If you do not want to do the host fixes Ron recommends then this admin message I found at reliable-email (now owned by Darlene) might be of help to you:

We are getting tons of complaints for Fling.com showing porn. We do not and never have promoted that site on any of our own sites. However, a lot of other ptr sites are promoting this site.

(edited out)

There is a solution to this problem to protect you and your small children who may be in the room with you from seeing this porn.

(edited out)

Go to 'control panel' then 'security center', click on 'internet options' then 'security' then 'restricted sites' then add any/all sites(in this case it would be 'fling.com') you wish to block from having access to your computer in the 'sites' box, then 'close'. Now you know how to add sites manually to your firewall!

I have edited out any bits that were not relevant.

And thanks to Darlene for this but the hosts fix does block far more of course.

Excellent advice for all! I pretty sure that's for XP is it the same of Vista I wonder?

Thank you, thank you, thank you for the information. If I saw this site one more time I was ready to throw my coffee cup at the screen!! If I wanted porn I'd sign up for it....

Putting individual sites in the restricted zone is such a pain. Doing the HOSTS fix is so much easier and once one has done it a couple times, updates are a snap and they must be using wildcards as I never see any of those site to which was referred.

In light of what you've said above in the quote, how does that help you - as a PO - to identify undesireable material in links that you are accepting for advertising on your site.

I mean, just because you can't see them, it doesn't mean they are not there.

Or do you genuinely prefer the "suck it and see" method?

JoeP

OpaBear has asked us to report porn here at the forum. I think that is pretty responsible. He has even banned sites for this reason. He is not to blame for this crap.

I have CSlite (FireFox add on) and do the immunize in SpyBot, so I have 2 hostsfix things in place without ever having to do it manually. On a rare occasion, something filters through, and I just stick it in AdBlockPlus (also Firefox add on) and I don't see it anymore. Lydia

If your post quoted above is in response to mine, then I think you are missing my point.

OpaBear (which I'm assuming is the "all cute and fuzzy" name for the PO) is quite right to request reports and ban sites where necessary. I did not at any stage suggest that they might be held responsible for advertising the undesireable elements.

What I am querying is this:

If a PO over-protects their own PC - whether by entering a line in the hosts file, using Adblock, instigating firewall settings or any other means at their disposal - then how do they then see those undesireable elements when they are incorporated in a site or webpage that is submitted to them for advertising on their site?

Example ....

Recently this site called Fling.com has been flooding the net with pornographic images.

Because the PO has no personal wish to view this material, they had previously added the necessary line to their hosts file (or whichever metho they prefer) to block the site / link from displaying

I come along with my latest whizzy blog on money-making tips, but I'm proudly promoting Fling.com at the very top of the page, and I submit it for advertising.

The PO - having blocked Fling.com - does not see that I have it on my page, they purely see the remaining content. As a result, they accept it for advertising and arrange for it's distribution to their members.

Those members - happy to perform their role of pleasing the site's advertisers (the fact that they also collect their fraction of a cent notwithstanding) - gleefully click the runner link associated with my whizzy blog.

And for those members who have NOT blocked such undesireable elements, what do you think the first thing they will see would be? Fling.com of course.


Like I said, just because you it is blocked so that you cannot see it, that does not mean it is not there.

JoeP

JoeP, I totally agree with what you say about owners not blocking anything so they can see what is in or on the ads they are sending. That being said, the recent fling.com ads were only aimed to the USA population and could not be seen by anyone outside the USA. Therefore many otherwise responsible owners had no idea it was on the ads they sent or even on their own site. I think most of them contacted the affiliate they were using as soon as the porn was reported and asked to have those ads removed right away. Sadly some owners do not care and we still see the fling site and we also see very graphic images on Adult Friend Finder and even a pop up for Penthouse. Those owners did not have the ads removed or contact the affiliate they use and ask them to not give them any adult content ads.
The other problem is many many times you would have to check the ads 10-15 times to get the "bad" popups, add ons or slide in ads. On some they do not show on every ad sent or you would have to keep refreshing and on a members ptp they might give them lots of invalids and get them suspended.
I wish all affiliates that owners used gave them an option to make sure they can opt out for adult content. That probably is the only option we really have as owners to get rid of the offensive material.
Let me add this, there is at least one site sending hard core porn, they do have in their keywords for the members, the wording adult ads 18 and over. However they are supposed to have an adult gateway for a member to say yes they are over 18 in an electronic signature. By not having this way for a member to agree they are over 18, they are leaving themselves wide open to some heavy legal problems in many US states and in some countries besides the USA. Also in some states and countries that age is 21 not 18.

In reply to your queries,

OpaBear is a term of respect that I was given by the members several years ago. It is but one of the alter egos I have. If you're uncomfortable addressing/referring to me as OpaBear, I answer to Ron, Paris, Aldronel, Zandosan. Pick whichever you prefer but I'll not stop using a term of endearment just because one out of thousands may have a problem with it. We get the same thing every now and then from foreign members who have a problem with AARs being referred to as Widdle Bears

I do what I can to find ways to help protect members' puters and eyes so offensive malware isn't displayed. One of the ways is to keep the HOSTS file up to date so I never have to be exposed to that garbage. It is very effective, as anyone who has it in place can attest to. As an analogy, pretend we're in a lab with hazardous and innocuous materials. Lab Policy is that nobody handle any materials (ads) without proper clothing (HOSTS fix in place). Lab Policy is in place for the safety of the employees. So, according to your way of thinking, I should take off all my protective gear (HOSTS fix) just to see if there's anything hazardous in there thereby opening myself to a host (no pun intended) of maladies that could befall me if I touch the wrong stuff (ad) just so some lab workers (ad readers) don't have to suffer the inconvenient loss of a little time taken for protection? Ain't happening. Not for me anyway. Yes, I know the bad stuff is there and I cannot see it just as anyone who has the HOSTS fix in place never sees any of it. Should they unprotect their puters to see if there's anything to report? I suppose you'd like for me to ride my motorcycle without protective gear so I can see firsthand what it's like to ride through an area purported to have dust in the air which in my current state of health could be, shall we say, less than delightful. Nope, not interested.

Thanks to the security I have in place, my puter has never been infected with a virus, I don't see porn and the malware that installs stuff on puters never gets to mine. I click the same ads as everyone else does and take members' word for it that there is something bad on a certain site. All I can do is give them the tools. What they do or don't do with them is beyond the scope of my control.

"Buy em books, send em to school and what do they do? Eat the Frackin teacher"

I have no idea what the suck it and see refers to and am unable to address that.

Well said and thank you for all the advice an help you have given your members over the years. Some WMs don't even bother to answer support emails or establish a forum where these types of problems (or any other issues) can be addressed. Lydia

AAPTH

Thanks for replying.

Bottom line from your answer ....

You don't see bad things, so its all ok - and therefore your members can suffer as a result.

WTG for being a responsible widdle PO

And yes, I've done some searching around the forums - and from what I've seen, it's blatantly obvious you don't particularly care what you promote.

Fortunately, other POs take a much higher degree of responsibility.


JoeP


NB ....

I that lab you talk about ... I guess that protective clothing prevents them from finding hazardous materials.

Geez - I wonder what would have happened to penicillin if Alexander Fleming's protective clothing prevented him from discovering it? I guess the world's population would have been a lot less by now.

NB NB

Over in the UK - a "widdle" is something else entirely

I have full faith and trust in Ron Cheneler aka opabear.

You say he doesnt care about what is promoted here and you see this in other forums. If you read your admin updates as well as some threads in this forum such as support you will see some sites he has banned from advertising here. Unlike some sites Ron reads and posts if necessary in this forum just about every day. You will rarely go 24+ hours without a reply from a forum moderator or Ron himself. He has also posted links to the very same hosts fix he has on his computer for all members to apply to their computer. He was even willing to instant message me to help me with this.

In my personal opinion Ron Cheneler aka opabear is one of the most reliable, dependable, accessable, trustworthy and caring paid operators in the entire industry. If you have suggestions as to how he can improve the site there is even a thread for that in this forum.

Well put by some of our widdle bears. I agree fully.

We had problems because of computer hardware problems. Is Ron supposed to let any virus etc loose onto his computer so it crashes and is unusuable for a while and he is spending his time fixing that rather than processing ads and replying to forum posts that need his personal input.

I'm not going to get into it anymore with you as it can come of no good. Suffice it to say that one of us does what he can to help members whereas the other is looking for ways to make the PO look like a total ass. I and the memebrs know what I do for them and that I have their best interests in mind. Inasmuch as you're obviously having a bad bay/week/month/life, you're looking to take it out on me. I have better things to do than to get my wrath focused upon you and I will go tend to them.

Please, do us both a favor and find someone deserving to attack as you are wasting your time coming after me.