15 comments

[ 5.8 ms ] story [ 65.4 ms ] thread
What is imgur's ultimate goal? Is it to become the youtube of images?
Continue to build out and improve the default image hosting platforms for one of the largest sites on the Internet (Reddit) as well as maintain it's status as one of the top 50 most visited sites on the Internet?
At times I just skipped reddit to browser imgur.
Advertisement revenue. They do very good for themselves.

<tinfoil hat>

Recently movie posters, and Netflix what to watched lists make the front page with alarming constancy normally getting top posts by margins of 2-3x. I emailed support about this, to report that people were misusing the site for advertisement, and I got no response. I realize movies are popular, but an indie movie normally shouldn't be the most popular thing of all time (or even top 100).

I find it strange because normally their responses are very fast. I found a scheme where people were using a vote farm to push amazon links. The accounts involved were banned within 24 hour.

</tin foil hat>

But this being repeatedly ignored had me almost tempted to make a "vote botting as a service" website.

Well, they were in talks with Yahoo about being acquired.

Personally I'd like to see them add video hosting to their repertoire. They have a solid community that could allow them to compete in the video space.

As far as features go, I'm surprised they haven't added the ability to attach images to comments. That would allow for "friendly" 4chan like discussions (that is heavily image based).

> Well, they were in talks with Yahoo about being acquired.

You shouldn't believe everything you read on the internet. :)

You think someone would do that? Go on the internet and tell lies?

Looks like it was businessinsider doing the conjecturing so that's not too surprising.

> Is it to become the youtube of images?

Yes.

While I realize it's the modus operandi of Imgur, the .gifs were distracting and made the article harder to read.
I came into the article prepared to agree, as I've seen articles that have more filler images than content, but in this case ... they only had two that weren't direct content. To me they didn't really detract from it.
But, 2 gifs is 100% of the gifs in the article...