| User | Comment |
|---|
| daver | | posted 15-Dec-1999 8:19am |
I've never paid for access to a web site, although I pay a subscription for a product related to a web-site (and the web site runs on the proceeds). There is another web site that I frequent that charges to post a classified ad. I haven't done so, but I would pay if I felt the need for an ad. |
| Mariah | | posted 15-Dec-1999 10:45am |
No, and I highly doubt I ever would. I don't really have the extra money to spend on stuff like that. |
dab   | | posted 15-Dec-1999 11:18am |
I have access to a couple web sites as a side-effect of being a member in the organization. I didn't count those but I do subscribe to one publication, Trade-A-Plane, specifically to get access to their online listings. The online only subscription price is higher than the subscription to the paper edition which includes web site access. |
| moondragon | | posted 15-Dec-1999 11:23am |
i feel pretty strongly that if you're going to publish a web site and expend effort to publicize the URL, then the site should be accessible to anyone who cares to look. if your company needs revenue, get it from ads or some method that doesn't impede navigation across the Web. I even dislike the NYT's 'registration' feature. I should be able to send the URL of something I like to anyone and be assured that the URL will still work for them. (yes, i'm babbling a bit...) :)
|
bill  | | posted 15-Dec-1999 12:04pm |
This is an option I'm considering for surveycentral.org (though more as a way to avoid ads - no content will be blocked), and ugtz.com. On ugtz.com, I may limit the features unless some subscription price is paid. I'm not sure if it makes any sense though. |
| Mariah | | posted 15-Dec-1999 1:22pm |
bill: Just so you know, the ads don't bother me at all. I kind of like them. Some of them are pretty cute and I've actually used a couple. |
| Jody | | posted 15-Dec-1999 2:07pm |
I far prefer a banner ad to paying, personally. |
| ILJ | | posted 15-Dec-1999 2:44pm |
I love SC and all, but I don't believe I'd pay to use it. Ads are just dandy. |
| drdt | | posted 15-Dec-1999 5:05pm |
moondragon: could you babble a alittle more specifically? What is the "NYT's registration feature?" |
Maarten  | | posted 15-Dec-1999 6:40pm |
No, and I never will. |
| Gamera | | posted 15-Dec-1999 7:18pm |
I hope to pay for this one when it is convenient to bill for me to do so. |
| Gamera | | posted 15-Dec-1999 7:29pm |
moondragon: I feel very differently about it. Could you explain your believe a little bit? I feel that people advertise concerts, movies, newspapers, magazines, all sorts of things that if you wanted actually go there and see the content you would have to pay for it. Some magazines and newspapers (and concerts and movies too) are free- with the ad content (or sponsor promotions) being a revenue and content driver, others gain revenue from both advertising and subscriptions (paid visitors), others build their content and reputation on the basis of their not having advertising thus with an expectation of the visitor paying for the content. Some websites are really just extended product/service/company brochures (such as my own) and as such should not be charged for. Other websites use (or could use) the dual content/advertiser model, and others would do best to eschew advertising all together. How does the public announcement/publishing of the URL translate to you into a guaranty that the site should be free (any more than publishing the location of a concert, for instance)? |
| mandy | | posted 15-Dec-1999 8:51pm |
Nope...though many porn sites have tempted me. |
| mandy | | posted 15-Dec-1999 8:52pm |
I'd pay to come here. I love SC. |
| magbast | | posted 15-Dec-1999 10:37pm |
nope...and never will |
| magbast | | posted 15-Dec-1999 10:39pm |
i like SC, but i wouldn't pay to use it...hehehe..that's one way to get rid of me bill lol |
| Pomeranian | | posted 16-Dec-1999 12:15am |
Yes I have and they are worth every penny. |
| supplicant | | posted 16-Dec-1999 10:40am |
dab: any idea if this is corporate blindness/stupidity or some kind of shrewd business sense aimed at raising circulation, and therefore advertising revenue? |
| dab | | posted 16-Dec-1999 1:09pm |
Supplicant, originally they pitched it as if it was an introductory promotion to get people using their on-line stuff. That was more than a year ago so now I think they're keeping it so people get the paper and therefore the ads. I often throw the paper edition away without ever removing the plastic. |
| jjg | | posted 17-Dec-1999 12:17pm |
I figure that the information on a pay site is generally available on a non-pay site if you spend the time to look. So I don't pay for access to sites. |
| robin | | posted 18-Dec-1999 3:14pm |
I have not personally. My workplace has purchased contracts that give us access to technical support information that is accessed through the web. I don't think that counts though. |
| moondragon | | posted 18-Dec-1999 6:03pm |
drdt: the New York Times has a "register" requirement -- before you can get to any of their
content, you have to pick a name/password and hand them some demographic info (required).
topper: i will try to put together a rational explanation for you and post it back here in a day or so... but it's difficult. part of it is my beliefs about the way the web should work to insure its continued existance...part of it is my revulsion at the whole economist's view of the web (see Hal Varian from Berkeley, or others who quote him). more later... |
| mikecap | | posted 19-Dec-1999 9:58am |
|
| mandy | | posted 19-Dec-1999 2:04pm |
tasteful porn?
no thanx! |
| Avocado | | posted 21-Dec-1999 11:33pm |
Don't think I will, but never know... |
| Avocado | | posted 21-Dec-1999 11:36pm |
Oops, just remembered - paid for entry to a web site on rental apartments in my area. $60 for 3 months. I think the place I finally found was off of there, so guess it was worth it. |
| Maggie | | posted 23-Dec-1999 11:54am |
I see no need to. |
| phi | | posted 27-Dec-1999 2:34pm |
I have purchased information (title searches, for instance) from web sites. I have subscribed to print magazines which came with online versions accessible only to subscribers. But I don't think either of these meets the criteria the survey creator had in mind. |
| jzp | | posted 29-Dec-1999 8:39pm |
no. nothing worth paying for. |
| mikecap |
twistermine - maybe tasteful wasn't the right word; original, "real", or "cool" would be more apropos. Retroraunch is a collection of old amateur photos folks find in their basements or attics taken in the last century. It's utterly fascinating stuff, the only weird part is thinking that the person in the photo might be somebody's grandma right now... :o |
| mandy | | posted 3-Jan-2000 12:03am |
I love Victorian porn, myself. Some Victorians were actually very free and sexual which kind of counters most of the things I had learned about the strict moral codes of the times. To see two young women in Victorian dress or should I say undress...supple breasts poking out over the tops of their undergarments. skirts hiked up, playing slap and tickle is enough to cause unconsciousness. I also own many volumes of actual Victorian erotica, full of words like frig, bugger and chicken. Too funny. |
| lonxedosol | | posted 12-Jan-2000 1:26pm |
Weirdos... |
| kcthedog | | posted 26-Nov-2007 8:57pm |
Yes, this one is a good examle. |
LindaH   | | posted 24-Jul-2008 1:10am |
Just one. It rocks! |
| kcthedog | | (reply to LindaH) posted 24-Jul-2008 1:17am |
> Just one. It rocks!
U rock me baby! |
| LindaH | | (reply to kcthedog) posted 24-Jul-2008 1:19am |
You are finding some of my recent quotes in old surveys! |
| kcthedog | | (reply to LindaH) posted 24-Jul-2008 1:19am |
|
| LindaH | | (reply to kcthedog) posted 24-Jul-2008 1:20am |
I'm still going through those old ones. I made some posts lately I should go back and cut paste to notebook. |
| kcthedog | | posted 24-Jul-2008 1:24am |
This is kinda fun, knowing that it is an inactive survey and that chances are nobody will revisit the survey, we could talk dirty and no one would be the wiser.
 |
| LindaH | | posted 24-Jul-2008 1:33am |
Don't be so sure. One person stumbles in here, scores a comment positive or negative, creating a link from the scores page... |
