<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.2" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Spottt Quality Control</title>
	<link>http://blog.spottt.com/index.php/2008/02/26/spottt-quality-control/</link>
	<description>News, spews, and reviews of Spottt!</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 12:50:23 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Nicolai</title>
		<link>http://blog.spottt.com/index.php/2008/02/26/spottt-quality-control/#comment-170</link>
		<dc:creator>Nicolai</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Mar 2008 20:48:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.spottt.com/index.php/2008/02/26/spottt-quality-control/#comment-170</guid>
		<description>OK - I don't know about the rest of you - but I just took a quick look around some of the sites we exchange ads with. I can't believe how many sites are breaking the basic rules of this network.

9 of 10 sites either don't HAVE a Spottt ad, or they simply place it so far down that few if any people will ever take notice of it.

Is it just me, or is the network already this corrupted?

And yes, I did report a good sample of my findings to the Spottt crew.

 - Nicolai</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>OK - I don&#8217;t know about the rest of you - but I just took a quick look around some of the sites we exchange ads with. I can&#8217;t believe how many sites are breaking the basic rules of this network.</p>
<p>9 of 10 sites either don&#8217;t HAVE a Spottt ad, or they simply place it so far down that few if any people will ever take notice of it.</p>
<p>Is it just me, or is the network already this corrupted?</p>
<p>And yes, I did report a good sample of my findings to the Spottt crew.</p>
<p> - Nicolai</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy</title>
		<link>http://blog.spottt.com/index.php/2008/02/26/spottt-quality-control/#comment-134</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2008 22:28:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.spottt.com/index.php/2008/02/26/spottt-quality-control/#comment-134</guid>
		<description>Are there any network management tools for Spottt? 

Even if an ad is perfectly legit, it may not be relevant to my users. Example: saw an ad for an italian website about cars today on my site. Very nice, but my site is an american food and menu site. Pretty irrelevant. I would love the ability to manage the network a bit like most other ad networks.  Is that available or coming soon?

Thanks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Are there any network management tools for Spottt? </p>
<p>Even if an ad is perfectly legit, it may not be relevant to my users. Example: saw an ad for an italian website about cars today on my site. Very nice, but my site is an american food and menu site. Pretty irrelevant. I would love the ability to manage the network a bit like most other ad networks.  Is that available or coming soon?</p>
<p>Thanks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mr lonly</title>
		<link>http://blog.spottt.com/index.php/2008/02/26/spottt-quality-control/#comment-133</link>
		<dc:creator>Mr lonly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2008 21:01:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.spottt.com/index.php/2008/02/26/spottt-quality-control/#comment-133</guid>
		<description>Thanks !! good blog ....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks !! good blog &#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: j u l i a</title>
		<link>http://blog.spottt.com/index.php/2008/02/26/spottt-quality-control/#comment-127</link>
		<dc:creator>j u l i a</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Mar 2008 03:47:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.spottt.com/index.php/2008/02/26/spottt-quality-control/#comment-127</guid>
		<description>we'll they are doing some general clean-up now,
i don't see any animated ads now. (yet?)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>we&#8217;ll they are doing some general clean-up now,<br />
i don&#8217;t see any animated ads now. (yet?)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mystery</title>
		<link>http://blog.spottt.com/index.php/2008/02/26/spottt-quality-control/#comment-122</link>
		<dc:creator>Mystery</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2008 02:31:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.spottt.com/index.php/2008/02/26/spottt-quality-control/#comment-122</guid>
		<description>Nicolai - I was asking a serious question.  Not sure what you mean by flamebait, but I don't think it sounds positive.

All input is appreciated I'm sure.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nicolai - I was asking a serious question.  Not sure what you mean by flamebait, but I don&#8217;t think it sounds positive.</p>
<p>All input is appreciated I&#8217;m sure.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nicolai</title>
		<link>http://blog.spottt.com/index.php/2008/02/26/spottt-quality-control/#comment-119</link>
		<dc:creator>Nicolai</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2008 09:35:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.spottt.com/index.php/2008/02/26/spottt-quality-control/#comment-119</guid>
		<description>Mystery - in time - I spent several hours already.

And it's not like I'm not giving my input on how to make things better. I have posted a few comments on the blog - and one does come off kind of negative (as I even point out) but it still holds very valid points.

I also wrote several tickets - including a few reports on bad sites. All with constructive comments and inputs.

As to your flamebait... I don't see it doing any good for this network.

Try harder?

 - Nicolai</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mystery - in time - I spent several hours already.</p>
<p>And it&#8217;s not like I&#8217;m not giving my input on how to make things better. I have posted a few comments on the blog - and one does come off kind of negative (as I even point out) but it still holds very valid points.</p>
<p>I also wrote several tickets - including a few reports on bad sites. All with constructive comments and inputs.</p>
<p>As to your flamebait&#8230; I don&#8217;t see it doing any good for this network.</p>
<p>Try harder?</p>
<p> - Nicolai</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mystery</title>
		<link>http://blog.spottt.com/index.php/2008/02/26/spottt-quality-control/#comment-112</link>
		<dc:creator>Mystery</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Mar 2008 02:20:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.spottt.com/index.php/2008/02/26/spottt-quality-control/#comment-112</guid>
		<description>Nicolai - I was just curious at how much you have spent for advertising with Spottt?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nicolai - I was just curious at how much you have spent for advertising with Spottt?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nicolai</title>
		<link>http://blog.spottt.com/index.php/2008/02/26/spottt-quality-control/#comment-108</link>
		<dc:creator>Nicolai</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Mar 2008 13:05:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.spottt.com/index.php/2008/02/26/spottt-quality-control/#comment-108</guid>
		<description>Also, could we please have the target URL of the banners in the  tag?

Too many banners don't have _any_ information to what it's leading to. If that kind is actually accepted in this program at least do us the courtesy of showing my users what they can expect to enter. Maybe even a small site description in the same alt-tag?

My 2 cents

 - Nicolai</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Also, could we please have the target URL of the banners in the  tag?</p>
<p>Too many banners don&#8217;t have _any_ information to what it&#8217;s leading to. If that kind is actually accepted in this program at least do us the courtesy of showing my users what they can expect to enter. Maybe even a small site description in the same alt-tag?</p>
<p>My 2 cents</p>
<p> - Nicolai</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nicolai</title>
		<link>http://blog.spottt.com/index.php/2008/02/26/spottt-quality-control/#comment-107</link>
		<dc:creator>Nicolai</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Mar 2008 11:47:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.spottt.com/index.php/2008/02/26/spottt-quality-control/#comment-107</guid>
		<description>"Spottt graphic isn’t misleading, such as “you are the 1 millionth reader, click here to claim your prize!” and other stuff like that."

Well - sorry if this is going to sound a tad negative - but who on earth is then validating these banners?

I've seen a baby taking up 80% of a banner, with a text in the header saying "Visit my site!".

Then there's the "1 million in 365 days. Click to learn how to!".

And we have the completely anonymous with just a keyword on a almost blank banner, for instance "Joomla!" which I know is a CMS.

But come on! The banners have little if ANY value to the viewer - and if they're not directly mis-leading, they are at least less than half hearted...

I did put in a ticket regarding the same - but I wouldn't mind getting the views of my fellow link exchangers.

Because if this is what we're going to see, I for one will not put my name on it!

 - Nicolai

PS: And when will we start to see "relevant" links? I can't say my target audience is mainly people who needs their dog to be styled and washed. But I realize this need a bigger banner base to support good and relevant exchanges.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Spottt graphic isn’t misleading, such as “you are the 1 millionth reader, click here to claim your prize!” and other stuff like that.&#8221;</p>
<p>Well - sorry if this is going to sound a tad negative - but who on earth is then validating these banners?</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve seen a baby taking up 80% of a banner, with a text in the header saying &#8220;Visit my site!&#8221;.</p>
<p>Then there&#8217;s the &#8220;1 million in 365 days. Click to learn how to!&#8221;.</p>
<p>And we have the completely anonymous with just a keyword on a almost blank banner, for instance &#8220;Joomla!&#8221; which I know is a CMS.</p>
<p>But come on! The banners have little if ANY value to the viewer - and if they&#8217;re not directly mis-leading, they are at least less than half hearted&#8230;</p>
<p>I did put in a ticket regarding the same - but I wouldn&#8217;t mind getting the views of my fellow link exchangers.</p>
<p>Because if this is what we&#8217;re going to see, I for one will not put my name on it!</p>
<p> - Nicolai</p>
<p>PS: And when will we start to see &#8220;relevant&#8221; links? I can&#8217;t say my target audience is mainly people who needs their dog to be styled and washed. But I realize this need a bigger banner base to support good and relevant exchanges.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: +*+ j u l i a +*+</title>
		<link>http://blog.spottt.com/index.php/2008/02/26/spottt-quality-control/#comment-77</link>
		<dc:creator>+*+ j u l i a +*+</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2008 11:39:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.spottt.com/index.php/2008/02/26/spottt-quality-control/#comment-77</guid>
		<description>some sites have this animated gifs w/c is sometimes annoying &#38; tricky, could you please revoke the animated ones, to be fair enough to others that using static images.

(why did u not publish my last comment? i already know the reason...)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>some sites have this animated gifs w/c is sometimes annoying &amp; tricky, could you please revoke the animated ones, to be fair enough to others that using static images.</p>
<p>(why did u not publish my last comment? i already know the reason&#8230;)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
