1. Advertising
    y u no do it?

    Advertising (learn more)

    Advertise virtually anything here, with CPM banner ads, CPM email ads and CPC contextual links. You can target relevant areas of the site and show ads based on geographical location of the user if you wish.

    Starts at just $1 per CPM or $0.10 per CPC.

If this isn't a violation....

Discussion in 'Guidelines / Compliance' started by GuyFromChicago, Oct 17, 2005.

  1. #1
    http://www.sify.com/google_home_new.html

    I mean come on, at least try to make it appear some what legit. If you want to see the good stuff take a look at the source of that page.

    Some of my Adwords ads were appearing on that page over the weekend for a campaign where I have the content network on. Cost me about $60 in clicks and not one single person converted. My typical conversion is over 15%.

    That site has some decent traffic (at least according to Alexa) so maybe they are a premium publisher. Even though, what they are doing on that page can't be acceptable for any level of publisher.
     
    GuyFromChicago, Oct 17, 2005 IP
  2. aeiouy

    aeiouy Peon

    Messages:
    2,876
    Likes Received:
    275
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #2
    Yeah that is very weird...

    Maybe the are a premium publisher, but somehow I doubt it.
     
    aeiouy, Oct 17, 2005 IP
  3. exam

    exam Peon

    Messages:
    2,434
    Likes Received:
    120
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #3
    Why people want to get their account banned is beyond me.

    On second thought, I went to see their homepage, and maybe the page that GFC mentions is supposed to be an include or something. See the Adsense on the main page. But even if that's the case, the javascript keyword stuffing and ad format manipulation is really iffy.
     

    Attached Files:

    • sify.jpg
      sify.jpg
      File size:
      66.5 KB
      Views:
      171
    exam, Oct 17, 2005 IP
  4. Crusader

    Crusader Peon

    Messages:
    1,735
    Likes Received:
    104
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #4
    They are manipulating the ads. Most likely by displaying them in a Iframe from that page. As far as I can tell the javascript, takes a random selection of text and imbeds it on the Google HTML page, for it to be included in the main pages of the site.

    Definitely ToS violation.
     
    Crusader, Oct 17, 2005 IP
  5. exam

    exam Peon

    Messages:
    2,434
    Likes Received:
    120
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #5
    >> Definitely ToS violation.

    Unless they are a premium publisher with special ToS, which I doubt. :)
     
    exam, Oct 17, 2005 IP
  6. Jenstar

    Jenstar Active Member

    Messages:
    524
    Likes Received:
    77
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    68
    #6
    They are a premium publisher and using the by-permission-only custom ad units.
     
    Jenstar, Oct 18, 2005 IP
    GuyFromChicago likes this.
  7. GuyFromChicago

    GuyFromChicago Permanent Peon

    Messages:
    6,728
    Likes Received:
    528
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #7
    I figured they were premium...with an Alexa rating between 1,000 & 2,000 I'm sure they get a ton of traffic.

    Are premium publishers are allowed to display Adsense only (no content what-so-ever) on a page?
     
    GuyFromChicago, Oct 18, 2005 IP
  8. wrmineo

    wrmineo Peon

    Messages:
    3,087
    Likes Received:
    379
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #8
    That's a fairly good assumption GFC ... GoDaddy runs some massive GoogleAds on parked pages which we peons aren't allowed to do :)
     
    wrmineo, Oct 18, 2005 IP
  9. exam

    exam Peon

    Messages:
    2,434
    Likes Received:
    120
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #9
    >> Are premium publishers are allowed to display Adsense only (no content what-so-ever) on a page?

    I don't think so, but I think the intent is to include that page via iframe on the main page.
     
    exam, Oct 18, 2005 IP
  10. GuyFromChicago

    GuyFromChicago Permanent Peon

    Messages:
    6,728
    Likes Received:
    528
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #10
    I see those pages quite a bit. I always assume that was ok because most of the time there are at least a few other non-Adsense links on the page so you can click and leave without costing someone $. That's not the case with the page I paid $60 to have my ads displayed on. You either click on an ad or hit the back button or just close the browser all together.

    Apparantly most people click the ad............

    exam, you would think people who made it to the prmium publisher level would be a little more savy huh? iframe on the main page - I could live with that kind of traffic. Traffic directly from that Adsense only page though is another story.

    Obviously I've added that site to my block list, but it still sucks that that type of page is apparantly ok for premium publishers.
     
    GuyFromChicago, Oct 18, 2005 IP
  11. Nintendo

    Nintendo ♬ King of da Wackos ♬

    Messages:
    12,890
    Likes Received:
    1,064
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    430
    #11
    Um, what's wrong with using SSI so you don't have to edit every single file?? There's nothing wrong with that page at all. Look at the index page and you'll notice that page shows up there! You don't have to be a premium publisher to use SSI. I got an ad only URL on almost all of my pages so for example I didn't have to update every page when I upgraded to Yahoo, and Google knows about it.
     
    Nintendo, Oct 18, 2005 IP
  12. GuyFromChicago

    GuyFromChicago Permanent Peon

    Messages:
    6,728
    Likes Received:
    528
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #12
    Nothing wrong with SSI.

    The clicks I received from that site were not from the index, they were from that page that has nothing but an Adsense ad. Paying for clicks from the index would be fine, paying for clicks from a page with nothing but an ad are not, IMO.
     
    GuyFromChicago, Oct 18, 2005 IP
  13. exam

    exam Peon

    Messages:
    2,434
    Likes Received:
    120
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #13
    Right, if they're going to do it the way they have it set up right now, you shouldn't be able to access the page with the lone ad on it thru a web browser, it should only be accessible when called from the iframe on the main page. Maybe Jenstar could comment on this too?
     
    exam, Oct 18, 2005 IP
  14. GuyFromChicago

    GuyFromChicago Permanent Peon

    Messages:
    6,728
    Likes Received:
    528
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #14
    Exactly.

    That page even has a cache in Google from 10/12 so it's been linked to before.
     
    GuyFromChicago, Oct 18, 2005 IP
  15. exam

    exam Peon

    Messages:
    2,434
    Likes Received:
    120
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #15
    Yes, I don't see how that could be acceptable under *any* ToS.
     
    exam, Oct 18, 2005 IP
  16. Jenstar

    Jenstar Active Member

    Messages:
    524
    Likes Received:
    77
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    68
    #16
    Premiums aren't allowed to do that either... it is actually "AdSense for Domains" - formerly known as Domain Park - that is used on parked domains.

    http://www.google.com/domainpark/
     
    Jenstar, Oct 18, 2005 IP
  17. sachin410

    sachin410 Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    6,422
    Likes Received:
    573
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    410
    #17
    Sify has to be a premium publisher....its a big ..in fact a very big name in India.

    Its a subsidary of Satyam ..India's 4 th largest IT company and India's biggest ISP.

    BTW I use the site too :D .
     
    sachin410, Oct 18, 2005 IP
  18. GuyFromChicago

    GuyFromChicago Permanent Peon

    Messages:
    6,728
    Likes Received:
    528
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #18
    Did you bother to read past the opening post?
     
    GuyFromChicago, Oct 19, 2005 IP