How do ads fit into your idea of the yesterweb/web 1.0?

[Memory]

In some way, any kind of linking to something else, especially if you made that yourself, is an advertisement. The only thing that differs between, say, a website link here on Melonland or a 88x31 badge to your website, and an ad, is the shape.

If they are reproducing the visual style of really old web 1.0 banner ads in a (semi-)ironic way I actually love them very much.

I'd actually like to make some more cool retro ads; but for indie stuff!

[Kallistero]

I think ads are better done in real life, where they're presented either at the point of purchase (where people would WANT to engage with it) or during transit between things they're doing (where people aren't engaging with other things).

However, imagine walking into a grocery store, and every time you walk into an aisle, there's a holding cell between the outside of the aisle and the inside of the aisle, where that holding cell doesn't let you into the grocery aisle until after it's shown you an advertisement. You could also imagine reaching for some cereal, only to have a tiny little billboard come down and block your hand from grabbing the thing you're trying to get. That's basically what makes an ad unacceptable in real life: it's getting in the way of the experience that's meant to be provided for you. That shouldn't be acceptable on the Web, either!   

Where Internet ads have gone wrong isn't really the ad itself; it's that, from a customer/user standpoint, they've been put where they don't belong. There's definitely space for ads, either in the voids between other spaces or in places where people are actively engaging with whatever the ads provide. Finding a games site through an ad on another games site, finding a punk clothing site ad on a site about punk aesthetics, or finding a PC-building website ad on a site where you're purchasing a new computer part, these are all more than acceptable, even being appreciated.

That probably would've been the good future for ads, to have every advertisement put exactly where it belongs. It can add to (rather than just distracting from) whatever your site provides, it's more cost-effective for the advertiser when people who come to your site are more likely to click, and it gives the site owner more direction & discretion when it comes to choosing ad partners. This is actually how a lot of ads are and were done, too! It's a strategy that makes business sense and has the potential to make design sense, as well. When an advertisement can genuinely add to the experience or service that a site provides, that is the place where it fits. Just be mindful that it doesn't go the other way around, where the site is meant to enhance the ad instead. That's the line where it goes against the spirit of personal creativity. One doesn't need to follow from the other, but when it does, that's when the site taints its quality.   

[aketawi]

i really really enjoy the idea of "mock ads" which could link to other people's pages or to other cool places on the internet. the biggest thing i've come across that does that is johnvertisements, which is kind of an abstract take on ads and webrings.

i also recall seeing this kind of advert on someone's personal page, but i cannot recall who that was. if anyone remembers a homepage where you could draw with your mouse right on top of it, and people visiting at the same time also saw it, i believe that's the same one that had a couple mock ads for the webmaster's friends.

[Turboblack]

I have a very negative attitude towards advertising.
besides, if you sell yourself for 30 pieces of silver, think logically, advertisers will buy a banner display if you have at least 1000 hosts per day. How much will you earn for such a deal, five bucks? Okay, let's say you are very popular, and you have 10,000 hosts per day, 50 dollars seems like a good income, considering that it will be 1500 per month. But I have not seen such popular personal pages on the small web
and if you have about a hundred visitors, what's the point? Why smear it with dirt?

[candycanearter07]

I personally really enjoy both the cheesy ads from the past, and the fake personal site ads in stuff like neolinks and navlinks are really charming!

[Corrupted Unicorn]

They don't.

I get it, ad space is and was a big thing back then, but these are personal sites, right? I understand linking to other sites you like, or, if you're running a retro game site, linking to other sites with similar interests... ads for retro consoles/games? Kind of toeing the line...

I don't even like fake ads people put on their sites (like Boodlebox). I get it, it's an aesthetic thing, and I even have one old ad on my site just for fun, but... I have more than enough ads all around me at all times and I'd rather have my site to be as ad-free as possible.

[Slix]

I agree that they don't really fit into the idea of the "yesterweb" as a concept. Not everything has to be monetized.

However, for myself at least, I have had (very small amount and unobtrusive) Google ads on my site for a while now, because running a server costs money, and for a while, I barely had enough money to fix my car to get to work, let alone pay 100-some dollars a year for my site. Full discloser, because of the nature of my site (few users browsing repeatedly throughout the day, rarely clicking on those ads), I end up only getting a few dollars a month, which doesn't even cover the cost of the server per year. I do let users hide some of those ads, for their convenience, because I also don't like seeing a ton of ads on a site! So I think there's a balance there. But my situation is a bit different because I run a site centered around users and activity, rather than just a personal site with some pages that you might only visit a few times a week or something.

I don't know, it's a complicated issue, and everyone is free to do what they want at the end of the day. I just wish web hosting with databases/PHP support was cheaper while also being better than it is even when paying a decent amount each month. :P