I like sexy women, but I hate the picture of the floozy in the lower right fixed div. It says, "Stripd views sexy as drunk, dumb, and missing shoes." What word do you think comes to anyone's mind after "knock-kneed"?
But this may be a better idea than trying to rid the Internet of ads (the Stripd alpha business model).
I've talked to several founders of sites in this vein who say one of their biggest problems is keeping it clean. Maybe giving people a place for just this sort of content is a good release valve, even if it doesn't make money (and free porn doesn't make money...at least not very much...the clicks just aren't very valuable, and the bandwidth usage is massive).
Hey Alex, long time no speak! Here's some quick feedback.
I have an incentive to collect these images and occassionally share them with friends. However, I don't think I have an incentive to start doing it on a group basis. This alone prevents me from using the site. I think the danger of this far outweighs the benefit that groups bring (getting cliques on the service in one shot). I think making this an individual thing and giving an option to share is a better way to go.
Also, I don't think I'd mind if the images I collect show up on the front page anonymously. This gives huge incentive for people to come to the site and just browse. I know you have public groups, but the group thing doesn't work well for me.
I think the private option is important for certain pictures - possibly of yourself/people you know? - but I think you're right, a public setting would be valuable.
Hi Alex. I agree that browse functionality could be killer here. The girl stuck in the right corner on the groups page is irritating and unnecessary even on the front page.
If you have a more open browse view, do add subcategories and an opt-in for different categories (s/categories/tags/g ? Whatever the cool kids are using these days.)
In any case do not show pictures on the groups page. Trust me here.
> I wonder where that chapter is in your standard marketing book.
In the marketing book I most recently read ("Buy-ology", I think it was called), the author claims that this technique doesn't work for advertising. People remember the bikini-clad woman, not whatever she was advertising.
> Hrm, it is similar to how there are always bikini clad women at tech conferences.
I think it is an excuse for the stereotypical sex-starved geeks to hire strippers without going to a strip club. I don't really get it.
(Someone used "booth babes" at their job booth at a Perl conference a few years ago. Classy. I realllly want to work for you now...)
Current trends lead me to believe that seeing it in marketing handbooks isn't actually very far off. Albeit, they would have to do it subtly to avoid all kinds of "moralistic backlash."
It's a tried and true strategy for tech shows. I don't know about Las Vegas (CES) and Berlin (IFA), but in Tokyo and Taipei, definitely so. E3... goes without saying.
[1] IIRC, this isn't the paper that demonstrated this, but is the one I have handy in memory.
this is just a weekend experiment. if people care about organizing around a certain subset of content (in this case sexy content), then doctors would love to have their own
emergencymed.doctorblah.com, etc.
But this may be a better idea than trying to rid the Internet of ads (the Stripd alpha business model).