Forum SPLIT

[Dr Bunsen]

I have been considering this unfortunate outcome. If the worst comes to the worst though we could always look at rejoining the two…

[The Psyentist]

Bollocks to google and every other massive power hungry corporation. Option 1 in my opinion. Not the easiest option no but I think it best displays our integrity and morals. We are different, we don’t belong to society as the powers that be would like of us and we should stand up and not just tell others our beliefs but shout it from the rooftops!

We’re constantly being directed and herded throughout our lives by people trying to control us. Bottom line is yes we take drugs (ooh how naughty, yet tax evasion and every other crime committed by politicians or people with money=power goes largely unpunished), yes we listen to music which mainstream sheeple consider offensive and yes we have sex (hello; we’d die out pretty quickly if we stopped this).

What exactly are we doing wrong? Certainly not as much as google the thieving cunts. Take my money, fine, but fuck off you’re not having my freedom!

[General Lighting]

The issue here is google were giving us money – but it turns out on the condition we don’t have certain controversial content. its no different from parents choosing a private school for their kid on the condition it follows a certain faith group which happens the world over. What I do not understand is why on earth they did not just refuse the Adsense application at the start, as the subject matter of our forum has never been hidden.

We are not being told by SOCA or Ofcom or the feds in any other countries that we are doing anything wrong or to censor content (which would me much more of a human rights/free speech issue).

I doubt that Google are going to de-list us from their search results either, whether or not we discuss drugs on here. they have however made a business decision not to contribute to our funding due to the content in its present form. If we take Option 1, the money Google provided has to be found from elsewhere, or as a worst case some of the more resource intensive parts of the site like the music downloads and radio streams downsized (which obviously no one wants to see happen).

[Dr Bunsen]

Their rules have changed since we were accepted.

@General Lighting 552830 wrote:

The issue here is google were giving us money – but it turns out on the condition we don’t have certain controversial content. its no different from parents choosing a private school for their kid on the condition it follows a certain faith group which happens the world over. What I do not understand is why on earth they did not just refuse the Adsense application at the start, as the subject matter of our forum has never been hidden.

We are not being told by SOCA or Ofcom or the feds in any other countries that we are doing anything wrong or to censor content (which would me much more of a human rights/free speech issue).

I doubt that Google are going to de-list us from their search results either, whether or not we discuss drugs on here. they have however made a business decision not to contribute to our funding due to the content in its present form. If we take Option 1, the money Google provided has to be found from elsewhere, or as a worst case some of the more resource intensive parts of the site like the music downloads and radio streams downsized (which obviously no one wants to see happen).

[General Lighting]

hmm, seems like companies and organisations with as much or more clout than Google are leaning on them.

Although to our generation Google might seem all powerful its still a relatively new business and not all aspects of it are yet making money (they still won’t admit whether or not youtube is making any cash or simply being propped up by ad sales).

I believe Partyvibe has also been around longer than google 😉

[The Psyentist]

So let me get this straight as I’ve not even been here a year yet. Have Google always helped fund the site? Or only recently?

I’d have assumed they only started funding us a few months back when all their highly annoying adverts started appearing all over the site.

Previously the funds came from subscribers and people promoting their own things on our site?

If that was the case and PV got by for 15 years in this manner why should we suddenly rely on Google.

Please help me have a greater understanding of this situation because at the moment I am just confused and slightly angry.

[General Lighting]

@The Psyentist 552833 wrote:

So let me get this straight as I’ve not even been here a year yet. Have Google always helped fund the site? Or only recently?

I’d have assumed they only started funding us a few months back when all their highly annoying adverts started appearing all over the site.

Previously the funds came from subscribers and people promoting their own things on our site?

If that was the case and PV got by gor 15 years in this manner why should we suddenly rely on Google.

Please help me have a greater understanding of this situation because at the moment I am just confused and slightly angry.

it is only very recently Google have funded PV (hence the ads). in recent times there have been a lot more “resource intensive” things on this site like the radio streams, downloads, big picture albums which increases the running costs. We’ve also removed requirements for promoters to subscribe as UK promoters were avoiding using the site because of them.

[The Psyentist]

@General Lighting 552835 wrote:

it is only very recently Google have funded PV (hence the ads). in recent times there have been a lot more “resource intensive” things on this site like the radio streams, downloads, big picture albums which increases the running costs. We’ve also removed requirements for promoters to subscribe as UK promoters were avoiding using the site because of them.

Ah so catch 22. It was a matter of looking for resources from a bigger organisation in order to expand ourselves. Except of course the bigger organisation wants to make the rules for us, kind of like marking their territory.

Ironic how our choice is stay small and independent or extend but at the cost of dependency. I still say option one on the basis of morals although it certainly isn’t the easy or necessarily most logical resort.

[General Lighting]

@The Psyentist 552836 wrote:

Ah so catch 22. It was a matter of looking for resources from a bigger organisation in order to expand ourselves. Except of course the bigger organisation wants to make the rules for us, kind of like marking their territory.

Ironic how our choice is stay small and independent or extend but at the cost of dependency. I still say option one on the basis of morals although it certainly isn’t the easy or necessarily most logical resort.

option one was what PV had for many years but clearly it wasn’t paying the bills..

[Chrispydelic]

It seem they have you by the Googles!

[The Psyentist]

Glad no-one has chosen option 2. That would be bullshit and defying the point of PVR being a public forum for open discussions.

I must ask though; say we separate or remove the drugs and sex sections, how do we know Google won’t then decide we need to close down a particular radio channel because that type of music promotes drug use? Or my blog needs removing because of the graphic and disturbed detail contained within?

Get my point; bow down once and where will they draw the line of what is acceptable?

[General Lighting]

Google can’t close down any part of our content, even the feds/Ofcom etc would have great difficulty doing so (as our site resources cross international boundaries).

unlike some sites which use “free” google services for hosting, PVR is independent of Google. The only thing they can do is refuse to advertise on our forum (same as anyone else).

we are not dependent on google any more than the whole site is full of drug addicts dependent on non opiate party drugs.

That said splitting media content across brands to maximise ad opportunities is a well known tactic overtly used in conventional media.

My local newspaper group publishes two papers, one for urban Ipswich which takes a left of centre political stance, and one for the rural areas catering for a mixture of bumpkins and London incomers which is centre right and more government friendly.

As you would expect the ads run in each one reflect the different reader demographics. There are of course differences in the feature articles – but they share exactly the same reporters, the same core database of content, the same offices (I know as they are down the road from ICR). This is basically what we would end up doing.

[Dr Bunsen]

I’ve just bought a new theme and second hand licenses for vbulletin and vbseo for 120 quid. This change could be completed later today…

[DaftFader]

FUCK SAKES I just spent the last 30 mins writing a reply, only for me to fucking press the wrong button and delete it. Gah that took some thought to wright as well! I blame GL for jinxing me by talking about doing the typing in word pad first lol.

I’ll try again when i can remember what the fook it said! Might not be till later/tomoz tho as I’m struggling to keep my eyes open atm. 🙁

MEGA PISSED OFF! 😥

[Dr Bunsen]

Everything’s in place, just waiting for a license transfer and everythings ready.

I’m sorry you lost that post Daft!

[thelog]

Start sequence initiated.

[thelog]

I’m glad daft lost his post

[MC G-Tek]

@thelog 553067 wrote:

I’m glad daft lost his post

Ahahaha, you’re on form tonight bud!

[thelog]

Well lets be honest, no one would have read it anyway.

[MC G-Tek]

@thelog 553073 wrote:

Well lets be honest, no one would have read it anyway.

Well if it had taken 30 mins to type out, it may have been quite a long post, so you may have a point there – although I do tend to read the long posts by regulars, but not those by first-timers very often, too much chance that I’m taking up valuable time that could be used to make some reference to geese in reply their post!

[Dr Bunsen]

The site split is now live over at http://www.partyvibe.org, please visit the new site and be active as you can on both. Functionality across both sites remains the same of course and our staff will be active across both of course… happy days!

[thelog]

:sign0027:

[thelog]

Holy crap, I looked at the new site and got a flashback to when I first joined pV. It’s not exactly the same colour scheme but it’s close.

[Naustro]

That’s unfortunate

[Dr Bunsen]

All the existing threads and posts redirect to the new address automatically of course…

[Author]

Posts