Washington Post story on Free-Association.net and Tribe
9 ratings since posting on Wednesday, June 7, 2006
|
Overall Rating based on 9 ratings |
||
|
Advertisement
|
|||
|
It's good to see the positive press for places like free-ass, knowing that it's not marketed to kids at ALL. It looks good and makes us look like people instead of just freaks. --Freaky person! ;-) - spank_me_plz , posted 06/12/06 |
|
Unsu...
|
If you liked this article, you might be interested in this one: www.freepress.net/news/15605 Wait, does that count as cross-promotion advertising? I'm such a hypocrite... This article explained a lot. I have a tribe for a certain designer that was made "Mature" because one of the runway photos has a semi-sheer dress over a barely visible breasticle. I'm glad they did away with all that smutty content so I could get better ads for things like Viagra, Cheb i Sabbah's remix album, soccer injury clinics, Amazing Wigs, University of Phoenix, and mortgage refinancing. Oh, PS, the government is more interested in getting rid of pornography than they are about fighting terrorism. FYI. PPS - As if that ad for New York, New York in Las Vegas with the chick in the red dress with her big fake boobs hanging out and throwing the dice between her suggestively-spread legs wouldn't qualify for removal under Tribe's own TOU.... - Unsubscribed , posted 06/09/06 |
|
Unsu...
|
This article was really disturbing and depressing. I so do not understand the logic behind the assertion that advertisers don't want their ad next to, say, a naked dude. Wel...if the audience of a site is looking at the naked dude, then why not have the ad next to it? And the idea that "kids" might see things they shouldn't is just ridiculous. First, I hardly ever see anyone on tribe who is under 20--under 30, even!--and second of all, how is it tribe's responsibility if someone lies and says they're 18 when they're really not? Clearly, the changes have nothing to do with any desire to "protect" young people from certain content. - Unsubscribed , posted 06/08/06 |
|
Good article. We are not for sale...so tribe can make money... - Laurajean , posted 06/08/06 |
|
Darian's quote "Our advertisers and our investors aren't particularly happy with the adult content there. We needed to do something that enables us to be a successful business and that our investors are okay with." should make it clear once and for all that 2257 was not the primary driver of the TOU changes. - Bayou Blue , posted 06/08/06 |
|
w00t! It's about time free-ass got some press!!!! - gothalicious , posted 06/07/06 |
|
This is an excellent article about the sad, sad story of a social networking web site that decided that it cared more about its advertisers and investors than about its members who owned the eyeballs they were trying to serve up to those same advertisers. It's a cautionary tale of what happens when a web site tries to take adults and still act like their parents. And, in the small but crucial role of "scrappy, freedom-loving rebels", we have the fine folks over at free-association.net ...both an organizer and a simple, affronted community member downtrodden by "the man," or in this case, the TOU Guy. Check it out. - Sonya , posted 06/07/06 |
Washington Post story on Free-Association.net and Tribe was recommended for:
- Tribe: Tribe Alternatives: free-association.net
- Tribe: Tribe Moderators
- Tribe: * 2257 SUCKS *
- Tribe: September 2006 Release
