Inline PhysOrg.Com Links

[Vanadium 50]

Is the recent appearance of PhysOrg.com links in mid-thread a bug or a feature?

[Greg Bernhardt]

We are proud to have entered in a content sharing partnership with PhysOrg.Com

They will be delivering relevant news stories to PF. There are 14 forums that will receive unique stories and the rest draw from a general science pool. IE biology gets biology stories. In return we are sending PhysOrg.Com links to some of our discussions. We are confident this is a win-win. :smile:

[mgb_phys]

It's now working properly in Opera. It was showing just the logo with no links and occasionally stretching the box for the logo all the way down the page.

[Norman]

I think this is a big mistake. It is quite annoying to see a post under an initial thread in the Physics sections about family planning... It is intrusive that it appears as a post in a thread with absolutely no relevant information. I hope it does not stay in its current implementation.

[Greg Bernhardt]

I think this is a big mistake. It is quite annoying to see a post under an initial thread in the Physics sections about family planning... It is intrusive that it appears as a post in a thread with absolutely no relevant information. I hope it does not stay in its current implementation.

Thank you for your opinion. We will continue to tweak things in order to optimize usefulness.

update: all physics forums now show physics news stories

[symbolipoint]

The placement of those posts is not suitable in several of the boards. A better placement may be at the top of some of the boards or forum sections.

[Greg Bernhardt]

The placement of those posts is not suitable in several of the boards. A better placement may be at the top of some of the boards or forum sections.

Can you further explain what you mean by "not suitable"?

[dx]

I too feel it is a strange place to put it.

[Greg Bernhardt]

Gold members forget there are ads at the top of the forums :wink:

[negitron]

I think this is a big mistake. It is quite annoying to see a post under an initial thread in the Physics sections about family planning... It is intrusive that it appears as a post in a thread with absolutely no relevant information. I hope it does not stay in its current implementation.

It took me less than half a day to get used to it; it's very easy to distinguish the links from a normal post once you get used to them. In any case, I don't know what Greg feels like doing, but it would be trivially easy to change the border or background color or something if people are that easily confused about it.

[Redbelly98]

If it helps Greg pay the bills, I'm for it. I too found it pretty easy to get used to, and it's always in the same place (after 1st post of a thread).

[phyzmatix]

If it helps Greg pay the bills, I'm for it.

I agree. Also, in a week's time, it'll be as if it's always been there.

[Borg]

I was confused the first couple of times because it looked like people had signatures with advertisements.

[Greg Bernhardt]

If it helps Greg pay the bills, I'm for it. I too found it pretty easy to get used to, and it's always in the same place (after 1st post of a thread).

They aren't ads :smile: News stories from a partner site.

I was confused the first couple of times because it looked like people had signatures with advertisements.

I will look into ways of distinguishing them better. But at the same time I don't want it distracting.

[Danger]

It weirded me out the first couple of times, since I thought that some unnamed used had sneaked in spam. Now I'm used to it, and I think that it's a great idea.
Scientific American, now this. What the hell's next; are we going into partnership with NASA?

[humanino]

I support PF and Greg in all their decisions :!!)
Let's try it before deciding whether it was a good decision.

[berkeman]

I have to say that I'm starting to like it. Some of the articles in the links are darned interesting. The one about Smart Power Grid security was an eye-opener!

[Greg Bernhardt]

I should also mention the feeds are updated every hour.

[dlgoff]

http://www.physicsforums.com/misc/physorg1.gif
This is how their logo looks in my firefox. Should it be cut like this?

[Greg Bernhardt]

http://www.physicsforums.com/misc/physorg1.gif
This is how their logo looks in my firefox. Should it be cut like this?

yes, it's from the website

[negitron]

I will look into ways of distinguishing them better. But at the same time I don't want it distracting.

I was thinking something like this, perhaps:

http://img366.imageshack.us/img366/5497/phys.jpg

[dlgoff]

yes, it's from the website
Okay I see. But on their site they have the "PHYSORG.Com" below the cut.

[negitron]

Here's a link to the actual logo, as extracted from their CSS stylesheet:

http://www.physorg.com/tmpl/default/img/logo.gif

[qntty]

could you make an option to disable it? perhaps it could be a gold-member feature.

[sylas]

I would prefer it to be located outside of the stream of the thread. The current position is distracting. I propose it be prominent, but plainly distinct from the thread of actual discussion. Here's my suggestion:
http://lh3.ggpht.com/_WtnYwFZtgHI/SnPFudQmIpI/AAAAAAAAAbM/9kOYTCHOyTA/s400/physorglayout.JPG

Cheers -- sylas

[GDogg]

In return we are sending PhysOrg.Com links to some of our discussions. We are confident this is a win-win. :smile:

I hope we don't get the kind of comments they get in their articles with that...

[Greg Bernhardt]

could you make an option to disable it? perhaps it could be a gold-member feature.

I will be adding a "hide" option next week.

[Vanadium 50]

Thanks, Greg. I'd rather see it once than not at all, but I'd rather see it not at all over zillions of times. As it stands today, it's like a pesky kid tugging at your sleeve saying, "Have you read this article yet? How about now? How about now?"

[fluidistic]

I would prefer it to be located outside of the stream of the thread. The current position is distracting. I propose it be prominent, but plainly distinct from the thread of actual discussion. Here's my suggestion:
http://lh3.ggpht.com/_WtnYwFZtgHI/SnPFudQmIpI/AAAAAAAAAbM/9kOYTCHOyTA/s400/physorglayout.JPG

Cheers -- sylas

In my opinion it would be better at the bottom of the page. So that you can easily read a new thread without scrolling down if the post is short. It would also be noticed at the bottom anyway so I think it's a good place to it.

[arildno]

I'm still in the grumble-mumble stage about this..

[Greg Bernhardt]

News Bit
http://www.physorg.com/help/whats-new/

[tiny-tim]

It took me less than half a day to get used to it; it's very easy to distinguish the links from a normal post once you get used to them. In any case, I don't know what Greg feels like doing, but it would be trivially easy to change the border or background color or something if people are that easily confused about it.
I was thinking something like this (http://img366.imageshack.us/img366/5497/phys.jpg), perhaps

I agree, I'd prefer it to look substantially different.

The simplest method would be to put the whole text in the physics.org corporate colour, which I think is dark purple (and could the top line be centred?), something like …

PhysOrg.com science news (http://www.physorg.com/):

>> Magnetic Measurements Question Assumptions About High-Tc Superconductors
>> Future tech on show at 36th SIGGRAPH
>> What Hit Jupiter?

Also, the link is to the homepage, so why are the linked words "science news" instead of "PhysOrg.com"? … perhaps …

Science News from PhysOrg.com (http://www.physorg.com/):

>> Magnetic Measurements Question Assumptions About High-Tc Superconductors
>> Future tech on show at 36th SIGGRAPH
>> What Hit Jupiter?

or even …
Science News from http://www.physorg.com/tmpl/default/img/logo.gif (http://www.physorg.com/):

>> Magnetic Measurements Question Assumptions About High-Tc Superconductors
>> Future tech on show at 36th SIGGRAPH
>> What Hit Jupiter?

[GeorginaS]

I think it's a terrific partnership with a blending of two great ideas. They're complimentary sites, for certain. It takes a bit of getting accustomed to the second post in each thread not being part of the discussion, but truly, it's not a big distraction. And some of the articles are interesting. Plus, it may attract some new faces here, which, I'm assuming, is always welcome.

I vote (assuming I get a vote, that is :smile:) that it's a clever partnership.

[Greg Bernhardt]

Tiny, I like the middle suggestion. I'll look into it.

[tiny-tim]

Tiny, I like the middle suggestion. I'll look into it.

ooh, Greg, you've done it already!

that was quick! :approve:

[Greg Bernhardt]

ooh, Greg, you've done it already!

that was quick! :approve:

some of it

[Redbelly98]

Minor quibble about style: it looks kind of silly for Saturn's southern hemisphere to be lopped off for no apparent reason. This only looks sensible if there is some text right below the logo:

. http://www.physicsforums.com/misc/physorg1.gif
PhysOrg.com


... instead of:

PhysOrg.com
. http://www.physicsforums.com/misc/physorg1.gif

(It looks better when the background color matches the logo, of course.)

EDIT: this looks better I think:

http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/redbelly98/PhysicsForums/PhysOrg_Logo.gif

[Moonbear]

I don't like having it plunked inside threads. It's distracting, and looks like an advertisement. I don't see any relevance of the links to the threads I'm reading (for example, in all the threads I open right now, one of the links is to something about Nissan vehicles). And it's ugly.

[berkeman]

I don't see any relevance of the links to the threads I'm reading (for example, in all the threads I open right now, one of the links is to something about Nissan vehicles). And it's ugly.

Which forum was that in Moonbear? At least in the EE forum and some of the others I frequent, the links appear pretty interesting:

PhysOrg.com
physics news on PhysOrg.com

>> Dark Energy From the Ground Up: Make Way for BigBOSS
>> Physicists to study attractive and repulsive forces crucial in designing nano-machines
>> LHC to run at 3.5 TeV for early part of 2009-2010 run rising later

[berkeman]

And from the Posted Science Jobs forum:

science news on PhysOrg.com

>> Cut marks on bone suggest burial rituals of Early Britons
>> Researchers propose ambitious new strategies for AIDS vaccine research
>> Gov't reassures schools on staying open with flu

[berkeman]

And from Intro Physics in Homework Help:

science news on PhysOrg.com

>> Psychologists say longer lives can still lead to happier golden years
>> Two lines account for most human embryonic stem cell research
>> Model suggests how life's code emerged from primordial soup

Okay, Greg, I need to change my answer now. I'm spending too much time reading those links! As if I didn't already spend too much time here! :tongue2:

[Moonbear]

I guess it was just the links at the time I commented.

I'd actually be more likely to check out some of those links if the links were placed someplace other than the second post in every thread. At that point, I'm interested in reading the thread I opened, not haring off to some other site to read an article about something unrelated to the thread.

Since they've appeared, I'm noticing some other odd things with the site...not sure if it's related or not. For example, sometimes a button will appear as text instead of as a button (i.e., "Quick reply to this message" is often displayed instead of the quick reply button on the first post of a page) and up on the top border of the page, I see "image" at the end of the bar that has the quick links on it, and then it overruns the right side of the screen.

If we have to put up with the links to some other site within the threads, can they be at the end of the thread, so you only run into them when you're done reading a current thread? Maybe that would be less distracting and more likely to inspire someone to visit the other site?

[NeoDevin]

Since they've appeared, I'm noticing some other odd things with the site...not sure if it's related or not. For example, sometimes a button will appear as text instead of as a button (i.e., "Quick reply to this message" is often displayed instead of the quick reply button on the first post of a page) and up on the top border of the page, I see "image" at the end of the bar that has the quick links on it, and then it overruns the right side of the screen.

I'm getting that too. (http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=328997)

[NeoDevin]

I think there should be a "show once" option, and a "hide" option. I'm sure many people here already subscribe to the RSS feed at physorg, and it doesn't provide any benefit to see the links again, with fewer details.

[Moonbear]

I think there should be a "show once" option, and a "hide" option. I'm sure many people here already subscribe to the RSS feed at physorg, and it doesn't provide any benefit to see the links again, with fewer details.

That would be nice. I probably wouldn't be bothered as much if I just saw the links in the first thread I opened on a visit to the site, or a particular forum, and then had them go away once I'd seen it for that session. Seeing the same thing repeated in every thread is feeling like more of a reason to purposely avoid going to that other site...I'm not fond of being beaten over the head repeatedly with information I was capable of reading the first time. And, it seems others here are simply learning to ignore the ads for physorg entirely.

[Kurdt]

One of the main reasons this has happened, please remember, is to give PhysicsForums a lot of exposure on another site. Since the site is dedicated to science news, we may get a lot more quality discussions and threads from new members on the forum. its a small price to pay if you don't like the ads.

[fluidistic]

One of the main reasons this has happened, please remember, is to give PhysicsForums a lot of exposure on another site. Since the site is dedicated to science news, we may get a lot more quality discussions and threads from new members on the forum. its a small price to pay if you don't like the ads.

Ok. I'm getting used now to the physorg.com links in all threads, but even though the links are generally interesting for me it might not be true for all.
I wonder, why don't we do the same as we do with Scientific American new articles? I mean, the physorg.com "adds" in the first page instead of in each thread right under the first post.
I read all Scientific American entries and I might do the same for phyorg.com even if their links does not appear in each thread.

[Vanadium 50]

. its a small price to pay if you don't like the ads.

True. But remember, some people have paid real money to receive no ads. They may not be happy with interpreting "no ads" as "only those ads that we think are really, really important."

Personally, I think the idea is good, but would prefer a less intrusive implementation.

[sylas]

I read all Scientific American entries and I might do the same for phyorg.com even if their links does not appear in each thread.

I agree. They don't belong INSIDE the thread. To one side, or above, or below, anything. Not in the middle of the thread, between posts.

[Moonbear]

True. But remember, some people have paid real money to receive no ads.

Exactly. Honestly, I'd rather have the little text ads back at the top of the page than these things interrupting threads. It's far more obnoxious than the little google ads at the top. What's the point of people contributing to get rid of ads if they still get their threads interrupted with ads for another site?

[FredGarvin]

I personally do not like them. I would prefer that they were off on the side, similar to how the links are in the main forums page. If there was anything like a "flow" to the threads, it certainly gets destroyed by having an advertisement in them.

Perhaps if they were smaller or just one link to take you to another page?

[cristo]

I would prefer that they were off on the side, similar to how the links are in the main forums page.

I think if they were at the side then they would have more of a (negative) effect since they would effectively reduce the width of the page.

Anyway, I'm sure greg will take all comments onboard, especially of the gold members since you guys really are appreciated, and in fact he mentioned that he was going to introduce a "hide" feature. He's away at the moment, but I'm sure he'll get onto it when back.

[fluidistic]

I think if they were at the side then they would have more of a (negative) effect since they would effectively reduce the width of the page.


I do not believe so. There's still a bigger (about twice as big) place than the one occupied by Scientific American's new articles. I don't see how the Physorg.com titles would change the width of the page. I might be wrong of course.

[Hootenanny]

I do not believe so. There's still a bigger (about twice as big) place than the one occupied by Scientific American's new articles. I don't see how the Physorg.com titles would change the width of the page. I might be wrong of course.
I think cristo was thinking of the case where the Physorg.com advertisement would be placed to the side in the actual threads, rather than on the home page as the Sci. Am. links currently are.

[Moonbear]

I think cristo was thinking of the case where the Physorg.com advertisement would be placed to the side in the actual threads, rather than on the home page as the Sci. Am. links currently are.

Since the links included are associated with the specific forum one is reading, how about if it was a sidebar on each forum's thread index page? Is there room for it there without squashing thread titles too much? I'd rather have thread indexes compressed more than the posts in threads themselves.

[Redbelly98]

Or it could be above or below the thread posts, not off to the side. Then everything could be kept the same width.

[sylas]

Or it could be above or below the thread posts, not off to the side. Then everything could be kept the same width.

I like this idea, and produced an image of what it might look like, in msg #25.

[nvn]

I agree with some comments by Vanadium 50, Norman, dx, Moonbear, and others. I love a bare-bones page, without distractions and bloat. E.g., I prefer only a thin, plain-text navigation bar across the top of pages (no wasted space). And no side bars, not even on forum thread index pages. The current physorg.com link is interruptive, out of place, and annoying. This link should be only a small hypertext link at the bottom of the page (as is already there).

[Kurdt]

I don't think that was in the terms of the partnership unfortunately. In exchange for our exposure on their site, they get exposure on ours. I doubt they'd be happy with a tiny link at the bottom of the page.

[dlgoff]

I don't think that was in the terms of the partnership unfortunately. In exchange for our exposure on their site, they get exposure on ours. I doubt they'd be happy with a tiny link at the bottom of the page.I agree. This is Gregs site and he's done a great job so far. So lets keep it visible and see if our membership grows as a result.

[turin]

Just throwing in my opinion: It seems that this physorg ad is annoying me more than other members. I have refused to visit any of the advertised links in disgust. The visibility has an effect (on me) that is probably opposite to the intended effect. Why must that ad interrupt every single individual thread? I have greatly reduced my forum activity in order to reduce the number of times I see that ad. I don't think that annoying people with something is a good way to promote it.

[Evo]

Please take the time to read a thread before posting. As has been stated a number of times, it's not an ad. We have entered into a partnership with physorg.

[lisab]

Just throwing in my opinion: It seems that this physorg ad is annoying me more than other members. I have refused to visit any of the advertised links in disgust. The visibility has an effect (on me) that is probably opposite to the intended effect. Why must that ad interrupt every single individual thread? I have greatly reduced my forum activity in order to reduce the number of times I see that ad. I don't think that annoying people with something is a good way to promote it.

Actually, the links aren't for ads. Here's the About Us (http://www.physorg.com/help/about-us/) page for PhysOrg.com. It's a news service.

[turin]

I'm not talking about the links. Please forgive me for using an unapproved term to refer to the block just below the first post that advertises the links. I just thought it would be more concise to call it an "ad". BTW, I spent 20 minutes reading the thread, so please don't rebuke me for negligence just because we don't agree on terminology.

Hey! It looks like my poll has been deleted. What rule did I break?

[Evo]

Hey! It looks like my poll has been deleted. What rule did I break?We don't allow starting threads on a topic that is already open. You are free to complain here all you like.

It's really sad to see people complain about this. Greg does so much work to keep this forum going. I, for one, appreciate his hard work and hope he doesn't decide that it's not worth the effort and just shut it down.

[turin]

I'm sorry; I was complaining a bit. I just wanted my tiny little voice to be heard, in case Greg (I guess he owns the server?) wanted to count votes. I totally understand that this forum does not cost us little guys anything, and so in the end I of course respectfully defer to Greg's decision. I just thought that Greg, and possibly even physorg, should consider that the current implementation is counterproductive for at least one member.

[Evo]

I'm sorry; I was complaining a bit. I just wanted my tiny little voice to be heard, in case Greg (I guess he owns the server?) wanted to count votes. I totally understand that this forum does not cost us little guys anything, and so in the end I of course respectfully defer to Greg's decision. I just thought that Greg, and possibly even physorg, should consider that the current implementation is counterproductive for at least one member.This is the place to voice your opinion, and Greg is taking all feedback into consideration. He's out of the country right now, so don't think he's not paying attention. As a homework helper, you might be spared in the near future, so hang in there.

It bothered me too at first, but now I don't even notice.

[Redbelly98]

I was looking around at physorg.com, to see how they promote our site. PF has a presence, but not an intrusive presence, at physorg.

They do not put us "in the middle" of their articles, instead we are off to the side so as not to interrupt the flow of the article:

http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/redbelly98/PhysicsForums/physorg01.gif
(image is very wide, and displaying it here could mess up the display of this thread for some users)

Also, notice the "Hide" feature so that users who do not wish to be troubled with the Physics Forums links do not have to view it.

I think we could safely:
Put the PhysOrg link in a less intrusive place, say at the bottom of page 1 of a thread, and
Add a "hide" feature
with no cause for complaint on physorg's part.

After a week of seeing these links, I do find they are somewhat intrusive as currently implemented. On the other hand, I have been interested enough to read 2 or 3 of the articles.

p.s. Here is the full physorg article that I took the above image from:
http://www.physorg.com/news169725980.html

.

EDIT:
Hey, just wanted to throw in my 2 cents on the "it's not an ad" issue.
Okay, I understand that it isn't an ad because physorg does not pay money to Greg or PF to promote their site. But you could argue that this difference is transparent to the user. I think this may be the source of frustration on the part of some members here.

p.s. As I said before, I'm all for anything that helps Greg pay the bills. This hopefully attracts more membership to PF, some percentage of whom like PF enough to become Contributors.

[lisab]

p.s. As I said before, I'm all for anything that helps Greg pay the bills. This hopefully attracts more membership to PF, some percentage of whom like PF enough to become Contributors.

I'm sure Greg will track the data to see if we get a bump in the number of Contributors which can be attributed to the PhysOrg partnership.

OK, maybe just correlated to the partnership.

[berkeman]

I noticed an interesting link in an EE thread tonight and followed it:

engineering news on PhysOrg.com

>> Watching over the water system: Engineers design sensors to monitor pipes after earthquakes
>> Electronic medicine, without borders?
>> Braille Displays Get New Life With Artificial Muscles

The first link lead me here (sorry, I'm not copying all the links):

http://www.physorg.com/news169818899.html

This is an issue that our local emergency services agencies have been looking at in detail. As you can tell from my footer, emergency preparation is pretty important here so close to the Hayward Fault, and our water supply crosses the fault. We're working on improving the infrastructure of the water supply lines that cross the fault, and I'm going to forward this link to my agencies that are doing that work.

Thanks for the link.

[Kurdt]

Greg said he was already working on a hide feature. I don't know whther it is just for staff ad contributors or for everyone.

[sylas]

Greg said he was already working on a hide feature. I don't know whther it is just for staff ad contributors or for everyone.

I think the "hide" feature is less important than the location.

I personally don't mind at all how prominent it is. It can be big and bold at the top of every page. I would, however, prefer that it is not in the middle of a thread.

Cheers -- sylas

[Kurdt]

If its hidden, its position would no longer be a problem.

[Monique]

If its hidden, its position would no longer be a problem. It is, if you want to have people pay maximum attention to the links you should not put it right after the first post (I automatically skip the information and scroll down to read the thread and don't go back up to the first post).

Having a hide feature does not solve the problem, it even defeats the purpose of having the partnership. At the bottom of the page would be a perfect solution for me. That way you can read all the replies in a thread and link through to gain access to more information. There could be an unobtrusive button in the first post that takes you to the bottom of the page to the links, if there is any need for that.

[sylas]

If its hidden, its position would no longer be a problem.

Sure. But I don't propose to hide it. I don't have a problem with the information being there. I just think we'd be better to have a page layout in which the thread is contiguous, so I am proposing a different layout, with the information being, if anything, more prominent.

Hiding is overkill for what is indeed useful information, poorly placed.

Cheers -- sylas

[tiny-tim]

I was looking around at physorg.com, to see how they promote our site. PF has a presence, but not an intrusive presence, at physorg.

They do not put us "in the middle" of their articles, instead we are off to the side so as not to interrupt the flow of the article:

For the record, the following appears to be the PF presence on phys.org:

On the homepage, http://www.physorg.com/ , the second menu bar (under the "Spotlight News Stories") has a link "Physics Forums", but it links straight back to the same page!!

Just below that is a red button "More news", and clicking that takes you to the Feature stories page, http://www.physorg.com/editorials/, where an identical menu bar appears, at the bottom of the page, and again the link is to the same page!!

However, under that menu bar, ie at the very bottom of the Feature Stories page, is a selection of five PF threads, eg …

Getting comfortable with homological algebra, 54 minutes ago, via Physics Forums
Force and potential problem, 56 minutes ago, via Physics Forums
drag coefficient and power required!need help, 1hour ago, via Physics Forums
Continuity Like Equation, 1hour ago, via Physics Forums
effect of electric field on a dielectric, 1hour ago, via Physics Forums

(clicking the red "more" button gives the subsequent Feature Stories pages, with a different PF selection on each page)

Each individual story page has the story itself in the left column, and a number of boxes at the top of the right column: Related stories, Tags, Feature stories, and finally "Relevant PhysicsForums posts", which lists 5 or 6 posts of (doubtful?) relevance … eg (for the story "Jellyfish Robot Swims Like its Biological Counterpart (http://www.physorg.com/news165234976.html)")
Data collection and analysis: OriginPro 8.0 SR6
6 hours ago
Pressure Vessel Design
7 hours ago
Purging air from system
7 hours ago
Replacing a bow and arrow.
18 hours ago
More from Physics Forums - General Engineering

However, if you increase the font size even one point (as I always do), the PF box disappears (even though the other boxes do not :rolleyes:)

[tiny-tim]

Just occurred to me …

topicality may be a good way of selecting important or interesting phsy.org articles, but it usually isn't for PF threads.

So, rather than the present presumably random selection (I think it's the most recent items) from the relevant PF sub-forum (some of which are a bit :rolleyes: :rolleyes:), wouldn't it be better to take advantage of another of Greg's recent innovations, and link to the highlighted threads in that sub-forum? :smile:

[Evo]

Just occurred to me …

topicality may be a good way of selecting important or interesting phsy.org articles, but it usually isn't for PF threads.

So, rather than the present presumably random selection (I think it's the most recent items) from the relevant PF sub-forum (some of which are a bit :rolleyes: :rolleyes:), wouldn't it be better to take advantage of another of Greg's recent innovations, and link to the highlighted threads in that sub-forum? :smile:The "quality" of the PF threads being linked to is being addressed. Greg thinks he may have a solution.

[Greg Bernhardt]

I've talked it over with the guys at PhysOrg and we agreed to hide it for gold members.

[sylas]

I've talked it over with the guys at PhysOrg and we agreed to hide it for gold members.

This is a strange choice, to my way of thinking. The links are not at all like an advertisement for raising revenue, as I understand it. There's a good rationale for removing the ads for a subscribing member, but what is the rationale here?

I consider the PhysOrg connection as something that gives added value for users. The problem, in my opinion, was never about having links, but about their location, in the middle of the thread. It would make sense to have them at the top, or below the thread, as a set of potentially relevant links. But whereever they are, I think it makes sense to consider them as adding value, and hence there's no reason to remove them for gold members. It would be sensible to have an optional display for gold members, perhaps.

Cheers -- sylas

[GeorginaS]

Um, is the "hide" a default setting that I can change somewhere? I didn't mind the PhysOrg links in the second thread post and even liked checking them out. As a gold member, I can't see them at all now.

Poor Greg, it's always something, isn't it? Sorry.

[tiny-tim]

This is a strange choice, to my way of thinking.
…
I consider the PhysOrg connection as something that gives added value for users. The problem, in my opinion, was never about having links, but about their location, in the middle of the thread. It would make sense to have them at the top, or below the thread, as a set of potentially relevant links. But whereever they are, I think it makes sense to consider them as adding value, and hence there's no reason to remove them for gold members. It would be sensible to have an optional display for gold members, perhaps.

Perhaps PhysOrg could go at the bottom of the page, between the Tags and the Quick Reply box, for gold members? :smile:

Easy to get to, if we want it …

and a slight encouragement to click the "QUOTE" button instead of using the Quick Reply box! :wink:

(incidentally, perhaps the same position would be better for the Similar Threads table? … I hardly ever notice it :rolleyes:)

[Redbelly98]

Or maybe add PhysOrg links to the PF main page, in the same section that has the Scientific American and PhD Comics links.