5 ms·

Whatever the case, you can turn it off: http://help.disqus.com/customer/portal/articles/666278#discovery-settings http://help.disqus.com/customer/portal/articl

Whatever the case, you can turn it off: http://help.disqus.com/customer/portal/articles/666278#discovery-settings http://help.disqus.com/customer/portal/articles/666278#disco...

jacquesm 14y ago
It should have defaulted to 'off'. You can break trust exactly once.
- shortformblog 14y ago
  It's a free service and they're at the point where monetization is becoming a necessity. I can appreciate that, and it's not a particularly evil way of doing it, if you ask me. I don't know about you, but I can live with a couple of non-obtrusive links that go other places—especially since, like a lot of people, I got emails about it ahead of time. If you can't, you can turn it off. You act as if the ads are putting ugly pictures of fat people are flooding your site or ads for e-Cigarettes or other skeevy things. I've been seeing them for months — their ads, far as I can tell, are of higher quality than the ones you see on Facebook and Google search. (I see links for Exxon, Comedy Central and Citi on a recent comment thread on my site. Certainly not bottom-shelf names.) The reason why you probably didn't notice them is because they're so unobtrusive that they were designed so you wouldn't notice them. Now whatever philosophical issues that raises, I think, from what I've seen in my own experience, Disqus handled this the right way. EDIT: I don't get the downvotes. My point is totally valid here.
  - niggler 14y ago
    No one begrudges a company trying to monetize, but there's an expectation that there will be some communication beforehand. I'm sure if they sent multiple emails and if OP discovered the matter through official communications and not by looking at the page, then he may have been OK with it but more importantly wouldn't feel like a bait-and-switch was pulled.
  - jacquesm 14y ago
    > It's a free service and they're at the point where monetization is becoming a necessity. Monetization is not an optional thing that you tack on afterwards, unless you are willing to re-negotiate your relationships. If you do that on an auto-opt-in basis you are breaching the trust with your users. > I don't know about you, but I can live with a couple of non-obtrusive links that go other places—especially since, like a lot of people, I got emails about it ahead of time. If you can't, you can turn it off. Sure and if it had not been 'opt-in' and if I had actually received their messages I would have exported my comments and called it a day. But defaulting it to 'on' is not opt-in, that's forcing me in with the option to opt-out afterwards. And I absolutely do not want advertising on my website unless I know exactly who benefits from it and what the arrangement is. I ran a google tag for a while to help someone out, other than that my blog has always been ad free. Now I find I'm endorsing products and services that I would never endorse in a lifetime. > You act as if the ads are putting ugly pictures of fat people are flooding your site or ads for e-Cigarettes or other skeevy things. No, I'm acting this way because (1) there are ads at all and (2) especially exxon is very high on my shit-list for bad companies. Just about between Monsanto and McDonalds. Whether a company is bottom shelf or not has nothing to do with whether or not I want their advertising on my site. What's the point of having a comment moderation system to keep out unwanted links to advertisers if they sneak in the back door anyway? > The reason why you probably didn't notice them is because they're so unobtrusive that they were designed so you wouldn't notice them. Apparently that's only one part of the story, I don't know what the conditions are that make them switch on and off. > Now whatever philosophical issues that raises, I think, from what I've seen in my own experience, Disqus handled this the right way. Strong disagree, they could have simply left the feature to be switched off for existing accounts and switch it to default to 'on' for new accounts. Accounts should be left in the state of the terms-of-service at the time of sign-up, any changes to a users setting that materially alter the relationship between service and user should be avoided at all cost because they breach trust.
  - nollidge 14y ago
    I wouldn't have downvoted except for this nice piece of well-poisoning: > You act as if the ads are putting ugly pictures of fat people are flooding your site Not to mention the fact that his argument had nothing to do with what was being advertised.
- danso 14y ago
  Just out of curiosity, but what exactly did you think the arrangement between you and Disqus was? Their service obviously saves bloggers a lot of hassle, and it can't be free to maintain? I don't mean to say that this justifies this perceived wrong, but it certainly justifies, from their standpoint, to think: "If you're going to use our service, for free, you should at least read our emails (and not filter them to the Spam folder)". Also on their side: they've allowed the ability to opt out. So you can still drop the service on the grounds of principle, and technically, this is a "bait and switch"...but it's a pretty mild one.
  - jacquesm 14y ago
    Whatever it was that I thought I signed up for, I explicitly did not sign up for an advertising tag, especially not a stealthy one, and on top of that not one that looks like an active endorsement on my part.
    - FooBarWidget 14y ago
      You agreed to their terms and conditions upon sign up. It says: "We may, without prior notice, change the Service;"
      - jacquesm 14y ago
        And my terms of service read 'and if you change your terms of service in a way that I don't like I will disable your plug-in and I'll bitch about it'.
        patrickaljord 14y ago
        That doesn't make any sense. You agreed to their terms of service and now you're complaining because it doesn't match your ideals. Disqus is a great service provided for free, what did you expect?
        jacquesm 14y ago
- DavidBradbury 14y ago
  I think you are taking it far too hard. If you don't like it, turn it off or switch. Ads showing up in your comments page is hardly the end of the world. Lighten up.
- codingblues 14y ago
  now you are just being arrogant... they have opt-out ads... so you can opt out now... and it's an awesome free plugin... cut 'em some slack
- chipotle_coyote 14y ago
  While I don't know what happened with your sites, I just activated the "new" Disqus on my two sites. There are four settings you can choose for this: (1) Comments only (2) Comments and links only on your site (3) Comments, links on your site and 'recommended' links (4) Same as (3) but links may be above comment box The default setting appears to be (2); I tried this under two different Disqus accounts with three web sites, and that was the setting "Discovery" came up with each time. This doesn't strike me as particularly outrageous -- the links they are inserting are only links to your own articles, not advertising (and not revenue-generating, of course).
- uptown 14y ago
  "You can break trust exactly once." That's nonsense.

Whatever the case, you can turn it off: http://help.disqus.com/customer/portal/articles/666278#discovery-settings http://help.disqus.com/customer/portal/articles/666278#disco...

jacquesm 14y ago

It should have defaulted to 'off'. You can break trust exactly once.

shortformblog 14y ago
It's a free service and they're at the point where monetization is becoming a necessity. I can appreciate that, and it's not a particularly evil way of doing it, if you ask me. I don't know about you, but I can live with a couple of non-obtrusive links that go other places—especially since, like a lot of people, I got emails about it ahead of time. If you can't, you can turn it off. You act as if the ads are putting ugly pictures of fat people are flooding your site or ads for e-Cigarettes or other skeevy things. I've been seeing them for months — their ads, far as I can tell, are of higher quality than the ones you see on Facebook and Google search. (I see links for Exxon, Comedy Central and Citi on a recent comment thread on my site. Certainly not bottom-shelf names.) The reason why you probably didn't notice them is because they're so unobtrusive that they were designed so you wouldn't notice them. Now whatever philosophical issues that raises, I think, from what I've seen in my own experience, Disqus handled this the right way. EDIT: I don't get the downvotes. My point is totally valid here.
- niggler 14y ago
  No one begrudges a company trying to monetize, but there's an expectation that there will be some communication beforehand. I'm sure if they sent multiple emails and if OP discovered the matter through official communications and not by looking at the page, then he may have been OK with it but more importantly wouldn't feel like a bait-and-switch was pulled.
- jacquesm 14y ago
  > It's a free service and they're at the point where monetization is becoming a necessity. Monetization is not an optional thing that you tack on afterwards, unless you are willing to re-negotiate your relationships. If you do that on an auto-opt-in basis you are breaching the trust with your users. > I don't know about you, but I can live with a couple of non-obtrusive links that go other places—especially since, like a lot of people, I got emails about it ahead of time. If you can't, you can turn it off. Sure and if it had not been 'opt-in' and if I had actually received their messages I would have exported my comments and called it a day. But defaulting it to 'on' is not opt-in, that's forcing me in with the option to opt-out afterwards. And I absolutely do not want advertising on my website unless I know exactly who benefits from it and what the arrangement is. I ran a google tag for a while to help someone out, other than that my blog has always been ad free. Now I find I'm endorsing products and services that I would never endorse in a lifetime. > You act as if the ads are putting ugly pictures of fat people are flooding your site or ads for e-Cigarettes or other skeevy things. No, I'm acting this way because (1) there are ads at all and (2) especially exxon is very high on my shit-list for bad companies. Just about between Monsanto and McDonalds. Whether a company is bottom shelf or not has nothing to do with whether or not I want their advertising on my site. What's the point of having a comment moderation system to keep out unwanted links to advertisers if they sneak in the back door anyway? > The reason why you probably didn't notice them is because they're so unobtrusive that they were designed so you wouldn't notice them. Apparently that's only one part of the story, I don't know what the conditions are that make them switch on and off. > Now whatever philosophical issues that raises, I think, from what I've seen in my own experience, Disqus handled this the right way. Strong disagree, they could have simply left the feature to be switched off for existing accounts and switch it to default to 'on' for new accounts. Accounts should be left in the state of the terms-of-service at the time of sign-up, any changes to a users setting that materially alter the relationship between service and user should be avoided at all cost because they breach trust.
- nollidge 14y ago
  I wouldn't have downvoted except for this nice piece of well-poisoning: > You act as if the ads are putting ugly pictures of fat people are flooding your site Not to mention the fact that his argument had nothing to do with what was being advertised.
danso 14y ago
Just out of curiosity, but what exactly did you think the arrangement between you and Disqus was? Their service obviously saves bloggers a lot of hassle, and it can't be free to maintain? I don't mean to say that this justifies this perceived wrong, but it certainly justifies, from their standpoint, to think: "If you're going to use our service, for free, you should at least read our emails (and not filter them to the Spam folder)". Also on their side: they've allowed the ability to opt out. So you can still drop the service on the grounds of principle, and technically, this is a "bait and switch"...but it's a pretty mild one.
- jacquesm 14y ago
  Whatever it was that I thought I signed up for, I explicitly did not sign up for an advertising tag, especially not a stealthy one, and on top of that not one that looks like an active endorsement on my part.
  - FooBarWidget 14y ago
    You agreed to their terms and conditions upon sign up. It says: "We may, without prior notice, change the Service;"
    - jacquesm 14y ago
      And my terms of service read 'and if you change your terms of service in a way that I don't like I will disable your plug-in and I'll bitch about it'.
      - patrickaljord 14y ago
        That doesn't make any sense. You agreed to their terms of service and now you're complaining because it doesn't match your ideals. Disqus is a great service provided for free, what did you expect?
        jacquesm 14y ago
DavidBradbury 14y ago
I think you are taking it far too hard. If you don't like it, turn it off or switch. Ads showing up in your comments page is hardly the end of the world. Lighten up.
codingblues 14y ago
now you are just being arrogant... they have opt-out ads... so you can opt out now... and it's an awesome free plugin... cut 'em some slack
chipotle_coyote 14y ago
While I don't know what happened with your sites, I just activated the "new" Disqus on my two sites. There are four settings you can choose for this: (1) Comments only (2) Comments and links only on your site (3) Comments, links on your site and 'recommended' links (4) Same as (3) but links may be above comment box The default setting appears to be (2); I tried this under two different Disqus accounts with three web sites, and that was the setting "Discovery" came up with each time. This doesn't strike me as particularly outrageous -- the links they are inserting are only links to your own articles, not advertising (and not revenue-generating, of course).
uptown 14y ago
"You can break trust exactly once." That's nonsense.