What price MeFi's soul?

February 19, 2007 5:04 AM

Some of the current adsense ads running for non-members seem inappropriate. For example soulmate calculator, which appears to be a data harvesting, phone spam service. The UK version of the site doesn't even have any T&Cs, to make it clear you are signing up for £9/month of unwanted ringtone/wallpaper hell. Can the adsense filtering be turned up a notch, in line with our community values?
posted by roofus to Bugs at 5:04 AM (47 comments total)

Yes, I agree. No more tempting roofus to find his SO through a soulmate calculator!
posted by necessitas at 5:37 AM on February 19, 2007

Non-members of MeFi, without my cunning, guile, and extensive "internets knowhow" could easily have been fooled into signing up. I rely entirely on haruspicy and moleosophy when searching for my SO.
posted by roofus at 6:03 AM on February 19, 2007

I don't know about the UK site, but terms of service are clearly listed on the American version. If people aren't wary enough to refrain from putting their cell phone number into any text box that asks for it, on a page that they reached from an advertisement, then they probably shouldn't be using the internet.
posted by Roger Dodger at 6:11 AM on February 19, 2007

You don't know what you're talking about, or what you're asking for. AdSense filtering is on a per-domain basis, not by keyword, nor is there a slider that Matt can simply turn up a couple notches higher on the anti-skeeviness scale.

You expect Matt to keep track of literally hundreds of domains you don't approve of? Or should a new MetaTalk thread be started every time someone sees an ad, while logged out, that they don't like? And given the way this site and AdSense work, for an ad that may only appear in one context out of literally tens of thousands of pages?
posted by mcwetboy at 6:17 AM on February 19, 2007

Scrotum.
posted by thirteenkiller at 6:38 AM on February 19, 2007

I would like a skeeviness filter, please.

For real life. I'm fine with skeeviness on the internets. Just keep it away from me when I'm on the train.
posted by dmd at 6:45 AM on February 19, 2007

Enhancement request to Google: SF (skeeviness filter).
posted by netbros at 6:56 AM on February 19, 2007

I dunno. I bet they pay a pretty penny per hit to advertise on mefi. Matt's got a little mouth to feed, after all. And since anyone in the know blocks the google ads anyway ...

C:\WINDOWS\system32\drivers\etc\hosts.
127.0.0.1 googlesyndication.com

... it's no skin off our backs, is it?
posted by Dave Faris at 7:35 AM on February 19, 2007

I'm pretty much with mcwetboy on this one. There's no easy way for me to filter skeevy ads and I have no idea when and what context they appear in. I don't surf the site logged out, so I can't even monitor the ads. I'm trusting Google to match ads to keywords and if the service being advertised was illegal, Google wouldn't allow them on their network.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 7:56 AM on February 19, 2007

We have adsense? I had completely forgot until you mentioned it- and that is why I love it.

in line with our community values?

With those community values being?
posted by jmd82 at 8:01 AM on February 19, 2007

Some of the current adsense ads running for non-members

If they're non-members, then how can they be considered part of the community? All ads for logged-in members seem to reflect "community values" (and generally, we don't have to see any ads at all) so it sounds like non-members offended by ads should join the site and login. Problem solved.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 8:15 AM on February 19, 2007 [1 favorite]

The ads are deliberately dodgy so that anyone who dares not sign up here gets infected with spyware and crazy frog ringtones.
posted by fire&wings at 8:20 AM on February 19, 2007

That soulmate calculator is all over the place, and I hate it. My interests as a programmer, video game player, wood worker &c. all suggest that I NEED A SOULMATE. My wife will undoubtedly be upset.
posted by boo_radley at 8:39 AM on February 19, 2007

I'm trusting Google to match ads to keywords...
posted by mathowie

We're doomed. I can just picture all the ads for scrotum rings and the like.
posted by leftcoastbob at 9:13 AM on February 19, 2007

When I check out MetaFilter when I'm not logged in I always click on the ads. You know, for the kid.
But the Soulmate Calculator matched me with roofus and
I'm not sure how to feel about that.
posted by Floydd at 9:39 AM on February 19, 2007

Matt's got a little mouth to feed, after all.

I wonder what she has to say about this?
posted by Señor Grumpus at 9:39 AM on February 19, 2007

So these girls, they suicide?
posted by Rhomboid at 9:52 AM on February 19, 2007

in line with our community values?

you want fisting ads now?
posted by quonsar at 10:01 AM on February 19, 2007

you want fisting ads now?

I can see it now. "Teach a man to fist..."
posted by cortex at 10:14 AM on February 19, 2007

quonsar, I don't think that your comment is entirely appropriate for mixed company, please be aware that there are ladies reading this website.
posted by Meatbomb at 10:22 AM on February 19, 2007

... But it is totally in line for the dirty whores reading.

The question then becomes, is the Q talking to himself, or does he simply know his audience well? I keeed!
posted by Xoder at 11:48 AM on February 19, 2007 [1 favorite]

If they're non-members, then how can they be considered part of the community?

Ooh, an opportunity to beat my drum! Lurkers are like expatriates (or undocumented immigrants, if you want to get infammatory). They can't vote, but their presence effects us; they're not citizens, but they can be considered community members, at least for some values of "community." You can define "community" in ways that exclude or include them.

To get language-geeky, you could exclude them with the OED's definition 3, "Social intercourse; fellowship, communion," or 6, "The body of those having equal rights or rank," or include them with 7c, those "who have certain circumstances of nativity, religion, or pursuit common to them, but not shared by those among who they live," with the pursuit in question being reading MeFi.

Or we could call it a day and go with definition 10: "A common prostitute." In which case, bring on the fisting ads.
posted by longtime_lurker at 11:59 AM on February 19, 2007

The ads are deliberately dodgy so that anyone who dares not sign up here gets infected with spyware and crazy frog ringtones.

oh shi!

Is that why everytime I open my browser it goes:

DA DA LING DING DING DING DING ding DA DINGDING DING DA DING DINGDING ding DA DING!
posted by exlotuseater at 12:09 PM on February 19, 2007

When I was office-sitting for a friend one day, I accessed MetaFilter without signing in. Finding an ad for soulmates was surprising, but risible. It relieved the tedium of using a computer with no Java and none of my Favorites.
posted by Cranberry at 12:59 PM on February 19, 2007

Complain to Google. Seriously.
posted by scarabic at 2:48 PM on February 19, 2007

please be aware that there are ladies reading this website.

Um, fisting is not a gender-specific activity, so what's your point?
posted by George_Spiggott at 5:37 PM on February 19, 2007

It's not a question of which sick deviants engage in such vile activities, you ignorant cretin. It is about gentlemen watching their choice of words in the presence of the fairer sex.

Do try to keep up, george?
posted by Meatbomb at 6:27 PM on February 19, 2007

Which sex is that? My last girlfriend was pretty unfair, and in my experience when you hear someone casting unwarranted aspersions there's at least an even -- or, is it were, fair -- chance that that person is female.

Anyroad, one of us doesn't have a sense of humor, but I wouldn't bet on which.
posted by George_Spiggott at 6:43 PM on February 19, 2007

And I might add that you're awfully protective of the female sex for someone whose nickname is an obvious spoonerism for "beat mom".
posted by George_Spiggott at 6:47 PM on February 19, 2007

The phrase "community values" always makes me shudder.
posted by modernnomad at 7:11 PM on February 19, 2007

mathowie writes "There's no easy way for me to filter skeevy ads"

Well you now know about soulmate calculator and if you actually think it's skeevy you can exclude it in your adsense console. That's not hard to do.
posted by peacay at 8:01 PM on February 19, 2007

Now that I think of it, the soulmate calculator just got a free link on a well indexed and highly trafficked site, thanks to roofus linking to it in his OP. So you've done more harm than good with this lame callout, jackass.
posted by Dave Faris at 9:42 PM on February 19, 2007

Man, crunchy, that name change has really let you show us the kinder, gentler side of your personality. Assuming Dave Faris is your actual real honest-to-goodness name, I find it intriguing that you'd discard a pseudonym with some degree of goodwill built up to resurrect with your real name, but while using it, be relentlessly unpleasant.

Not sarcastic -- I honestly do find it interesting in an avatar-y, web-identity-politics kinda way.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:12 PM on February 19, 2007

Given that soulmatecalculator dotcom seem to have paid big money for very common adwords (including possibly "a", "the", and "and"), I don't think they are too worried about their pagerank.
posted by roofus at 3:50 AM on February 20, 2007

so, spiggot is meatbomb. interesting.
posted by quonsar at 4:05 AM on February 20, 2007

Since you asked Stavros, I was hoping it would be different, that by switching to my real name, I'd be better able to hide my contempt for some of the people around here and perhaps be more diplomatic and less blunt. Unfortunately, I haven't. But I don't think I've been relentlessly unpleasant -- at least no less pleasant that I was before the name change, nor more unpleasant than the majority of people around here. But if the word "jackass" offends your sensibilities, Johnny Knoxville and I apologize.

As for this particular case -- why, if you think a site is awful, terrible, too too too terrible to be allowed to advertise on Metafilter, would you go to the trouble of linking to them? You could say the name of the site, and then accuse them of their supposed spam crimes, and we'd take or leave you at your word. I can't really fathom the motives of why someone would link to the site, ulterior or otherwise, as well.
posted by Dave Faris at 5:03 AM on February 20, 2007

Nah, it's cool: do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law. I was just curious.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:23 AM on February 20, 2007

(But I will say that I do disagree with you that a) more than a very few people are unpleasant with any consistency b) it's anything but counterproductive to respond to such unpleasantness when it occurs with more of the same. But there's been many a time when I've been no angel, and I ain't nobody to go judging you.)



*sob* ...can't you see it's tearing me up inside!
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:33 AM on February 20, 2007

...nor more unpleasant than the majority of people around here.

I dunno, I think that's the one point I'd be inclined to disagree with. I think you might actually be more (or just more consistently) unpleasant than most folks. I wouldn't use a stronger word there, and I'm with stavros here—do what thou wilt, man—but you strike me as genuinely curmudgeonly much of the time.

You're a perceptive guy, and you have a knack for distilling your take on a situation down to a (cynical? pessimistic? uncharitable?) response, which is both admirable and sometimes kind of assholey, but I can't knock you for paying attention and there's always some assholery going around. But, well, yeah. That you drop phrases like "...I'd be better able to hide my contempt for some of the people around here..." into comments without blinking puts you pretty solidly in unpleasantville.
posted by cortex at 6:38 AM on February 20, 2007

so, spiggot is meatbomb. interesting.

Huh? That's a pretty bizarre conclusion. No, whatever meatbomb is he's a genuine example of. I don't have a sock puppet. don't fuck with people.
posted by George_Spiggott at 7:54 AM on February 20, 2007

What cortex said. I don't really care what you do, but if you really think you're not coming across as more unpleasant than the majority of people around here, you're wrong. I certainly have my grumpy moments myself, and am frequently tempted to unleash the Savage Scimitar of Smiting on those whose comments displease me, but 90% of the time I step back, think "is it really worth coming across as an asshole for this trivial purpose?" and refrain. You might want to try doing the step-back thing, say, 50% of the time and see if the unexpressed bile keeps you awake at nights. I think a lot of people here would like to think better of you, but you do make it hard sometimes.
posted by languagehat at 7:54 AM on February 20, 2007

I'd be better able to hide my contempt for some of the people around here if they wouldn't drop phrases like "...I'd be better able to hide my contempt for some of the people around here" into their comments without blinking.
posted by Kwine at 7:58 AM on February 20, 2007

Huh? That's a pretty bizarre conclusion.

George, I'm thinking (hoping?) that it's either (1) a play on the recent Meatbomb's Sockpuppet Theory Hour post or (2) speculation that your failure to read Meatbomb's comment as a joke was sort of notable and could be presented as an argument for willful sockpuppet comedy.

So: Meatbomb was (almost certainly) kidding, you didn't get that, quonsar was riffing, and you should really come to the next Portland meetup regardless.
posted by cortex at 8:06 AM on February 20, 2007

cortex, I was fairly sure (about as sure as you indicate in your last parenthetical) that beatmom[b] was kidding, and responded in kind. But there are quite a few people around here capable of voicing in all seriousness things you and I would assume to be a joke, so I played it either way.
posted by George_Spiggott at 8:15 AM on February 20, 2007

If you insist on calling me beatmom I'm going to tell start calling you go_grope_egg_tits.
posted by Meatbomb at 10:26 AM on February 20, 2007

Sounds like a win-win.
posted by cortex at 10:30 AM on February 20, 2007

When is the next Portland meetup, by the by?
posted by lilithim at 4:36 PM on February 20, 2007