DakotaT
14 years ago
Great Avatar 93, I'm still getting yelled at for letting the girls watch Jaws on HBO with me one night. I like to let them watch River Monsters too. Wait, maybe Mrs. Dakota has a point.
UserPostedImage
Pack93z
14 years ago

Great Avatar 93, I'm still getting yelled at for letting the girls watch Jaws on HBO with me one night. I like to let them watch River Monsters too. Wait, maybe Mrs. Dakota has a point.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 





One of my all time favorite characters in film.... well I let the kids watch Ghost Adventures one night, not knowing that much about the show.. "clueless" you may state... that was one long night of being smothered by two kids hopping at every little noise in the house.. lol.



River Monsters is one of Tristian's favorites..



I wonder if Dockett is pissed that Quint stole the acting thunder in Jaws. :)



"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
Zero2Cool
14 years ago

There is one side your commits are overlooking missing.... the money side of the argument.

Sites who have adds get money based on how many times the site is visited and/or viewed, so by taking the articles and copy and pasting them some where else makes the site possible earn less money.

So while it might be foolish to turn down exposure, it's also foolish to not try to get your money's worth, and since you need exposure to get the money and money to get living needs and sometimes used on the exposure, it all becomes a catch 22... of which comes first...

For what ever reason most sites have gone towards the money side of the catch 22 and not the exposure side...

Originally Posted by: beast 



What you're saying leads directly to what I had said and validates my point. Which is, more exposure = more money - if money is what you're after. If your material more widely spread, it increases the opportunity for someone to SEE your material, click your link and add 'ad' revenue to your wallet. If you limit your material to one site, then you're hoping that everyone finds your site first.

If my agenda if financially driven, I want others to spread material like a wild fire and link it back to the source as often as possible. to me it's marketing common sense. Know what I mean?

I get you're saying you want everyone funneled to one site, but wouldn't you rather that be a bigger funnel? If so, why limit yourself to the mercy of search engines when you can have search engines AND other sites funneling clicks?
UserPostedImage
beast
14 years ago

What you're saying leads directly to what I had said and validates my point. Which is, more exposure = more money - if money is what you're after. If your material more widely spread, it increases the opportunity for someone to SEE your material, click your link and add 'ad' revenue to your wallet. If you limit your material to one site, then you're hoping that everyone finds your site first.

If my agenda if financially driven, I want others to spread material like a wild fire and link it back to the source as often as possible. to me it's marketing common sense. Know what I mean?

I get you're saying you want everyone funneled to one site, but wouldn't you rather that be a bigger funnel? If so, why limit yourself to the mercy of search engines when you can have search engines AND other sites funneling clicks?

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 




More exposure does not mean more money if no one goes to the site... and that's why they want you to go to the site, so they can get more of both.

Like I said it's a catch 22... which happens first the chicken or the egg?

Your arguing a good article will get more people to his site.... which is not always true. Other article on here are good but I don't always click the links when I don't have to. I clicked this link to see the article and they got an extra counting on who viewed it which makes them more money.

Those other good article, that I didn't click the link to didn't get any money from me reading it.
UserPostedImage
zombieslayer
14 years ago

What I'm thinking is that, the players did not try on their top 100 lists.

I mean really, for them to just sit down and rank the top 100 players, I'd guess half of them just spent about an hour on it, and their bound to forget someone or some other kind of laziness, also from what I've read in the NFL.com comments on each article about it, it seems the list qualifications weren't clear to the players that it was top 100 of this season, not body of work or potential. Also, the actual rules of making the list cause problems. I think everyone agrees that the top 2 WR's are Johnson/Johnson, but when you look at this year alone, roddy white's stats for this year alone, most TD's, most yards; you would think he is hands down the best receiver THIS YEAR. I still think calvin johnson is and was a better receiver regardless of stats. but if you decide to totally ignore the stats, you can blame anything on the supporting cast. So all of this together makes for a disorderly list.

Not that I think Raji doesn't belong above dockett, but when you see roddy white above megatron...

Originally Posted by: Jacob 



You bring up a very good point. That's the thing with lists. As of right now, Aaron Rodgers is on pace to be the best QB ever. But his body of work is very small and if he decided to take up painting and retire tomorrow and move to the coast of France, he won't make the Hall of Fame.

That's of course an extreme example but you see where I'm coming from. Lists need to have a context. Are these the best 100 2010 performers? Or best active players based on past performance? Or best 100 players to be expected for 2011? To just say best 100 players is just going to start up fights over the context alone.

My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
Greg C.
14 years ago
Well, I would expect that the players were told which criteria their rankings should be based on. My guess is that they paid no attention to all of that and gave the highest rankings to their buddies and the guys they see on Sportscenter.

It would be much better to have any kind of rankings like this, as well as Pro Bowl selections, based on the opinions of scouts. They have the expertise to do it, and they would be objective and take it seriously.
blank
nerdmann
14 years ago
Point being that the dude asked us not to post articles in their entirety. Dude's not part of an evil empire. He's just a guy with a cool site. He's a high school teacher, who writes good articles for us on the side. So I'm showing him respect.
He did ask not to post articles in their entirety. So if you want, I could post the main points of the article with a link. However, if you don't want me to post from there at all, I won't. You also have a bitchin site. So I show you respect as well.
Thanks.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
mi_keys
14 years ago

More exposure does not mean more money if no one goes to the site... and that's why they want you to go to the site, so they can get more of both.

Like I said it's a catch 22... which happens first the chicken or the egg?

Your arguing a good article will get more people to his site.... which is not always true. Other article on here are good but I don't always click the links when I don't have to. I clicked this link to see the article and they got an extra counting on who viewed it which makes them more money.

Those other good article, that I didn't click the link to didn't get any money from me reading it.

Originally Posted by: beast 



Well the way I understood it Zero's point was more long term looking. Yes, right now someone might not go to his page and might read this one article on this site. He might lose out on ad revenue due to lower traffic in the short run. However, if he increases his exposure and continuously writes good articles people will start to go to his site first. They'll want to see all his articles when they come out and won't want to rely on other people thinking his article is worth posting.

Additionally, limiting your exposure limits your growth opportunity for the future which means your ad revenue will be more or less capped at the exposure you cap it at. Trying to build his reader base has the potential to lead to far more revenue in the future than capping his exposure would allow. Additionally, in the short run he could try to mitigate his relative losses by asking those who post his articles to go ahead and click on his link anyway to help out a poor high school teacher.

That's something I think could be sold and frankly I've seen it work in similar situations on youtube. You can obviously watch videos for free but it helps them out to have subscribers. I used to not have an account on youtube but I got one so I could subscribe to a handful of channels that consistently put out material I enjoy watching so I could help them out.
Born and bred a cheesehead
beast
14 years ago


I know what Zero's point is an I agree with it (other than the "lacks confidence" and "foolish" parts. I'm saying there are two arguments to it and nether one is perfect, both have their weakness in the argument.

Why would I go to his site if his (and others) articles are posted on this great site? I wouldn't... cus this site already has his articles... and more...

And is he really getting any more exposure having the link and article posted vs. just the link? I would so but not much so...


UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
14 years ago

I know what Zero's point is an I agree with it (other than the "lacks confidence" and "foolish" parts. I'm saying there are two arguments to it and nether one is perfect, both have their weakness in the argument.

Why would I go to his site if his (and others) articles are posted on this great site? I wouldn't... cus this site already has his articles... and more...

And is he really getting any more exposure having the link and article posted vs. just the link? I would so but not much so...

Originally Posted by: beast 



I feel like a broken record, but what the heck, it's Friday!! It only HURTS their hit counter if you PREVIOUSLY frequented the sources site and STOPPED because another site you frequent has some or most of that content. Perhaps I'm different in that regard because I don't trust anyone to bring over EVERY article to this site from ANY single source. Therefore, I still hit my favorite sites that are Packers related.

I wish I could explain this point more clearly to you because I know for a fact (based on what you've said) you'd understand and completely agree. I just don't know how to encompass the point clearly to you that what you say is a weakness is only perceptual, not factual. I've created sites from ground up and it was done by allowing others and encouraging others to spread the sites material around. The internet is a scratch my back, I'll scratch yours network. If you expect everyone to scratch your back, you'll be left with an itchy back!



BTW, thanks for adding this to this thread even though I created one for this so we wouldn't continue trashing this one up!! :P



Edit, oh sorry didn't answer your question. Why would you go to his site if some of the material is posted elsewhere that you frequent? Simple, because you never know if someone missed an article that you might want to read.
UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
Mucky Tundra (2h) : GRAB THE PITCHFORKS~
Zero2Cool (2h) : CUT HIM
Mucky Tundra (3h) : Socieltal collapse imminent
Mucky Tundra (3h) : The West has fallen
Mucky Tundra (3h) : After starting off camp with 25 straight made field goals, Brandon McManus has missed one
Zero2Cool (8h) : But it should be stable
Zero2Cool (8h) : It's probably gonna be slower.
Zero2Cool (8h) : We're gonna just full go on to the new host.
Zero2Cool (20h) : What crap. Site issues galore
Zero2Cool (30-Jul) : if PH dies, there is packerpeople com available
Zero2Cool (30-Jul) : database is on new host, eventually website will follow
Mucky Tundra (30-Jul) : Zero, regarding Ewers, you are correct.
Zero2Cool (30-Jul) : Sadly, this might be our life for awhile. I could put it on another host, but seems it was slower, although more stable
beast (30-Jul) : How long will it be down?
beast (30-Jul) : RIP site 😭
Zero2Cool (30-Jul) : Site will die, I have to restart it.
Zero2Cool (30-Jul) : Quinn stinks. Lot of underthrows. (my guess)
beast (30-Jul) : How did Quinn Ewers effect where Golden was drafted?
dfosterf (30-Jul) : All I've experienced was late at night or early morning. I just figured you were doing something in the background
Zero2Cool (30-Jul) : Site sure seems to be down more than up
dfosterf (29-Jul) : 50 cent hookers? I'm moving to Green Bay. I thought it was just real estate that was more affordable there. 😂
Zero2Cool (29-Jul) : Sure seems site going down more than 50¢ hooker
Mucky Tundra (27-Jul) : Golden with two TDs in red zone drills today
Mucky Tundra (27-Jul) : @JacobMorley Shoutout to Quinn Ewers for allowing Matthew Golden to be available when Green Bay picked.
Zero2Cool (27-Jul) : The menu you expanded to log in, it's the first icon under "PackersHome" .. maybe i should add text to it
dfosterf (27-Jul) : Feelin' pfowish can't find the sun. No big deal, will drag a laptop out when the time comes
Zero2Cool (27-Jul) : if you're on mobile, open the menu and its the "sun" icon
dfosterf (27-Jul) : Can't find the toggle, lol
dfosterf (27-Jul) : I can find that the Microsoft lady rep for Titletown Tech is the philanthropy boss for the entire Microsoft corporation, but. .
Zero2Cool (27-Jul) : There's a toggle for light/dark theme. Super easy.
dfosterf (27-Jul) : The white background beta was hard to read, especially the quotes
dfosterf (27-Jul) : Hopefully the color scheme remains the same
dfosterf (27-Jul) : *Friday*
dfosterf (27-Jul) : 100 million would be 539 million as of Fridsy
dfosterf (27-Jul) : Heck, they could have taken a hundred milliion and invested in DAVE inc. last year (semi random, humor, but real)
dfosterf (27-Jul) : Beer brat and ticket is where the money comes from
dfosterf (27-Jul) : The 40th is Titletown Tech itself. This is a pet project of both Ed Policy and Mark Murphy
Zero2Cool (27-Jul) : New site coming along nicely. The editor is better than what we have here. Oh yeah!
dfosterf (27-Jul) : No profit that I know of. 0 for 40
dfosterf (27-Jul) : The woke reference has to do with the makeup and oftentimes objectives of the companies they invested in
packerfanoutwest (27-Jul) : beer and brats woke? say whom?
beast (27-Jul) : I don't want to get into politics, but how is, beers and brats considered to be "woke"? Food is food...
beast (27-Jul) : That being said, I'm not saying all 100% should be that way, but not surprised if majority are Wisconsin based
beast (27-Jul) : And if everyone has heard of them, then it it probably has less growth potential and less community based
beast (27-Jul) : Well isn't the investing person supposed to invest the money?
dfosterf (27-Jul) : I swear if I were to discover that one of them has invented a virtue signalling transmitter I will not be surprised, lol
dfosterf (27-Jul) : 39 companies so far that I bet no one has ever heard of.
dfosterf (27-Jul) : -Not saying woke, but should- borderline philanthopist venture capital excercise
dfosterf (27-Jul) : Well for one, they are pouring resources into Title Town Tech. Investing beer, brat, hot dog, ticket money into what is pretty much...
beast (27-Jul) : Wow, 95% drop in investment revenue? Would be interesting to hear the details of why...
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2025 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
COMMANDERS
Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
Browns
Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
Cardinals
Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
PANTHERS
Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
EAGLES
Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
Giants
Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
Bears
Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
RAVENS
Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
Vikings
Recent Topics
2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

28-Jul / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

28-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

28-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

27-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

27-Jul / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

27-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

25-Jul / Around The NFL / Mucky Tundra

25-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

25-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / TheKanataThrilla

25-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

25-Jul / Around The NFL / beast

24-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

24-Jul / Around The NFL / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.