AFFILIATE SEARCH | Shop Amazon.co.uk using this search bar and support WHO!
New WHO | Site Feedback
Forum rules
Whilst 'off-topic' means all non-football topics can be discussed. This is not a free for all. Rights to this area of the forum aren't implicit, and illegal, defamator, spammy or absuive topics will be removed, with the protagonist's sanctioned.
Whilst 'off-topic' means all non-football topics can be discussed. This is not a free for all. Rights to this area of the forum aren't implicit, and illegal, defamator, spammy or absuive topics will be removed, with the protagonist's sanctioned.
Re: New WHO | Site Feedback
Thanks for the feedback, It's all very useful.
Re the ads. The side bar ads might actually generate more. My view was the pop ups on the top/bottom were less intrusive than side bars so I went with those. If general opinion is that adverts in the side bar were less annoying I can switch to those on the desktop version at least. I think it might be a big ugly though? Happy to hear what the consensus is though.
Re the ads. The side bar ads might actually generate more. My view was the pop ups on the top/bottom were less intrusive than side bars so I went with those. If general opinion is that adverts in the side bar were less annoying I can switch to those on the desktop version at least. I think it might be a big ugly though? Happy to hear what the consensus is though.
- stubbo-admin
- Posts: 956
- Old WHO Number: 12009
- Has liked: 226 times
- Been liked: 442 times
Re: New WHO | Site Feedback
iphammer wrote: ↑15 Sep 2024, 20:54 New site is looking good. You've done a great job
A few things I will say is these Google ad popups are a bit annoying can't you use banner ads in the sidebar instead of the header and footer sections?
Have you considered using the affiliate program to monetize this site? Google search whufc affiliate program looks like there's a program for the club shop that you could use on here.
Also when trying to send direct mail the auto username search function doesn't work for me if I type in a username ie if I type in stub there are no options that show up to choose from I have to type the full username in and hope the message arrives to the user.
To find a member click on the 'Find a User's link above the name entry box in direct message....you'll get a window to search username. It should give you 'type to find' on username, or you can use wildcard (e.g. stub*) and search....once found choose 'select user'.
Wils is the Google Ads man...we'll see what our options are...North Bank is looking at options with a contact if his...we're trying with the Amazon Affiliate approach to avoid being too intrusive...but as with any affiliate scheme if no one buys from it doesn't make you anything and we need to cover costs...the idea with the Amazon link is whilst it only makes 1% if we could get users supporting NT us by using it when going to Amazon, it doesn't need to change their shopping habits but does us a favour....Google Ads is currently the most guaranteed way of achieving the income needed to cover costs. But we're still looking at options.
Appreciate the feedback.
Wils is the Google Ads man...we'll see what our options are...North Bank is looking at options with a contact if his...we're trying with the Amazon Affiliate approach to avoid being too intrusive...but as with any affiliate scheme if no one buys from it doesn't make you anything and we need to cover costs...the idea with the Amazon link is whilst it only makes 1% if we could get users supporting NT us by using it when going to Amazon, it doesn't need to change their shopping habits but does us a favour....Google Ads is currently the most guaranteed way of achieving the income needed to cover costs. But we're still looking at options.
Appreciate the feedback.
- Hammer and Pickle
- Posts: 4006
- Old WHO Number: 211190
- Has liked: 99 times
- Been liked: 133 times
Re: New WHO | Site Feedback
Just click on my profile name and then add me as a foe. That’s your ignore function.
I’m always here to help.
I’m always here to help.
Re: New WHO | Site Feedback
New site is looking good. You've done a great job 
A few things I will say is these Google ad popups are a bit annoying can't you use banner ads in the sidebar instead of the header and footer sections?
Have you considered using the affiliate program to monetize this site? Google search whufc affiliate program looks like there's a program for the club shop that you could use on here.
Also when trying to send direct mail the auto username search function doesn't work for me if I type in a username ie if I type in stub there are no options that show up to choose from I have to type the full username in and hope the message arrives to the user.
A few things I will say is these Google ad popups are a bit annoying can't you use banner ads in the sidebar instead of the header and footer sections?
Have you considered using the affiliate program to monetize this site? Google search whufc affiliate program looks like there's a program for the club shop that you could use on here.
Also when trying to send direct mail the auto username search function doesn't work for me if I type in a username ie if I type in stub there are no options that show up to choose from I have to type the full username in and hope the message arrives to the user.
- stubbo-admin
- Posts: 956
- Old WHO Number: 12009
- Has liked: 226 times
- Been liked: 442 times
Re: New WHO | Site Feedback
SurfaceAgentX2Zero wrote: ↑15 Sep 2024, 09:42 I know I've mentioned it before and I understand the reasons you gave for disagreeing with my suggestion.
However, I honestly think that, given the reasons you gave, we'd be better off without the WHO News panel at all.
It consists almost entirely of Hammers News items and basically he's a prolific and spammy, click-bait cսnt whose blatant profiteering and lack of any actual insight is obvious to all. His lurid headlines lead to rehashed press articles of no substance whatsoever. I actually object to this site unintentionally helping this prick out. Also, the attempt that site makes to get hold of all your cookies is close to, if not actually illegal. You have to be very careful not to give it permissions - I think they are legally obliged to default to essential cookies only, you're supposed to opt in, not out.
Rant over.
Better?
- WHU(Exeter)
- Posts: 1312
- Old WHO Number: 13669
- Has liked: 75 times
- Been liked: 127 times
- Hammer and Pickle
- Posts: 4006
- Old WHO Number: 211190
- Has liked: 99 times
- Been liked: 133 times
Re: New WHO | Site Feedback
I believe double posting was only a thing on the old site because it was so slow, Gank.
Would you like this site to be half useless for everyone just on my behalf? Or was that some kind of especially hapless attempt at humour?
Would you like this site to be half useless for everyone just on my behalf? Or was that some kind of especially hapless attempt at humour?
- stubbo-admin
- Posts: 956
- Old WHO Number: 12009
- Has liked: 226 times
- Been liked: 442 times
Re: New WHO | Site Feedback
I'll investigate if I can get a meaningful alternative up and running this week...even "good" services like NewsNow include them though. Agree with the clickbait view on it. Claret and Hugh are frankly the same now too.
- SurfaceAgentX2Zero
- Posts: 630
- Old WHO Number: 214126
- Has liked: 87 times
- Been liked: 146 times
Re: New WHO | Site Feedback
I know I've mentioned it before and I understand the reasons you gave for disagreeing with my suggestion.
However, I honestly think that, given the reasons you gave, we'd be better off without the WHO News panel at all.
It consists almost entirely of Hammers News items and basically he's a prolific and spammy, click-bait cսnt whose blatant profiteering and lack of any actual insight is obvious to all. His lurid headlines lead to rehashed press articles of no substance whatsoever. I actually object to this site unintentionally helping this prick out. Also, the attempt that site makes to get hold of all your cookies is close to, if not actually illegal. You have to be very careful not to give it permissions - I think they are legally obliged to default to essential cookies only, you're supposed to opt in, not out.
Rant over.
However, I honestly think that, given the reasons you gave, we'd be better off without the WHO News panel at all.
It consists almost entirely of Hammers News items and basically he's a prolific and spammy, click-bait cսnt whose blatant profiteering and lack of any actual insight is obvious to all. His lurid headlines lead to rehashed press articles of no substance whatsoever. I actually object to this site unintentionally helping this prick out. Also, the attempt that site makes to get hold of all your cookies is close to, if not actually illegal. You have to be very careful not to give it permissions - I think they are legally obliged to default to essential cookies only, you're supposed to opt in, not out.
Rant over.
Re: New WHO | Site Feedback
Can we have one RIP thread pinned and every day the nerd cunts who love this shit can post faux-solemn condolences to the latest obscure musician to have died?
Bring back accidental double-posting but only activate it for spastics like H&P to further enhance their “figure of fun” status.
Bring back accidental double-posting but only activate it for spastics like H&P to further enhance their “figure of fun” status.
- Mike Oxsaw
- Posts: 3967
- Location: Flip between Belvedere & Buri Ram and anywhere else I fancy, just because I can.
- Old WHO Number: 14021
- Has liked: 16 times
- Been liked: 394 times
- stubbo-admin
- Posts: 956
- Old WHO Number: 12009
- Has liked: 226 times
- Been liked: 442 times
Re: New WHO | Site Feedback
Mex Martillo" wrote: ↑14 Sep 2024, 12:15 Hello,
I find this likes thing a bit gay. Can we change it to something more appropriate, like "you cսnt"?
I can change the verbage if we can come up with something a bit more 'WHO' that makes sense instead of Like/Likes.
- Mex Martillo
- Posts: 1444
- Location: Catalonia
- Old WHO Number: 11796
- Has liked: 134 times
- Been liked: 175 times
Re: New WHO | Site Feedback
Hello,
I find this likes thing a bit gay. Can we change it to something more appropriate, like "you cսnt"?
I find this likes thing a bit gay. Can we change it to something more appropriate, like "you cսnt"?
-
- Posts: 194
- Old WHO Number: 212340
- Has liked: 11 times
- Been liked: 18 times
Re: New WHO | Site Feedback
Thanks for sorting out the new site and the prompt login help.
Hopefully this puts some life back in the old beast
Hopefully this puts some life back in the old beast
- stubbo-admin
- Posts: 956
- Old WHO Number: 12009
- Has liked: 226 times
- Been liked: 442 times
Re: New WHO | Site Feedback
Come On You Irons" wrote: ↑13 Sep 2024, 12:27stubbo-admin wrote: ↑12 Sep 2024, 18:31 I *may* have a solution to filtering to view 'Off Topic', 'Football' or 'All'. Have spent two days developing it with ChatGPT as a 'Partner'.
The trade off is an icon (representing Football or Off Topic) will be placed before the Thread Title (and you'll be able to filter them away).
You'll identify which type it is when creating a new thread (I'll go back and add it to old threads). Or we could just add the icon to football threads, so you can filter to view all or just Football.
What's the consensus on whether this is needed or not?
Screenshot_20240912_183329_Chrome~2.jpg
Screenshot_20240912_183517_Chrome~2.jpgI don't like it. It would add more clutter to an already cluttered UI. There is no need for a 'football icon' to denote football related threads in my opinion.
I tend to agree. Think I've found a way to do it without needing to add the icon...just classify when the post is made and no visible indicator, but with the filter option to filter the posts displayed (so no more clutter, but with the extra functionality of thread filtering).
-
- Posts: 675
- Old WHO Number: 304394
- Has liked: 20 times
- Been liked: 73 times
Re: New WHO | Site Feedback
stubbo-admin wrote: ↑12 Sep 2024, 18:31 I *may* have a solution to filtering to view 'Off Topic', 'Football' or 'All'. Have spent two days developing it with ChatGPT as a 'Partner'.
The trade off is an icon (representing Football or Off Topic) will be placed before the Thread Title (and you'll be able to filter them away).
You'll identify which type it is when creating a new thread (I'll go back and add it to old threads). Or we could just add the icon to football threads, so you can filter to view all or just Football.
What's the consensus on whether this is needed or not?
Screenshot_20240912_183329_Chrome~2.jpg
Screenshot_20240912_183517_Chrome~2.jpg
I don't like it. It would add more clutter to an already cluttered UI. There is no need for a 'football icon' to denote football related threads in my opinion.
- Lee Trundle
- Posts: 3085
- Old WHO Number: 33318
- Been liked: 439 times
Re: New WHO | Site Feedback
stubbo-admin wrote: ↑12 Sep 2024, 18:31 I *may* have a solution to filtering to view 'Off Topic', 'Football' or 'All'. Have spent two days developing it with ChatGPT as a 'Partner'.
The trade off is an icon (representing Football or Off Topic) will be placed before the Thread Title (and you'll be able to filter them away).
You'll identify which type it is when creating a new thread (I'll go back and add it to old threads). Or we could just add the icon to football threads, so you can filter to view all or just Football.
What's the consensus on whether this is needed or not?
Screenshot_20240912_183329_Chrome~2.jpg
Screenshot_20240912_183517_Chrome~2.jpg
I think that could work. I never used to filter anything (football/off topic) on the old site, so I might not be the best person to give advice though.
-
- Posts: 1
Re: New WHO | Site Feedback
Shut the fuck up Vexed you angry old dirty bald impotent virgin nonce cսnt
- stubbo-admin
- Posts: 956
- Old WHO Number: 12009
- Has liked: 226 times
- Been liked: 442 times
Re: New WHO | Site Feedback
I *may* have a solution to filtering to view 'Off Topic', 'Football' or 'All'. Have spent two days developing it with ChatGPT as a 'Partner'.
The trade off is an icon (representing Football or Off Topic) will be placed before the Thread Title (and you'll be able to filter them away).
You'll identify which type it is when creating a new thread (I'll go back and add it to old threads). Or we could just add the icon to football threads, so you can filter to view all or just Football.
What's the consensus on whether this is needed or not?
The trade off is an icon (representing Football or Off Topic) will be placed before the Thread Title (and you'll be able to filter them away).
You'll identify which type it is when creating a new thread (I'll go back and add it to old threads). Or we could just add the icon to football threads, so you can filter to view all or just Football.
What's the consensus on whether this is needed or not?
-
- Posts: 271
- Old WHO Number: 17239
- Has liked: 56 times
- Been liked: 32 times
- stubbo-admin
- Posts: 956
- Old WHO Number: 12009
- Has liked: 226 times
- Been liked: 442 times
Re: New WHO | Site Feedback
Jonah Lomas" wrote: ↑12 Sep 2024, 10:12 This is a great addition.
The Biden thread only has about 20 posts visible for me now!
My God the constant bickering and point scoring is tiresome.
Ha, I've not tried out that function at all as of yet, but good to see someone found it working 
