I plan to add an ad after the first post of every thread and under it with the text that says, "Don't want to see ads? Please consider becoming a Donator, click here." Is that acceptable under their policies?
Leosghost
10:23 pm on Jan 5, 2015 (gmt 0)
IMO..Sounds like "drawing attention to ads"..so.. No..
Others may be along to diss / agree..
miracle
10:35 pm on Jan 5, 2015 (gmt 0)
In a way but it's not drawing attention to actually click on the ad.
frankleeceo
12:17 am on Jan 6, 2015 (gmt 0)
If the adsense ad's right next to that line of text you may run into troubles.
If there's a distance and gap it is up to the reviewer's judgement call.
Policy is sometimes like constitution, people can read it a little differently unless spelled out black and white. If you go completely strict, you CANNOT even mention the existence of Ads at all on your page. But if you go loose, you definitely cannot mention the existence of ads right next to it.
Chances are just put it there, see if you get more donators. If you do, great, if not, there is really no reason to put the text there is it? (and it probably won't increase your adsense CTR neither)
If adsense review team ding you for it you can always change and fix it later. Chances are they will issue you a warning and ask you to remove the wording.
But then again, it's all chances and all depends on what the policy team decides. They could outright ban your site if they want.
So it's up to you to make your own judgement call.
ember
12:23 am on Jan 6, 2015 (gmt 0)
The TOS are deliberately vague in some places so that they are open to interpretation, Google's interpretation. I'd think what you want to do would be drawing attention to the ads, so I'd say don't do it. I guess it depends on your tolerance for risk.
netmeg
1:43 pm on Jan 6, 2015 (gmt 0)
Is it worth risking your account?
Me, I wouldn't do it.
tangor
2:44 pm on Jan 6, 2015 (gmt 0)
One language which has been used (and shows no adverse effect that I know of) is:
"This site contains Third Party Content. If you do not wish to receive Third Party Content please consider a Donation of X$ for the Third Party Free site version."
But like all Free Advice it is worth what you pay for it. Me? I wouldn't take the chance. You never know what G will do.
farmboy
8:38 pm on Jan 7, 2015 (gmt 0)
This has me wondering how many people would donate rather than click on an ad?
FarmBoy
ember
2:02 am on Jan 8, 2015 (gmt 0)
This has me wondering how many people would donate rather than click on an ad?
I'm hoping that someone here will test that out and then report back here ;) I'm not brave enough to do it.
tangor
2:36 am on Jan 8, 2015 (gmt 0)
As presently laid out in this conversation, nobody. I certainly wouldn't!
That said, there is that OTHER, which is the subscription side, wherein OTHER CONTENT, not just Third Party Free, is the selling point. If you don't have that, good luck on getting a single (insert your currency here).
frankleeceo
3:01 pm on Jan 8, 2015 (gmt 0)
tested it, I push limit often as part of testing process, often only for a short period of time from a few days to week. People won't really donate more unless you really load your pages with tons of ads along with pop up and pop unders, light boxes and more. Then people would donate to remove the annoyances. (assuming if you are the only resource and no other sites offer what you offer). Because if other people offer the same thing, do expect exodus over time.
Loading pages with tons of ads and give incentive to remove it is bad user experience. You 'will' lose 50% of more of your visitors over time, and even more as time progresses if this route is chosen. But nevertheless --- the rate of return squeezed out of the ones that remain will more than double to cover the loss - for the short term. (if the CPM of your ads are great that is).
do not go this route. It is like killing the golden goose instead of waiting for the golden egg. But sometimes...if the golden eggs has already dried, maybe killing the goose and eating it can offer you the last meal ---- just saying.
