Yeah, these sponsored posts seem to be doing the lead balloon thing. I have no particular beef with either Insightly or with you guys, but trying to force geeks to talk about things that benefit a sponsor is just not going to work. I've seen two of these posts, and in neither one did any useful conversation happen.
We've had tremendous success with some of these posts, and others haven't caught on. We're definitely learning and adjusting as we go. Just a couple weeks ago, one of our sponsored posts was the top post on Reddit tech and reached #5 on the front page of Reddit as well. So, sometimes people quite like them.
Also, in the past, we've held similar discussions to this one that have gone quite well and been very interesting, including on topics like enterprise storage, enterprise printing, data models, and the like.
But, yes, this particular post clearly did not catch people's interest, and we're learning from that as well.
You'd probably raise more actual revenue if you came up with better price tiering. I wanted to give you $50/year, but that wasn't easy to do; it was either $15 once or $10/mo. So you got $15 from me instead of $50.
Hmm. Perhaps the organization of the site isn't that clear, but we've always had a lot more options than you suggest, including a $5 month option (http://rtb.techdirt.com/products/watercooler/) and a name your price option, that even has a single check box for $50 (http://rtb.techdirt.com/products/friend-of-techdirt/).
We'll look for ways to make that clearer.
I think you're falling away from your own major drives, the ones that got me to sign up in the first place... engaging your users and giving them something excellent.
Again, as noted above, most of what we've done has worked. Sometimes it doesn't -- and this may be a case where it doesn't, which we're learning from.
Talk about Insight.ly because they are interesting, not because they pay you.
Honestly, nothing in this post said anything about talking about insightly. It asked people to discuss ways to deal with a very real problem that many of our users do discuss regularly. It was sponsored by Insightly to create a general discussion on the topic -- not to have anyone comment about Insightly.
So if Pandora buys a radio station and they simulcast ONE broadcast so what? If they do the same thing the radio stations do they should get the same rates. But if they do something different... I dunno, say allow user defined algorithmically generated personal playlists per user... well, then, that's a different service and requires a different rate. Pretty simple really.
No, they're asking for the same rates that ASCAP gives iHeartRadio for *ITS* algorithmically generated personal playlists.
It amazes me how you folks keep spewing off about this without even knowing what you're talking about.
They're not asking for the same rates that *radio* pays. They're asking for the same rates that radio stations pay FOR THEIR ONLINE STREAMING SERVICES THAT ARE JUST LIKE PANDORA.
Why does anonymity/privacy lover Mike Masnick have the moderation filter catching posts of users utilizing TOR? Hmm....
We don't. We use a variety of anti-spam filters to catch spam, and it sometimes catches legitimate comments, which we tend to free up within hours (a bit longer over the weekend and late at night). It is true that tor-based comments are slightly more likely to be caught in the filter because (shockingly) tor is often used by spammers. However, if the comments are legit, we free them pretty quickly. Also, it does not catch all tor comments. Many of them get through no problem. The system uses a variety of heuristics to figure out what is and what is not spam.
The system that catches those comments catches approximately 1,000 spam comments per day. It tends to catch very, very few legitimate comments, and those it does catch are put live on the site pretty quickly.
Re: Re: Re: Congratulations, Techdirt engineers -- once again you've broken something.
Well that was quick. Seems both problems are gone again. Also, the text on the expander-tabs had changed to "Read More" and has reverted to "Expand". Did you guys click "undo" after trying something and realizing it had unwanted side effects?
Nope. Made no changes to the site tonight at all. Expand/collapse has been working fine for me. Not sure if what you saw was a hiccup, but we'll look into it.
As for some of your other points, we decreased the number of articles on the front page after we received numerous complaints of load times for the full page. The expand/collapse stuff was also due to people complaining that they had to scroll through long articles they didn't want to read to get to the ones they did want. This way you can scroll and *very easily* open up the full article if you want to.
Also, if you want to keep the articles expanded, there's an option for that in your preferences, so if you really don't like the collapsed stories, no problem, you can have it appear the old way -- and that works whether you're logged in or logged out.
So, no, most of these changes have been focused on improving user experience, giving you more choices. Sorry if you don't appreciate them, but we're trying our best to accommodate a variety of ways in which people read.