LJS, crying shame

I am I

I am I

All-Conference
So I first went to the LJS after getting links there from here. I've since read stuff on espn, owh, and elsewhere about our Cornhuskers, mostly directed from here.

I've never posted on these sites and generally just browse the articles and mostly read the fans comments. Kind of a huskerboard alternate I guess u could say. Recently they've (LJS) changed formats and have gone pay to play.

Their articles are the same and the look is mostly intact, but the new format (i think) is terrible. Apparently since the change they are hemorraging members of their "daily chat".

I guess I started ths thread just to say: I'm glad huskerboard is free, most of the members are cool, and any changes to format are pretty easy to grip and

thanks to everyone who puts on this show!!

Kinda mundane thread I suppose, but when a place you frequent on the web drastically changes their look and availability, I think we should all give big props to Huskerboard.com and all the people who make it what is....

So from me to all of you....thank you

 
I think we're going to hold off on having a discussion on how to circumvent their system. Thanks, guys.

 
I've easily hit the 10 view limit, but haven't seen any attempt to block me. Maybe it's because I'm out of state?

 
knapplc said:
I think we're going to hold off on having a discussion on how to circumvent their system. Thanks, guys.
Click to expand...
At ESPN.com on the B1G blog the Lunch Time Links are open access. And I think the reporter blogs for both LJS and OWH are not counted.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Haspula said:
knapplc said:
I think we're going to hold off on having a discussion on how to circumvent their system. Thanks, guys.
Click to expand...
Can it be posted in the shed or is it just against the rules?
Click to expand...
Do not post it in the Shed, or anywhere on the site.

It is completely against the rules. We are not in the business of providing information to subvert another business or website.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is what really annoys me about the way the LJS is going about this:

Thank you for reading and relying on journalstar.com for your news and information. You have now viewed your 30-day allowance of 10 FREE pages. Want to read more?
Click to expand...
The bold is mine (they've bolded other parts, which I've made plain text).

I do not "rely on" the JournalStar for my news and information. I use them as part of literally a dozen or more resources for news. They are not, by any means whatsoever, indispensable.

I don't know how this experiment of theirs will turn out. I will not be paying $10 per month for Lincoln news, that's for damned sure, not when I can get it elsewhere for free - or for the price of watching/looking at/listening to a few commercials.

Don't charge me $120 a year for news that's readily available all over this town. Don't pretend or insinuate that I don't have choices. And don't try to charge exorbitant prices for a website already awash in very obtrusive ads.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
knapplc said:
This is what really annoys me about the way the LJS is going about this:

Thank you for reading and relying on journalstar.com for your news and information. You have now viewed your 30-day allowance of 10 FREE pages. Want to read more?
Click to expand...
The bold is mine (they've bolded other parts, which I've made plain text).

I do not "rely on" the JournalStar for my news and information. I use them as part of literally a dozen or more resources for news. They are not, by any means whatsoever, indispensable.

I don't know how this experiment of theirs will turn out. I will not be paying $10 per month for Lincoln news, that's for damned sure, not when I can get it elsewhere for free - or for the price of watching/looking at/listening to a few commercials.

Don't charge me $120 a year for news that's readily available all over this town. Don't pretend or insinuate that I don't have choices. And don't try to charge exorbitant prices for a website already awash in very obtrusive ads.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, they are just following the herd.

I have always subscribed to the Journal and supplemented it by reading the Omaha Weird Harold on line. Even though both papers often pool reporters and you get mostly the same stuff. OWH has Sam McKowen and some others I think are worth reading. About 6 months ago, they went to this "fee" based on line fee. I eventually thought it was worth 30 cents a day and now it is deducted automatically. So far it's probably been worth it, but it's really borderline. That is the future I'm afraid.

 
I wouldn't have a problem paying for online content. I'm not so silly to think that I should get all that news for free, but their prices are outrageous. I'd pay maybe 1/3 that per year.

I have yet to be stonewalled by the OWH. Not sure if it's because I've drastically reduced reading their articles since they implemented fees or some online glitch, but so far they haven't stopped me from reading.

 
saunders45 said:
I've easily hit the 10 view limit, but haven't seen any attempt to block me. Maybe it's because I'm out of state?
Click to expand...
Just got hit with it. You know what's really stupid? You can still read the article even with the giant "BUY HERE" ad.

GG LJS... GG.

 
Yeah, I've been getting the same thing, only with 25, then 20 articles out of the OWH website. Pain in the rear, to say the least. But you're exactly right, knapp. No reason to pay for the info that I can basically get from several other sources. Anything big gets around pretty quickly. But then, I think you're going to see this coming from most newspapers online over the next couple of years. WSJ has been doing it for quite a while already. I'd say it's Warren's group buying up the papers that caused it, but as I recall, this had been rumored before the sale of the newspaper anyway, and as I noted, others have been doing for a while already.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top