ENTRECARD: U.S. DOLLAR PAID-AD QUESTIONS AND POINTS TO CONSIDER

I put some of the following to RE over at BadGalsRadio - RootsRock since '99. If you don't know RE's blog, visit. [Update: Friday, April 03, 2009 at 6:50:14 AM: Oh, RE, Your April 1 post was shock-jock level. I couldn't read it. The images were beyond the pale. Why go there? It's not what Jesus wants of you. Why cave in before the world? What's the point?]

Don't go there though if you're going to make a snap judgment based upon your cultural background that may not include RE's diversity. She's eclectic. You may have to be willing to spend some time to see from where she's coming. {How's that for avoiding ending a sentence with a preposition?; a waste of time really, but I don't want the grammar police using my laxness as an excuse to disrespect God. Ending prepositions (at, by, in, to, from, and with) are good for the police though. That's why Woody Allen robbed banks you know — good for the economy and employment rates — no joke — pure capitalism for the discerning/adepts. Actually, I end plenty of sentences with prepositions. To Hell with.... It's really hypocrisy with which I'm concerned. There I go again. Oh well, it's what I get for once having gone to a then elitist, preppy, boarding school. I learned plenty there though, but I digress.}

Concerning the Matter: Questions and Points to Consider:

  1. Okay, so you're choosing which blog on which to advertise. How do you know which ones have chosen to allow every other view to be a paid ad? Those sites should cost half the EC. It's a fair point from a capitalistic standpoint.
  2. Also, when someone changes the settings while your ad is in the lineup, your cost should be lowered or you should be notified so you may cancel.
  3. Then there's this. What happens when someone doesn't have an ad running at the same time as yours? How are you supposed to know that the ad is twice as valuable as otherwise on that day? How can you plan ahead when budgeting your EC ad campaign?

If you want to use these questions/points, by all means, go ahead. Just don't act as if you thought of them. There was some stealing of thunder concerning the tax issues by some who loathe me and curse me (and Jesus and God). You know who you are.

By the way, RE is not one who steals thunder. She shares it. Credit where due is very, very Christian. Credit to Jesus for what he did and is still doing is critical. That's why we practice giving credit in the mundane as well — proper conditioning to enter the New Heaven. It's not ego! We are not Ayn Rand followers. We are last so all may be first. That was completely lost on Ayn and still is by her followers.

Now, there are some other things that I've not discussed much.

What's with "Wicked!"? What signal is that sending out?

Is it all in fun? Hardly

When you click to drop and then wait to see what Entrecard returns, you will see that Entrecard returns the terms for each successive series of 50 drops: "Thanks!," "Go Go!," "Alright!," "Wicked!," "Yeehah!," and finally "Awesome!." So, after 150 drops, I as a Christian am confronted by Entrecard promoting "Wicked!" Now, of course they know this. It's something they intend that I accept, take in the spirit of fun (twisted; subconscious conditioning; lowering the guard), or leave. Well, I'm not in Entrecard on Entrecard's capitalistic terms. The whole cosmos is the temple wherever I go. I take it with me, inside, living. My intention is to clean the cosmos. That's Jesus's intention too, in case you're unaware of that. Most people are. In fact, I've never met anyone who knew it or at least said it anyway. If it weren't his intention, I wouldn't be a Christian.

What's with "persecution"? What signal is that sending out?

Also, the contest for finding and turning in offending blogs calls that act "persecution." You're given selfish reward-credit for persecuting. That's conditioning to unrighteousness. What am I doing if not persecuting? Ah, semantical theology is the point. Warning for free is what I'm doing. I'm not consigning anyone to Hell. I'm trying to be sure that everyone who doesn't belong there doesn't go in or if already there, comes out. Do you see that? It's harmless as a dove if God does say so himself; and I'm not God (part of) unless I'm one in God's spirit, which I'm working on.

Now, capitalism is evil enough on its face isn't it without promoting persecution as something that ought to be condoned let alone even tolerated?

Rush around dropping to get credits to spend on ads or to have converted into cash or spend in the (what's it called) "shop" "market" (you can see how much that's my focus) — Me, me, me.... Me, mine, more.... To Hell with giving and sharing unless there's something in it for me, me, me....

Am I dishing it out, as Marc Chamot over on his blog, "What I Think?," might suggest? You can look at it that way. What I'm I dishing out? Good food

Am I opposed to the marketplace? Of course I'm not. I'm constantly concerned with the marketplace of ideas. That's all I work on nearly every waking moment.

Fudging Numbers:

As for Graham, reserve a place in your heart for him to see your light.

As for being sent to Entrecard Hell for questioning Entrecard, my sense is that Graham doesn't want to give that impression, at least at this stage. He may not be as bright (certainly not in the Jesus sense-meaning; the real meaning) as many apparently believe him to be, but he does have capitalistic instincts (conditioning actually).

He has too much riding on being "for bloggers" and all the freedom-of-speech conceptualization that comes with that territory.

His reputation is already suffering enough. He knows that much, don't you think?

The fact that he's called on fudging numbers ("Entre-Fraud: Why Does Entrecard Lie About It's Number of Blogs?" — not a gotcha but rather a heads-up — Thanks, RE, for supplying that link) but doesn't explain but rather just ignores and also doesn't correct the numbers is actually crafty in Graham's book: The Capitalist's playbook.

He's counting on the selfishness of users to override fine-detail ethical concerns.

I'll share taking the heat and won't burn (that's figurative, spiritual language). I don't intend that RE cover the fringes of the flock alone. Jesus left the 99 to find the 1. That's not lost on me.

I've been to the bottom looking to save the one. She just kept running away though.

Bless Thee All,

Tom

Seriously related posts {manually chosen for you by me (Tom Usher)}:

Donate


The following should appear at the end of every post:

According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":

Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.

Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.

Political Campaign Intervention

Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.

Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.

Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

  • Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
  • Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
  • Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
  • Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
  • Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office

Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:

  • The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
  • Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
  • We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
  • When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
  • It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
  • We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
  • We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
  • When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
  • We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
  • It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)

  • Subscribe


  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
    • Entrecard is a strange new place. They certainly seem to make big decisions and then have to backup and correct mistakes.

      Sadly, they sometimes fail to make corrections. This will hurt them in the long run. (Their current handling of problems in The Market comes to mind).

      I suppose I do not have an expectation that they will run the enterprise on Christian principles as you seem to.

      Checking out the other places you mentioned. Thanks

      • Hi Dr. Bruce,

        I suppose I do not have an expectation that they will run the enterprise on Christian principles as you seem to.

        Oh, I only want the many to see how the system of mammon (and EC is a form of that) will not get them there.

        Thanks for commenting in a way that gave me the opportunity to make that clearer.

        Entrecard is the old wineskin for sure. It is not a platform that will last into the Christian, spiritual age of the New Earth.

        Blessings, Bruce,

        Tom

    • to quote one of my modern day heroes, as a parable; in this case is hopefully acceptable Pastor.

      "We've Been Trodding on the Winding Path much too long.. Repent Repent"

      do you think Entrecard knows that song ? Maybe I need to play that song in a set dedicated to them.

      However I doubt Graham can hear it in his Universe.

      I also agree with you about that message where it says "Wicked". it's totally uncool.

      why not have it say, "WOW".

      or "Wonderful"

      that would be so much more positive, as we all know.

      Pastor, can you pray for the Entreplex as it's in need of Prayer Today.

      and please add my name to that list, eachday.

      • Hi RE,

        I would like to hear that song.

        As for you, take it for granted.

        Blessings Thrice,

        Tom

        She's alright, She's my pal

        [Update: Friday, April 03, 2009 at 6:30:14 AM: Oh, RE, Your April 1 post was shock-jock level. I couldn't read it. The images were beyond the pale. Why go there?]

    • When it comes to advertising on Entrecard, I always go for biggest advertisers. There is only one reason, to get more incoming clicks. But, it has been months I don't advertise on EC. The bounce rate is alarming high. So, diversifying incoming visits is a must to stay healthy.

      • Hi Atniz,

        Thank you for supplying your last name.

        As for bounce rates, I really don't know why they are so important to blog owners. Do advertisers see the stats? Anyway, don't advertisers pay for click-throughs rather than views?

        Lots of traffic comes in off Google searches and other major search engines and social-networking sites on account of the title and description of individual posts. To me, the Internet/Web is fluid. Substantive (pro and con) content is what attracts me. There are just so many sites that it seems unrealistic to think that anyone would sit on one going from post-to-post for very long unless he or she is deeply moved and learning truly valuable, life-correcting lessons with each post.

        There are exceptions of course, such as with sites that cater to a clique as no other regardless of meaningfulness. Some people just gorge on fluff all day, everyday. Kids and teens are often like that, of course. It's play. There's a place for it.

        We adults of the whole world though must roll up our sleeves to repair the damage other more immature adults have done. We must do that for the sakes of those very children who deserve a real safe and secure place to enjoy clean fun that does not promote violence, greed, or depravity (harmful) of any kind. I say "real safe and secure" because there are those who call people to the dark side, as if evil brings true national or world security or prosperity. I speak here specifically of the openly evil-hearted and former U.S. Supreme Court appointed (unelected) Vice President of the United States, Richard "Dick" Cheney.

        Thank you for your comments, Atniz. I look forward to getting to know you along the narrow way. Bless your family. I know you have little ones at home where you work on your internet business.

        Peace,

        Tom