The problem is that it's most likely costing ICS/Playboy many times that, in loss of sales. I believe their primary business is selling content on a subscription-based model, be it print or electronic format, not running a fucking board.

Reasons for this are a product of this industry
How many webmasters last more than a few years?
Its allways about short term $

nonsense. the biggest determining factor is the poster. You'll find more threads being deleted that were started by assholes, trouble makers, etc.
The friend or advertising dollar is ALWAYS worth it. The poster and his drivel never are.

If posters don't like it, they can simply open their own board.

GFY is no democracy...

Oh I agree, There are many poster here that just live for trouble. Smokey is not one for the most part and did bring up a valid point. I'm not a drama queen either. I'll dabble in it a little but i'll never give any serious time to it unless it is directly effecting my bottom line. I am very loyal to my friends and this I know this board is here to make money and advertisers are an important part in that. But what do you do if one advertiser is fucking over all the other advertisers? Is it worth it to keep that one account when it might piss off all the others? I know i'm just a guest here and if they decided to ban me right now I wouldn't bitch and moan about it. I know i'm speaking out against one of the main advertisers here and that's my right, just like it is thier right to delete my threads and ban me.

I find smokey to be informitive and helpful.

You want to know the simple truth? They need to free up space in the database so we can constantly be alerted to whatever's stuck in Juicy's ass today. PLAIN AND SIMPLE!

i find smokey to be informitive and helpful . (informative - helpful)

See censorship sucks, But If it's for a good cause like that. I take back all the bad stuff I have said about AFF there are bigger issues here. Like how did juicy fit headless up his ass?

I heard Juicy has the truth behind 9/11 stuffed up his ass too, but there's no way I'm going in looking for it!

Fitty..............deletes

i'll get you gadget if it's the last thing i do:mad:

Which is likely the perspective, but it is a very limited one.

The direct cost of losing a specific advertiser is anywhere from zero to the whole of his spending: it depends entirely on the demand for space. But the real cost doesn't begin and end with direct revenue. If the presence of a particular advertiser in some way enhances your own business interests, losing them could cost much more. And vice versa.

If I recall correctly from an article I read a few weeks ago, Playboy's online revenue was around $5 million a month during the first quarter of this year. If they were being targeted by Zango customers, then by the most optimistic forecasts of 1/2% penetration, that alone might be costing them $25K per month. The lost revenue due to their content being spread around torrent sites has to be huge and many times greater than any benefit from the exposure (after all, who hasn't already heard of Playboy?). Etc.

It is remotely possible that an enterprise the size of Playboy Online isn't affected by the gray and black areas of online porn. But it is surely more likely that the cost is far in excess of anything they earn from any one advertiser.

No wonder we have not caught binladen. Not sure if it's worth the $25million reward to go searching that ass.

You miss the point entirely - the "losses" don't come out of GFY's pocket, but the loss of 20k or even 50k of advertising (plus the contest threads, etc) would have a serious effect on the bottom line of this place. A few of the bigger consistent sponsors head for the exit doors, and suddenly this isn't anywhere near as profitable a business as it was.

So instead, a few companies apparently have the ability to "make a call" and have super negative threads sent into the shitpile.

Thanks to Smokey for not letting it die. The powers that be at GFY might want to consider how delicate the balance is when you are on the peak of the mountain.

The last numbers I saw (a year old) suggested that upwards to 50% of all end users had some sort of spyware on their systems.

Zango has claimed upwards to 200,000 installs per day - 73,000,000 installs per year. I think that the 1/2% penetration is just to polite a number.

However, this is the key thing: The sponsors don't lose a cent as a global overall total. The money moves, but the surfers buy at the same rate. The difference is who gets paid and how much it costs to acquire the sales. If a program isn't buying Zango traffic, then yes they are likely losing sales - but in the big scheme of things, the industry is the same size, just different people make the money.

The ones getting the biggest fucking over is the affiliates, but for the most part that just isn't important to many of the programs.

they don't have to have a reason
it merely is about what you control
if it's discussed in any other terms
then it's missing that basic point,
so even though you feel you ought
to be able to express yourself here
it really is just their site to control

The programs lose when they have to make a payout to a spyware advertiser for type-in or other trafic that would not otherwise require a commission to be paid.

I thought once you start editing a forum then you can be held responsible for whats posted there.

A judge could easily see it that way.

because they can:2 cents:

I think you should sue

If you want to debate the legitimacy of advertising on torrent sites, fine. The industry isn't in agreement with how to handle torrent sites and their traffic. Webmasters on all levels are both for and against torrent site advertising. So there are going to be those who take offense to claims that torrent site advertisers are supporting CP. I'm not surprised that particular thread was pulled given the implied allegations.

yeah, they do - but most of them apparently weren't bright enough when they started to realize the implications.

If I named names, this thread would likely get removed. I really doubt that a Will against AFF attack would be tolerated anymore.

Because everyone knows the nature of torrent sites (stolen content, pirated software, and of course, other "illegal" material) then sponsors that allow them into their programs and have the gall to say "it's all good" need to understand that they are, directly or indirectly, supporting the distribution of CP.

It would be a 1 minute programming job for AFF to search for the word "torrent" in the domain requesting an advertisement and deny it. They coudl easily scan their referals for torrent sites and disable accounts. They have the ability, they have the programming skill (even Lars could do it, he was an $11 a hour coder) but...

THEY LIKE MAKING MONEY TOO MUCH TO GIVE A RATS ASS.

That is what makes it so frustrating - the solution is RIGHT THERE... but they have no desire.

Do you even think before you type lol Editing posts could raise questions of 2257, No warning to kids not to go on here,someone posts something thats considered obscene somewhere is gfy now held responsible because they edit their board.I read somewhere if whatever goes up on board goes up and they dont touch anything they cant be held responsible once they start editing they can be held responsible for content.

Isn't it kinda obvious? It's because they can...

of course I think before I type. infact, here's what I thought before I typed that post:

"look at this fool. could he really think that 99% of the people on this board don't know the implications to editing a forum? does this clown think he has a better clue than the lawyers for ICS? Its amazing how these clueless people prattle on. I think I'll fuck with this one a while"

I agree with everything except the lawyers, highly doubt they are on top of the newest changes on forum law. I have two different lawyers under retention and Ive got more oh really I have check that,so the assumption they automatically know has worn off for me and one firm wrote a large part of the new condo law in atl. lol

I'm pretty sure I'm not the one missing the point. Given that GFY is owned by Playboy, I think the loss of revenue due to torrents and spyware does come out of GFY's pocket, indirectly.

Probably alot more then ad dollars,they should put you on the board

its not a new change and its an obvious one.
please, stop. you're really not smarter than the people paid to be smart.

I doubt that, when its yours and your not getting a check.You have to think more than the people being paid to be smart. You should know that you run a empire for christ sake,you blindly assume everyone you pay automatically has your best interests at heart. Come on.

we're not talking about me. we're talking about you, the guy who thinks this snippet of common knowledge about editing chat boards is some special knowledge not known by everyone.
EVERYONE who's anyone knows all about that law. but hey, if you're so smart sue!

whatta ya gonna do for the 20thousanth post?

You NJ guys were always alittle slow I have found. I really dont give a shit so why would I sue and I think you very wrong to assume that everyone knows that because if they did they wouldnt do it.

there you go

it is the problem of theoretical losses versus real losses. Would shutting down one torrent site up playboy's bottom line by 20k a month? I don't think they would know. That is soft dollars.

If they lost a 20k sponsor, trust me, they would know. That is hard money no longer going to the bank.

You mean soft like the billions of dollars companies like Coca Cola plow down into branding every year? :)

simple logic for simple people.
I'll dumb it down for you.
They don't do it simply because they CAN, they do it because they KNOW they can.(despite your guesses to the contrary)