Do we, as an adult webmaster community, oppose supporting adult versions of YouTube?
 

I've read 3 separate threads on the topic so far this morning:
http://www.greenguysboard.com/board/...ad.php?t=39291
http://www.greenguysboard.com/board/...ad.php?t=39294
http://www.greenguysboard.com/board/...ad.php?t=39281

In each, I posted, assuming that we, as an adult webmaster community, oppose these type of site.

I understand that they are legal & that's not much we can do about them, but that doesn't mean we have to support them.

I think we've talked about this in the past (I can't find the thread) but if I remember correctly, the general consensus was that sites like this are of little or no benefit to the JoeBlow webmasters that we have here on the board. (most of us are in the Link List/Free Site and/or TGP/Gallery business)

So before I continue with my "this board is not for you" mindset when I reply to these threads, I'd like to know if I'm right in my thinking.

Please vote as well as post comments/questions |shake|

too much free porn can't be good. I don't support them.

I'm split but leaning over to the NO side more since it's giving away more free porn again but with less advertising possibilities for us small webmasters than let's say freesites or TGP galleries.

If you can put your watermark on the movies it might be another opportunity to get some people over to your site. But then again I can imagine it's not the greatest traffic ever...

I tested it once and am still waiting for the loads of traffic to come in :)

The only benefit would be to a pay site owner if any at all and just because of the watermarks on the movies. I really don't see it making money for anyone at all, other than a chance of a surfer typing in a URL from a movie but then again why would they if there is a never ending supply of movies. :(

I think that was one of the few Pros that we came up with - assuming you have your own exclusive content, then you could slap your domain on the movie & get traffic that way.

I know that there's a few paysite owners & webmasters that produce their own content and if they wanted to try it & support it, that's their business (but I think that most of those - that I know anyway - would not support this)

I really don't see any benefit to anyone other than the people that own these sites and the sponsors. Assuming that adult programs go the same route as TV networks (except viacom). They will be happy to provide the video clips. And really, who can blame them?

But sooner or later, these youtube type sites are going to see that they are offering too much for free and adjust. Freesites didn't start out with only a few pictures. They started with 5 - 30 Thousand and saw money slipping through their (our) fingers.

Oh yeah, I am kind of torn on the vote. If they were done right with tiny clips, I think they would work well for everyone and be a good source of traffic. But as they are now, they just offer way too much. I guess I will have to vote "no".

I fully support their right to find innovative ways to promote their own sites, but they should not be advertising them or discussing them on webmaster boards. It's sort of a fuck you to affiliate webmasters. I realize they don't mean it that way, but really, if you are openly discussing such projects, which exclude affiliates, on a webmaster board, it's a fuck you.

I may not know what works ;), but I do know what does not work. Posting lengthy video clips of your exclusive content without a glaringly large adjoining tour link is asinine.

Also, why is it, if we create free sites/galleries with their content, we are allowed to promote only their paysite on those pages, yet they'll allow their movie clips to be viewed on a tube site where the predominant advertising is that of OTHER sites? Hmmm...

I voted NO.

I understand a paysite owner may want to use every resource they could to sell as well. Hoping the watermarks bring someone over to buy. I am a small fish and even I think somtimes that I give away to much free stuff with tgp and linklists. Still fall under the old thought of tease them with free and let the paysites please. Unfortunately I feel I am in the minority on this and may need to change. But untill they can come to a difinite agreement with 2257 and secondary producers I will stick to teasing nudes :)

ON behalf of one of my camhoes, I submit clips to a site called clips4sale.. they are anywhere between 120-240 seconds each depending on the material presented. While I know this isn't a "free" porn site, it's amazing the number of people who purchase clips. I think it would be much MORE effective if program owners wanted traffic to do it in these little sound bytes and sell them for 1.99 or whatever. then the surfer gets a "taste" and if they want more, go buy a membership.

On the weird porn surfer note: Monday a guy purchased 75.00 worth of 180 second clips. He could have bought a monthly membership to the website for 24.99 and gotten all 150 full length videos.

Soo NO to the free Adult YouTube

I oppose it, as more and more surfers find out about these sites, coupled with file sharing programs, this can only mean less money for us webmasters

sure the owners are making money off of some of the traffic on those sites....but those kind of sites are taking the traffic from the real sites that make us money like the LL and tgps and so on

free porn = free porn = free porn

I have a problem with any kind of site based on surfer uploaded adult content. A significant percentage will always be unauthorized by the legit content owners. They'll give you the old line, "we pull all unauthorized copyrighted content as soon as we're notified." Sorry, in my opinion, that's not good enough.

I came very close to setting up a youtube type of adult site about 6 months back but ended up deciding against it. Mainly for the reason Toby mentioned about user uploaded content and 2257 worries.

Anyhow, they don't have to type in your url, you can embed a linked watermark to your site just like the youtube guys. So if they click on that watermark, it'll pop a new window sending em your way. The only benefit I can really see is I believe it would be a good way to gain traffic, but then again I am betting most them aren't going to buy porn anyways. But, I don't know..

I voted NO.

you guys are a bunch of hypocrytes

I have seen so many webmasters defend porn by claiming free speech but now that their income could be threatened free speech doesn't matter so much

to much free porn is no good for the business but of course those very same webmasters are putting porn on the web for free.
but of course they are putting out just the right amount of free porn, so its ok


ohh and lets not forget the copyright BS
that's like telling Ford they cant build cars cause some of them might be used as get away cars to rob banks

you would starve technical innovation and progress because somebody might violate a copyright. what if they said that about the Internet as whole back in 1995

99.9 percent of adult content owners never bother to file any copyrights

I don't think you would even need your own content Greenie. The surfers upload their videos, but when they embed the movie player onto their other pages or share them, then your watermark/logo is linked back to your site anyhow.

Which is why i worried about user uploaded content and 2257 as Toby stated.

You're missing the point - we all know it has legit uses.

What I'm trying to see is that if my feelings are the same as most of the people on this board (aka community) as far as not supporting it.

Understanding something is completely different than supporting it & I find it really hard to understand how you could support something that would teach surfers that they don't need Link Lists or TGPs, seeing as you own one of the biggest out there.

Technically, that's a secondary issue & not really a major concern of anyone that doesn't own the copyright's. The very legit versions of these that (claim) do not allow copyrighted material to be posted unless you own the copyright.

So in a world where all the content has permission to be posted, that would bring us back to my main point :)

I know it's only about 2.5 hours into the thread, but I am happy to see the 1/17/1 vote so far :)

I am not missing the point. I really think you are

you don't like it cause it might cost you some money

the company's that sold pay phones said the same thing about cell phones they were wrong then and you are wrong now

millions of companies or people have been put out of work because of progress should we have banned computers back in the 70s or ban robots today

just cause I make my living from a link list doesn't mean I am gonna turn myself into a hypocrite

so basically your argument is
my free porn is OK but theirs isn't cause I make less money

I support FLV and video stream as a solution replacing video download, which is the format most of the Tube sites use.

I personally use some of those sites to put automated content on my pages allowing people to directly stream the content off there.

However, I do not support full length videos to be posted on such sites, which one of the common practices at Bad Jojo for example. There're clips with over 5 minutes of play time as well as full length videos split into several parts - that way the distribution method becomes no different than warez, P2P, torrents, etc.

If done correctly to the webmaster community I see no offense in this kind of sites. I personally think that PornoTube may be quite useful for skillful webmasters in order to bring new traffic to their sites or help add new content to their existing pages.

One of the things I like about Tube sites is that you can create FLV content for your pages, but if you publish it on a Tube site you get free hosting (if you'd rather link to a remotely hosted video) and extra exposure from the site's visitors.

There's and there will be more than enough free content. However, I don't think it matters nowdays. Savvy people have their ways to get full-length videos without paying - there're more than enough pass sites and mIRC channels out there for the looking, not to mention everything else.

Tube sites are just another version to display free content. From my POV it's the more advanced and up-to-day method to do it and I think that most of the users would prefer it, instead of browsing differently looking, unstandartisized pages. Not to mention the community features of that kind of sites, which IMHO seriously lacks on TGP and LinkList sites.

I jerk off quite a lot to know that it's much better to go and click 2 times to watch a video, that's going to start immediately and even if it's only 2 mins long it's much better than going thru tens of pages to find something fitting my needs :)

I don't see tube sites as progress. There is nothing new about the way in which they stream video. Hell, it's not even a good business model. Everything I've heard is that the ROI is very low and that dealing with the barrage of copyright and other legal issues is a huge pain in the balls.

I think most of us are anti-tube for the same reason we are against free sites with 1k pics on them. We should, as a community, have some type of barometer of how much free porn is too much compared to the amount of advertising the surfer must confront.

Also let me add a few other points before I go:

1. SE traffic is not built by hosting videos
2. The traffic quality of TGPs is MOSTLY low
3. All of us expose the surfers to huge amounts of free content
4. Most people don't know what FLV is, nor how to save it on their PCs, but all galleries and free sites allow you to download the files on your PC
5. Tube sites are mostly filled with freeloaders

What I'm saying is - it's the same thing. The difference is in the technology used to get the content to the surfers and like it or not - Tube sites are more up to date than TGPs and LLs.

The thruth is in between, never in the ends. Some would say it's in the gray spectrum :)

True, but who cares about tons of videos when after watching 5 crappy video one after another you just close the site and move on to the next one. Peope who are serious porn buyers care about the quality of delivered free porn, not the amounts. IMHO it's always like that, no matter the industry.

I realize what surfers prefer to have. ;) But we're supposed to convince them to pay to get the higher quality, not give it to them so they have no motivation to purchase. We give them lower quality samples, plenty of advertising, and tell them to join if they want the full-sized, full length, crystal clear, hi-def whatevers.

I understand what you are saying about TGPs and Link Lists compared to the tube sites. TGPs and Link Lists have been a very static model for quite awhile, but I'd vastly prefer see them evolve, and I think there is room for that, rather than seeing tubes handing out buckets of video clips without having the proper advertising:content ratio.

Fuck I lost the message by clicking on the back button by mistake. So again...

IMHO in 90% of the time there're 3 types of buyers:

1. Noobs - that have no previous buying experience
2. Savvy buyers - looking for serious support of the product they're buying
3. Dedicated surfers - these're the people bookmarking your sites

The last 2 types are what I'd refer to as quality traffic and both of them require content quality, not quantity.

Buyers are not interested in free porn. They need sources to find what's worth watching and what's not. They hold account of the time they spend looking for quality, which is why they usually stick to using a bunch of selected and verified sources, instead of browsing tons of free galleries.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, I certainly don't think that I know everything and I would greatly appreciate any correction if required.

No, for the love of |buddy| I'm saying that I don't SUPPORT it. While I understand it & I see how it could be valuable to some people, that does not mean that I have to support it.

Based on all the examples you're posted, do you think that the companies that had the old technology helped/supported the new technology?

If you want to support it, go nuts. When someone figures out how to attach an affiliate program to it (and they will) make sure you sign up & put a big banner on the index & main pages of your site. Here's the text you can use under it:
Don't bother surfing these free sites & galleries! Click Here for all the free porn movies you can handle! And then delete all your bookmarks, including this one, because my site sucks compared to the free movies you'll get at Free-Video-Site

My site dont suck |bananna|

in fact i have always thought its like the best out there :D

nobody puts up more movie links in a day then I do
http://www.tommys-bookmarks.com/movie.shtml

just scroll through the new section

in fact i bet you could lump a bunch of LLs or tgps together and I would still be putting up more movie links

Tommy, what is the maximum length of a movie clip you will accept? I think that is the biggest difference. You can have a ton of movies as long as they are short enough to make a surfer want more.

LOL!

I'm from Bulgaria, a country from the Ex-Soviet Block. I haven't lived enough under communism to argue about it, but I do know that this thread reminds me a lot about it.

it dont take much to see if those sites grow and spawn new sites that it's gonna kill us affiliates

its bad enough we gotta post free porn to generate traffic

now we have to compete with a tube site that has people giving away more porn for the hell of it...

ratios are bad enough anymore, and if you do find a good site that converts good it don't last its getting harder and harder to see sales anymore

how would a big traffic site like tommys and the hun would "like" to loose half there traffic cause those tube sites have grown and spawned and have clips 8 to 15 min long....those tube sites would have some serious hosting bill but they would have tons of traffic to sell spots and have ads to and rake in the bucks for the owners

then all of the 1000s of people like us suffer with worse ratios and lower traffic cause we cant compete with them

also you could say those tube site surfers are freeloaders??

how many surfers come to our sites and say to themselfs "today I am gonna join a site" hardly any but a good site sells the surfer a membership

those tube sites are just another way to loose sales and traffic to the big money people that put those sites up!!! you think the guys that put up youtube and porntube were poor, they had money and backing imo

You're sorta helping to prove my point :) You income model is linking to your own galleries/free sites as well as those of other webmasters. How does that fit into what I think we will now refer to as "tube sites"?

(and your site doesn't suck - I tell friends to go there instead if mine :D)

I voted yes, I support porn, competition or not, the only porn I would ever not support involves underage stuff...

all they are doing is giving away better free porn than we are via a different business model, it might piss you off but that is what they are doing.

it's already been concluded that they have a right to exist, so as an adult webmaster community should we only support our own exact way of adult webmastering, and only when we don't think it will harm our bank accounts?

full file sharing among surfers isn't new by any means, it is just getting easier for them to share their collections now, and better some tube sites run by people in the industry than P2P sharing that is spreading viruses and malware all over the world and underground file sharing sites where all the illegal stuff gets mixed in with all of our legal stuff and BAM! the adult industry is a bunch of dirty CP pushing scumbags... it doesn't matter where the porn comes from, it matters where it ends up because we get the blame for all of it and any outlet that can be policed by the industry is a good one IMO

I think if an adult tube type site got as popular as "you tube", it could draw more negative publicity to our industry. Then we have congressmen trying to pass new laws and it all ends up in the courts again. This industry has more than it's share of legal battles. No need to throw gas on the fire.

It's the surfer upload part that I have issue with. Regardless of whether the site is "controlled" by "people in the industry" or not. Due to the sheer numbers there is simply no way to effectively police all of that content.

so we should openly ridicule everybody involved with tube porn on GG&Jim then??? just because they have a different business model?

this isn't about whether you like/dislike tube sites, it's about running off people who came to this community looking for help...

one person asked about a script for sharing, you could do alot of cool things with a script like that and who knows wtf they were gonna do with it, and why shouldn't they be able to find a script?

somebody asked about advertising for a tube site, and XXXJay posted here because he probably knows that this isn't just a LL/TGP board and that some people here who own/run programs and sites might want a different source of traffic...

which part of that should they be run off for, what am I missing? feel free to hate tube sites into the ground if you want but why hate on the people just for being associated with them in some way, shape, or form, hell even just asking about them? I hate "porn blogs" to no end but I don't treat people that blog, or in this industry make what i call "lie logs" to attract surfers...

I guess maybe GG needs to elaborate on what he means by support, send them free traffic and links, no, treat people who like or use them bad simply for that fact, well I vote no to that too....

As long as there is lots of gagging and abuse.... I am all for it! |thumb|

DD

Well, yes. This isn't a chamber of commerce. ;)

Not that it's an accurate gauge, but go look at pornotube.com on Alexa - it's already very popular.

That's their problem (and hopefully the police it enough so that they don't get sued)

After I read you're 1st post, I realized that "support" has more than one meaning.

Of course I support their right to do it, but I will not support them by helping to find scripts or ads or programs that might want to use it.

Why would I (and 75% of the board members that voted) want to help/assist a concept that would negatively effect our current business models?

Amen brother.