Top Mud Sites Forum - View Single Post

prof1515 · 12-25-2005, 07:35 PM

Advertising is about getting people to buy something they don't want and could probably get better elsewhere. I'm sure that's applicable in this case. If so, the idea is to present the best possible image of the product, not leave those viewing the advertisement questioning the quality of what's being hocked.

How long's the ad been up and how many ads have you had for the MUD? It's probably been up for a while and if it really worked, I'd have noticed it earlier. I didn't, because I didn't bother with the ad. So, no it wasn't effective, at least not with me. It was humorous though because it showed a high-profile example of the lack of quality advertising done to promote most MUDs and gave me a nice lead-in to a post I was already going to make regardless.

I understand advertising, I'm just not feeble-minded enough to fall for it. I question everything and my first rule when looking at any advertisement (if I do at all) is to assume that everything presented is false. However, when you see a typo like that, it's even more telling because advertising is about setting up an illusion. If the reality of poor quality makes it through what is supposed to be a carefully-constructed attempt at propaganda, it says volumes about the lack of quality inherent in the product.

I highly doubt 1% of the people that have seen the ad were influenced, especially not influenced positively, by the typo. All it really says is that the guys over at nuklearpower.com can't spell. If they charged you for such poor quality and you honestly believe that the typo has been noticed by people other than me, you should demand a refund because I doubt many people see a typo and say, "Now, I want that kind of quality!" If so, wouldn't it stand to reason that all the typo-laden, amateurish posts in the advertising forums would trump the much higher-quality (excepting the "duely" ad, IRE's ads are high-quality attempts, I do not dispute that) banner ads. They don't though because the implication is that the more unprofessional an ad, the more likely that the same could be said about the MUD.

Take care,

Jason

12-25-2005, 07:35 PM	#4
prof1515 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Illinois Posts: 791	Advertising is about getting people to buy something they don't want and could probably get better elsewhere. I'm sure that's applicable in this case. If so, the idea is to present the best possible image of the product, not leave those viewing the advertisement questioning the quality of what's being hocked. How long's the ad been up and how many ads have you had for the MUD? It's probably been up for a while and if it really worked, I'd have noticed it earlier. I didn't, because I didn't bother with the ad. So, no it wasn't effective, at least not with me. It was humorous though because it showed a high-profile example of the lack of quality advertising done to promote most MUDs and gave me a nice lead-in to a post I was already going to make regardless. I understand advertising, I'm just not feeble-minded enough to fall for it. I question everything and my first rule when looking at any advertisement (if I do at all) is to assume that everything presented is false. However, when you see a typo like that, it's even more telling because advertising is about setting up an illusion. If the reality of poor quality makes it through what is supposed to be a carefully-constructed attempt at propaganda, it says volumes about the lack of quality inherent in the product. I highly doubt 1% of the people that have seen the ad were influenced, especially not influenced positively, by the typo. All it really says is that the guys over at nuklearpower.com can't spell. If they charged you for such poor quality and you honestly believe that the typo has been noticed by people other than me, you should demand a refund because I doubt many people see a typo and say, "Now, I want that kind of quality!" If so, wouldn't it stand to reason that all the typo-laden, amateurish posts in the advertising forums would trump the much higher-quality (excepting the "duely" ad, IRE's ads are high-quality attempts, I do not dispute that) banner ads. They don't though because the implication is that the more unprofessional an ad, the more likely that the same could be said about the MUD. Take care, Jason