Warning page
 

What should be or not on a Warning page ?


The reason i'm asking this is becayse many webmaster and myself put ad's banners ect.. on are waring page right! Alot times not even thinking about it we but shit that has tits ass pussy showing and dont even think about it..

but on the other hand we should not be putting this stuff on are warning page
even are home page not just free sites true?


just thought i would see what other webmaster thought's are on this
later wishmaster

In theory, a warning page should be just a warning.

In reality, because the warning page is where the traffic is going, the temptation is to turn into an ad page.

My solution is to try to make the warning part of the page come early (near the top) and to make the warning clear to see.

Beyond that, well, it is porn.

Alex

I just avoid using banners and hpa's with hardcore content on my warning pages.

I think there are two type of warning pages. One for paysites and one for traffic building sites. My warning pages for my paysites are just that, warning pages. No porno on them at all, or else i would not have been able to process credit cards.
For the traffic building sites I still keep my warning pages clean. I don't want to give any porno hater extra ammo if I was to have some legal trouble. Most of the seasoned surfers know what it is and know to click threw it asap, so I don't really know if any ads on those pages would be worth it. I think the average surfer sees the warning pages and instantly looks for the enter button and nothing else.

I'd have to disagree with ya there Jugg.

From my own free sites, well over half my sales were from the warning page. That page is your first shot at convincing the surfer the paysite you're promoting has exactly what he's NEEDS :D

However, I do still treat it as a warning page. No hardcore images at all...not on banners...not on recips...none. Text is something else entirely...I'll get nasty in text...but no hardcore images.

If they dont' bite on the warning page...then I'll hit em with some hardcore images on the main page. Which by the way...is number 2 as far as where sales come from |thumb

psssssst, I make a fair number of sales every month from the "R-rated" HPA's on my warning pages.

Why even call it a "Warning" page? It's a doorway. Either to galleries or sponser pages. The actual warning is usually (not always) in a scrolling text area existing only as a feeble CYA device.

As with any marketing site the landing page is critical in terms of visitor retention and sales.

By the way MrYum my 8 yr old Granddaughter can read as well as view pictures. :)

It's called a warning page because that's what's been deduced as the best model for free sites...at least for now...and has been for some time. Yes, it is a feeble attempt at cya...but it IS an attempt nonetheless.

Good...I'm glad she can read at that age. I'd also hope that she's either supervised when online...or filters are installed...or better still..BOTH. But, while she may indeed be able to stop and read the text on the 'warning page' of my sites. She won't be seeing any hardcore images to ask questions about :)

To me...text requires one to actually sit there and read it. Whereas images are immediately IN YOUR FACE....there's no chance to bail out when the surfer realizes it's an adult site...the picture is there. At least with text...the surfer has to make a decision to READ it.

Don't take my post as personel MrYum. That was not my intention and if you felt that it was I sincerely apologize.

And yes, supervision and browser filters need to be implemented in every household it applies to. Filtering has 2 edges like any other sword. It's our 1st choice because there is no 2nd choice. Most filtering also causes the loss (indirectly) of web sites that are not harmful. That makes it tough for kids to use the internet as an effective educational tool.

And yes, the warning/landing/splash page is critical. If you can't reach out and grab the surfer with 'above the fold' (@800x600) 'hooks' then they are lost and gone forever.

Again, no offense intended MrYum |huh

later ............ Larry

I don't think there should be any obscene visuals wishmaster. The "Warning" pages we do are very 'plain Jane' and non-descript in nature. Some LLs are very firm on not showing visual obscenities and others don't seem to care one way or another. Let your personel constitution be your guide I guess!

By the way. If you look at one of the sites you listed for us MrYum you'll see that we have similar thoughts, in theory anyway.

www[dot]grrl-porn.com/free/bj-race-a/index.html

No offense was taken by your post Larry...not at all. If my response came across that way, my turn to apologize |cheers|

The subject of warning pages comes up from time to time. I know many link sites don't mind hardcore on the page...some do...I'm in the latter group for reasons previously mentioned. For now, this is the model we use...that very well may change at some point in the future. But, at least we can try to show some modicum of responsibility with the current model...jmho of course :)

I remember that site! Chuckled when I saw it...nice to see someone going a bit outside the box...while still remaining true to the rules |thumb

Interesting thread :)

How does any surfer arrive at your warning page? For freesites it's through a link from a porn site, or a link from a search engine whereby the surfer has searched for porn. I'd be amazed if anyone is getting traffic from a SE to a freesite using non-adult searches, unless they were specifically aiming to trick people that are searching for knitting patterns into clicking a porn link - not exactly a productive use of one's time.

You're exactly right jel. If someone SEO's there little 4 page FS correctly there is basically no SE fodder on the index. If anything, the gallery and/or main page will pull the SERP's completely skirting the index/warning page.

And yes, if the page is stuffed with irrelevant content/keywords the whole search is skewed.

Cheaters abound .............

By the way MrYum, Yeah, that site you listed was SEO'd to the max and designed for the 'Big 3' Link Lists (YaHoo-Google-MSN Search) But, reason is, everything we do is aimed at long-term residual income.

I never hear that mentioned in FS dialogue. As a matter of fact many of the freesites I come across in old threads are gone in 3-4-5 months.404

So are many of the new WMs gone, it seems to be a 'swinging door' in the adult arena, by that I mean new players nearly everyday. Not only are so many new to adult but new to internet marketing period.

later .........

thank's for ever one thought's ...
glade i'm not the only one that thinks this way about this matter


some time i read a-lt want to put my input in but i just keep it to myself lol as in sure many of us do ...
welll thanks agina
alll of you for your input on this matter|thumb

later wishmaster

Well, this brings up the elephant in the room that anti-porner "protect the children" types either ignore or deliberately confuse.

There is a major difference between 1.) an 8-year-old searching Yahoo for "Barbie" or "Cinderella" that get hit with a faceful of cumshot images, and 2.) a 16-year-old boy who is actively searching for porn images.

The first group should have legitimate protections in place, such as parental filters, non-explicit warning pages, etc. The latter group - well, that's the immutable law of supply and demand, and the idea that someone needs protection from something that they are already knowledgeable enough to be actively seeking out is laughable.

Of course the anti-porners bring up the first example when what they really want to do is stop their horny teenagers from finding jerkoff material. I agree we have a responsibility to do what we can to discourage the teens, if for no other reason then the fact that they are non-paying bandwidth wasters. But we all know a "warning page" isn't gonna stop the teen boy horndogs.

I'm paranoid. Ask yourself what it should be if you're dragged into court on obsenity charges.

---art

Obscenity is a whole other issue, that has nothing to do with warning pages. If some prosecutor wants to make the case that images on a website are obscene, he'll be going after the images on the whole site, and a warning page will be utterly irrelevant, since images ruled "obscene" are illegal to display to adults as well.

I hope you discovered what you were after wishmaster :D

There are certainly several opinions expressed in this thread and everyone seems to have valid points.

later ...........

I try to avoid hardcore on warning pages. I sometimes even create my own banners using pictures from the site, to avoid hardcore. Tits are ok, IMHO, but that's where it stops.

Exactly. I even asked one of my sponsors to produce non-hardcore banners and they complied. :D

I have to agree as well,
I may show part of a tit or, one girl touching another through clothing,
but I don't put hardcore on a warning / landing type page.
Hardcore being intercourse, showing pink, even a dick for that matter.

But as Mr.Yum pointed out,
I too do use enticing text on a warning page.

Ben

yes i got what i was looking for just wanted to ssee what others thoughts was :D

all the adult industry attorneys i've talked to feel that there are certain things that should be on a warning page - none of those things being pussy or cock ;)

the theory is if you end up in hot water because minors saw your porn, you can show that you really are making an effort to keep them out if you have a warning page.

I'm not convinced sub-minature text in a scrunched down scrolling textarea would be viewed as "making an effort".