An email to Forum readers and participants included:

For as little as $500 let us introduce you to our *70,000 online monthly readers

By advertising on On Line Opinion you:
• Reach a broad and influential demographic
• Talk to motivated people who share your values
• Support a site which promotes healthy debate on the issues of the day.

Since all points of view are allowed on the Forum [I applaud that] how can the Forum guarantee to an advertiser that the readership shares the advertiser's values? Healthy debate is inconsistent with a particular set of values beside the value that healthy debate is good.

I very often wonder, not why GY allows two threads so a like but why posters do not use existing threads.
This comment fits like fingers in a glove the one about free speech already here.
And, in my view asks a question that is , rather lite on substance.
OLO while giving us a forum is Private Property, it costs cash to build run and continue to keep us all here.
Why should its owners be any different than any advertiser.
We see advertisements for things that may well be fraud, sex aid drugs for one.
Why impose rules on the printed word that have never been imposed on other adds?
I think we need to consider this, evidence exists, in my view, the monster claiming to own the NET or trying to, has left its mark already OLO needs our support ,not lifting the carpets hoping to find wrong that is not there.

Dear Belly,

I think of Graham Young as an ethical person, and I respect his editorial policies along with his moderation of olo submissions. My comment was a criticism of advertising speak which is a pervasive influence in our society. It is so pervasive that even Graham has fallen into it.

it took me a while to sepperate the headline
from the question

but davids main point appears to be disputing?

quote
'Talk to motivated people who share your values'

as we know ANY OPINION
has an equally valid opposing opinion

ok 70,000 might not agree
but the half or quarter that do
thats better odds than just about any other site

see if we allow
and retain opposing opinions
we ENSURE..there will allways be enough others
of enough opposing opinion..to sustain the truth of the claim...

[if advertising is affective..people will come back]

and as long as your opinion is respected
or you can rebut or refute others errant opinions..the site wins

its a clever concept

diverse opinions
means the house wins...most of the time

it takes all sorts
and we got them ...in spades

I think that I agree with one under god.

>>there will allways be enough others of enough opposing opinion..to sustain the truth of the claim<<

The claim that you will be reaching "motivated people who share your values" is surely going to be entirely supportable, given the patently diverse set of opinions expressed here.

If the claim had been "you will be reaching only people who share your values", then it would fail that test.

david I share your dislike of advertising speak but I was goint to post a similar repsonse to Pericles' post above.

OLO can also claim to have an influential demographic - many of the posters are social commentators, have a high public profile and there are even a few 'celebrity' authors. OLO also makes the news on occasion including the latest ANZ and IBM withdrawal of advertising.