Patrick O’Keefe

Well, I gave it a day. No go. More sites appeared and the term remained. And so, link units have been removed, sadly. It’s disappointing because I like them. But, if such a thing happens on other sites, I won’t hesitate to remove them. I will add them back when Google comes up with a solution or after a week or more, perhaps (we went a week or more without having that term appear, perhaps it’s temporary).

Is this worth sharing?

Well, I’ve been on Skype (patrick_okeefe) for a while. But, a couple days ago I downloaded Gizmo (patrickokeefe). I have yet to use it. Anyone using it?

Is this worth sharing?

Today on YB, I noticed the first inappropriate AdSense Link Unit term I’ve seen on any of my sites.

I would really like it if Google would hurry and make it possible to block certain terms from appearing in link units because there are a lot of sites that this type of thing could affect (MB is one of them) and I’d really like to keep the ads.

From the AdSense FAQ:

The solution I have come up with is to block all of the sites that appear when you click on that link unit (I hope that’s OK… I don’t think you make money on a click until they click a second time, which I’m not doing. Is there some other way to get a full list of sponsored links for a term? Just searching for the term did not do it.). We’ll see if that works.

Time consuming, though. Hopefully they come up with a term blocker.

Is this worth sharing?

For the design contest, I have set a deadline of August 31, 2005 at 10:00 PM Eastern to have at least the main concept design in.

The quote my initial post:

Is this worth sharing?

This thread at SitePoint brings up a subject that I think I am in the minority in. That is - I feel that placing images next to AdSense ads, specifically to make it appear that the ads and the images are in some way associated is dishonest.

I mean, you don’t control the ads AdSense serves. In some cases, you may be able to reasonably guess what the subject of the ad is going to be… but you can’t guess what the exact ad is going to be. And so, you cannot associate the completely proper image with the ad. Notice I say completely proper. It’s probably easy to come up with an image that’s somewhat proper… like, on YB, I could put baseball’s next to the ads. And that would be sort of right - but it wouldn’t be 100% right. And it wouldn’t be right all the time as we serve ads on other things.

Really, all it is is a form of trickery. Tricking people into thinking it’s not an ad, tricking people into thinking the image and the ad is associated. One thing is for sure, the ad and the image are rarely as associated as they should be. If I am tricked into clicking an ad for something that turns out to be something else… it is going to erode the trust that I had in your website and potentially cause me not to visit.

Making ads blend in is one thing - making people think they are clicking an ad for something that they’re not clicking an ad for at all - that’s a problem.

Is this worth sharing?

Black Rob’s second album is scheduled to drop in October. I’ll be pre-ordering it.

Is this worth sharing?

I’m using Last.fm. Pretty neat site. My profile.

Is this worth sharing?

What do you all think about mixtapes? You see, I’m a big Bad Boy and Diddy fan (as well as other music, of course) and there is a lot of music that is out there on mixtapes that has never been released and probably will never be released, so I’ve been looking at buying some. But, I was also looking into them a bit from the legal standpoint, etc.

The funny thing is that it seems like it’s not (or is rarely) legal. But, that it is generally a legal illegal, if that makes any sense. In that it’s illegal, but the people who have the rights that are being infringed upon don’t really mind (or even like it) because it helps them promotion wise (i.e. it’s better to have a million people saying your name (even if they’re buying mixtapes), then have no one saying your name). So, it’s like it’s alright. But, still… is it? I’m been pondering the whole thing as the ethical princess that I am. The whole goofy “you’re buying the case and the artwork and the CD is free” thing doesn’t help.

I have a few quote, unquote mixtapes that were 100% straight in that they were released off a major label. I’m talking about Funkmaster Flex (60 Minutes of Funk, Volumes 2 and 3) and Clinton Sparks (Maybe You Been Brainwashed). But, that’s different and those are not what I am talking about - I’m not talking about major label releases. If I did buy some, I’m looking at buying them from MixUnit.com which promotes itself as selling “100% official masters” and is co-owned by Clinton Sparks who is a major mixtape DJ. So, I imagine that’s as good as it gets. You would think that a website that visible that has been that visible for a while would be seriously shut down if it was completely illegal and frowned down upon, but prehaps not. Hmm…

Is this worth sharing?

Early returns on the AdSense optimization: 2nd most clicks in a single day. The best day (clicks wise, not revenue wise)? November 27, 2003.

Hopefully, it’ll hold out.

Is this worth sharing?

Now being held at PF, DC and WHT, a contest to redesign our network homepage, our network bar and design our upcoming network blog. As part of the prize package, we’re giving away ad spots worth more than $5,000. Incase anyone happens to be interested. ;)

Update: Deadline set.

Is this worth sharing?