Just an FYI: It's now 100% :)
http://www.link-o-rama.com/greenguy/mlinks.htm

using css was invented to solve all those problems - mainly separating layout of webpage from content, nothing to do with being lazy or not, you obviously got it the other way around.

as well as you obviously have no idea what makes a page responsive.

links which will make it more clear:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascading_Style_Sheets
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsive_web_design

All this responsive design stuff has it's place, but the first question that must be answered before undertaking the rather substantial task of redesigning a very well established site is whether or not those visiting the site via devices with small screens actually purchase the product.

I've been asking that question for a number of years, and those that would have those numbers don't appear willing to share them. Namely, do surfers actually buy porn site memberships via their cell phones?

If that were the case (its not, but if it were) then CSS failed miserably. In fact it would be an epic fail of historic proportions.

Yes this is why CSS was invented, to separate layout from webpage, simply that - not to solve the problems of compatibility or responsiveness. In other words, to make things easier for "lazy" webmasters.

Childish insults tend to loose arguments, not win them.

If you want links, here are a few on CSS compatibility:

Browser Compatibility

Tablet Compatibility

'Phone Compatibility

A good and valid question. There is no point in spending time designing websites that simply don't sell.

However as tablet and 'phone use increases, and PC and laptop use decreases, we will find it is impossible to get enough surfers to those machines to make any money. Already tablet/'phone usage looks like the main way the main buying demographic (18 to 30 year olds with money) surf. Soon, making pages only usable on PC/laptop will be like designing sites only viewable on W98/IE6.

So the important question is not "Do surfers buy porn on their 'phones/tablets?" But "What can we sell on our porn sites that they will buy?" For well over a year I have found that "non porn" sells better than porn, even on my porn sites. And my best sellers on my adult sites are spell books. Spell books can be read on tablet/'phones - in fact many people use tablets as eReaders, and use them for most of their reading. My best selling porn line is not websites, but porn eBooks, again ideal tablet/'phone material.

I would like to be able to say that I did this deliberately to cash in on future developments, but the truth is - I did it because porn sales were in decline, and I wanted to make more money from PC/laptop sales. I was not clever enough to look towards future technology, I was just lucky. However I am currently reviewing my "responsive" policy (the fact that many of my sites are responsive is due to me allowing for older PC browsers with low width limits, not because I allowed for 'phones/tablets, and so do not look good, and some even don't "work" on the smaller tablet or 'phone screens). Having read your post I'll be throwing in "consider what shit will sell on tablets/'phones" as another main concern about "device compatibility".

Just checked my Nasty Dollars stats and my mobile sales almost equal 'regular' sales.

Yes, but can you tell if that is tablet or phones? Tablet users should still be able to see old school table layouts just fine, so you'd not be missing them either way. It's the phone users that I want to know about. What percentage of joins are from surfers using their smart phone?

Au contraire mon ami.

If you are going to sell something else entirely, you build a site specifically to promote that new product rather than convert a old well established site like LOR. Or more specifically, build a new network of sites to promote that new product.

One more thing to add, purely my own opinion, but if your business plan is highly dependent on search engine traffic for success then rethink your business plan unless you can generate the income to have full time seo specialists working on keeping up with it all. A one man shop ends up chasing his tail.

Well mine are exactly the same...0 |lol|

My design skills are more like Greenie's as I have not kept up with all the new stuff. |pokefun|JR

With that being said when everyone was talking years ago about getting rid of tables and were changing all their sites mine were on page one with tables and stayed there while most of those people chasing their tails bottomed out and left. Since then I have lost nearly all that but that was because of other updates by G a few years back. I just checked and the sites that are still on page 1 are there whether I search the terms on pc or mobile and they are still fixed size table built. So I'm not even sure I need to worry about responsive stuff right now or wait it out until I absolutely have to and then there will be something new again to worry about |crazy|

With all this being said, android and apple devices resize tables even if they are fixed in size including images. If you build it right the site looks exactly the same on pc and mobile just one being smaller in size, naturally, and I personally like that. I hate when you view something on a tablet/phone and instead of seeing 15 thumbs in the screen you now only get 1 or 2 thumbs because of responsive design. That is like building a site for pc with thumbs that are 750x1000 making the surfer consistently scroll down to see more. To me this is extremely annoying and quite ugly.

Now if you have a 1000 pixel table with 15 60x90 thumbs in a row that shit will be tiny and barely clickable when viewed on mobile. But if you swap it out to 5 or 6 150x200 or larger thumbs then even on small phones it is easily viewable and clickable. Plus, to me, it is far better looking so I have to assume it is better looking to others as well.

Then again, I am old so get off my lawn you young non buying whipper snappers :)

Ever watch TV? Did you notice how, during the Superbowl you only ever see adds for football products? How during the cop shows they only sell detective novels and toy police uniforms? And how during the sci-fi shows they only ever show ads for trips on Virgin Galactic, and Star Wars toys?

No?

That is because no successful business outside of Internet porn works on the model you suggest. Everyone else sells "other stuff", not "more of the same stuff that they give away free to attract customers".

Now, have you noticed how, in Internet porn (where we give away free porn and expect people to be so grateful that they buy porn for money rather than continue to surf for more free porn), there are less and less people running adult sites? And despite the drop in competition, most people still in business are complaining that they don't make as much as they used to?

That is because most people are still using the same model that you suggest (give free porn, then hope people decide to pay for it rather than continue to watch the free stuff).

IMHO only selling porn on porn sites is so "last century" and makes about as much sense as designing sites that can only be viewed on Windows98/IE6.

I don't think any of us are doing that, are we? I don't even think it is possible (unless you own the search engine and adjust the results to put your sites at the top).

You must be living on a different planet. There are VERY few non-adult products that will allow you to promote them on adult web sites.

I do promote some things other than membership sites, but they're not a significant percentage of my income. I've tried quite a few things that were flat out busts. Adult toys, lingerie and fetish wear. Live cam sites and dating sites, multiple times. Just to name a few.

My site links are in my sig. I'd love to hear of some non membership program that's going to make me hundreds of dollars a month.

Not even a nearby planet.

I have often come across people who are horrified that I sell pornography on websites. This is the first time I have come across people who are horrified at me selling non-porn!

I hope you two are "creationists" rather than "evolutionists". Because the rules of evolution hold for businesses as well as life. And the principle rule that the nice Mr Darwin taught us was:

"Evolve or die."

You may be doing OK now, but if you continue to run your businesses like it is still the twentieth century, then prepare for extinction.

You keep missing the point. What I'm saying is that if you're going to make a different product the primary focus then you build a new site/network for that. You don't abruptly change an existing site/network.

I'm not saying change the site/network, I'm just saying ad some extra ads for non-porn stuff.

(Oww fuck, I'm eating a take away while typing and I just ate the hottest onion bhaji on the planet - feels like I just filled my mouth with the strongest chillies available. Help, I need alcohol.)

OK, beer in hand, back to the point (but my mouth still hurts).

Back in the 1990's bandwidth was expensive, So free sites did not give much away, and rarely videos. As bandwidth got less expensive, we started giving more and more away. Today you can get a month's unlimited bandwidth from a host advertising itself for tube sites, for less than I used to pay for 1G. As well as the tubes, there are loads of message boards giving away free downloads of entire site rips (seriously, if you want to do a review of a sponsor's site and they won't give you free access - just do a Google search, you will find someone ready to give away a recent-ish download of their entire content).

Today, only a moron would pay for porn - there is more than he/she could use in several lifetimes, all available for free.

Fortunately for us, there are still a few morons about.

Unfortunately for us - they are getting smarter, every week there appear to be less morons and more tech savvy people out there.

Soon there will not be enough morons to pay your hosting costs. By then you need to be using your porn site to attract people, then flogging them other shit that they cannot get for free.

As a friend of mine (who became a self made millionaire in his twenties and is now a multi millionaire) loves to quote: "The first rule of business is innovate or die. If you are doing the same thing tomorrow as you were doing yesterday, then next Tuesday you start your 'going out of business' sale."

(My mouth still hurts a bit.)

No to interrupt this ongoing back-and-forth, but my #1 listing for "greenguy" came back :)

|bananna| |banana| |bananna| |banana|

Please post some examples of "non-porn stuff" that will allow promotion on adult sites. As I stated before, they are few and far between.

Why isn't there a "why bother wasting your time interacting with ecchi" emoticon?

Hmmm...... Some of us should pay more attention, because before the change to Juicy Ads, one such sponsor used to advertise on this board.

Also for a while my sig went to one such sponsor.

And one of the distributors of my book (if you follow my current sig) is mostly a non-adult book publisher who allows ads on adult sites.

Yes, they are hard to find. But making money is hard. If you want a way to make loads of money without actually working hard then you are making a mistake living in the real world!

Because ecchi is a genius and everything he says is always correct - always! :)

Seriously though, it is because: If you don't want to interact with me then just don't interact with me. No one is forcing you to do so, last time I looked there was no board rule forcing members to interact with me. If you don't like what I say, and don't want to argue your point, just ignore me. You will notice that only you and Toby are arguing this point, no one else is. I choose to believe this is because everyone else agrees with me, but it is possible (some may say probable) that there are people out there who disagree with me but are thinking "There is no point in interacting with this asshole, so I won't bother."

Everybody brings something to the table |shake|

...except Skippy - as helpful as a rubber crutch |couch|

|lol|
http://payload70.cargocollective.com...ch_860_860.jpg

I like cookies and ice cream.

well this thread really digressed...

however, my clear cut opinion:

it's 2015 and you have to stay on top of things with current web standards, just because shitty looking site made you money in 90s, it doesn't mean it will do again, since in the 90s there was no competition like today from big blog or tgp networks to monster tubes with free full length videos.

you have to ask yourself would a surfer rather visit and stay on eye catching tube site with full length videos and watch them within a single click or go to obsolete link list where you have enter page, tons of category pages which lead to small 2 page sites with warning page and 2 poor galleries and banners?

btw, freeones is excellent example how an old site kept up with the times.

I have no desire to run a tube site. I know the pros & cons of keeping my site the way it is & I fully accept that, even if it took me 8 years to realize it :)

However, if it was 2007 & I had to do it all over again, it'd be Tube O'Rama :D

That is my point about CSS. There is such browser and device incompatibility that it is practically impossible to make a site that is not "shitty looking" on some machines if you use CSS. Take LOR for example. Despite G's modesty it is a good looking site. However if you look at the thread where he talks about adding a slide in menu to the site, you will see it now only looks good on some devices and some operating systems. On others (eg XP/IE8) it is (sorry G) a "shitty looking site".

On XP/IE8 you get confronted by three non working buttons and an ugly menu dump. Worse, because the menu dump is the same on all pages, if you click a link "above the fold" the page appears not to change (it does change, but you have to scroll several screens worth down to see the change, most people won't realise this and will assume the page is fucked).

This means G is loosing, by his figures, $1 out of every $40 he could be making (Google disagree, their figures put it at about 20%, which is $8 out of every $40).

Worse, people will be talking about it. One XP user tweeting "Don't bother with LOR - it no longer works" will stop dozens of their followers even trying to visit the site, loosing him surfers who could ironically see the site perfectly on their Windows 8 machines, but who now don't bother because their XP using friend told them the site was as good as dead. Add on to that a few good re-tweets by people with plenty of followers, and G could be loosing thousands, possibly tens of thousands of surfers.

On top of that, I have been told (although PC says this is "old news") that Google lower the ranking of sites that are not IE8 compatible. Which, from this thread alone, you can tell will not make G a happy boy.

All this hassle because G used CSS instead of pure HTML. Is it worth it?