ads for bitcoin scams and celebrity clickbait and saying ‘not our fault’ when it happens. Clearly there are ad services around that don’t do this.