Ad Blockers, Ads, And You

[Twilight Sparkle ✨ 8,520]

Warning!

 

Feldian-length post ahead! It's really an editorial rather than your average forum post. Please read the whole thing before voting in the poll and replying. The point of this is to give you a site owner's perspective on online advertising and ad blockers in particular, and I aim to get a mature, well-informed discussion going about it.

 

---

advertisements plural of ad·ver·tise·ment

 

Noun: A notice or announcement in a public medium promoting a product, service, or event or publicizing a job vacancy.

 

(source)

 

We're all familiar with advertisements, commonly shortened to ads. They're everywhere - from your local supermarket's weekly fliers to the massive billboards on urban high-rises. There's no denying that the advertising industry is a prevalent one in most people's lives. It has embraced technological innovations from the airplane to Hollywood-like computer graphics over the years. With an ever-increasing array of technologies at their disposal, advertisers have come up with a mind-boggling variety of ways to give you a sales pitch.

 

The advent of the Internet (and particularly high-speed residential downlinks), combined with browser technologies such as HTML, JavaScript, and Flash Player, presented advertisers with an opportunity to shell out some dosh in return for space on an existing website with an existing audience. Due to the interactive and media-rich nature of the web, advertisers have been able to provide ad experiences more dynamic than anything a newspaper or TV channel will ever show.

 

But at some point, they took the "dynamic" aspect too far. Popular opinion has it that online advertising is not a solicited message from a product creator to a potential customer, but a brutal war for space, cash, and the most important factor - the end-user's attention. Pop-ups and pop-unders; pre-, mid-, and post-rolls; aural alerts congratulating you for winning contests you never entered. There's something to be said for being creative with an ad, but you know something is wrong when users begin to dread them.

 

Enter the ad blocker.

 

Several developers took it upon themselves a few years ago to create browser add-ons that seek out the ads in a page and remove them for the user. Promising an automated end to the UX- (user experience) destroying madness that online ads were, such add-ons enjoyed a meteoric rise in popularity. Internet users were happy to take control of their experience and blot out what they didn't want to see, enjoying the content of sites in blissful purity.

 

It sounds great, right? And from the end-user's point of view, it is. Ads are ugly, flashy, soundy, poppy, and do little else than distract you from the site you're trying to enjoy. What could be better than banishing it all with a single, free program?

 

---

But like every good story, there are several sides to the plot. You're not the only character in your online adventure. Advertising is and always has been, for thousands of years, a method for advertisers to pay publishers for the privilege of marketing a product or service to the publisher's audience. Newspapers sell ad space between their articles to cover their writers' salaries, the maintenance of their printing facility, and rental for their office space. Television networks sell ad space interspersed in their content to cover the sky-high costs of maintaining their studios, equipment, and creative minds.

 

Webmasters are no different. Site owners like I sell ad space on their little slice of the Internet for the exact same reasons - to lower the cost of using the site for you, someone else will need to provide the money to pay for its maintenance. Advertisers are more than happy to line up and pay site owners money for some space on their site to expose their wares to a new audience. Better yet, when the right advertisers are matched up with the right site owners, the end users get access to additional content that is relevant to their interests. An ad might give you that extra push to buy what later becomes your favourite video game.

 

Ads were always meant to establish a symbiotic relationship between the user, the publisher, and the advertiser.

• The advertiser gets to show their product to a new audience.
• The publisher earns the advertiser's business, which helps the publisher maintain their own service.
• The end user is exposed to a product that may fill a need or desire in their life. If it does, the end user gives the advertiser some business, leaving the advertiser with more money to develop further products and the end user with a useful product.

There's no denying that advertising can be a fantastic revenue stream for site owners, and a happy site owner with a profitable site is in a much better position to keep the site online and continuously work on improving it than one who pays for everything out-of-pocket. Among other things, a profitable site is a sustainable site.

 

---

There is a very common misconception that I've seen time and time again in my experience as a site owner, and that is that sites are just as free to provide and maintain as they are to visit. Nothing could be further from the truth.

 

It's true that one can maintain a relatively small site on pocket money, yes. But the monetary and temporal cost to a site owner to maintain a good website can increase dramatically as the site grows. Servers, bandwidth, software, development, support - all of these things and more cost money. And the bigger a site grows, the more it needs of each. Websites that get "free" hosting for huge amounts of traffic (Equestria Daily is a good example you're likely to be familiar with) pay for the resources they use in other ways. On Blogger, for example, you are limited to a very small feature set that Google have optimized to run and scale as cheaply as possible on their global server cloud. And this still does not take into account any of the other "costs" involved in running a website that doesn't have a monthly bill. What about plane tickets for the staff to various events that the site covers, for example?

 

It might sound impressive if someone tells you that their site earns $10/day, which works out to ~$300/month, right? Well, what if the site owner spends 50 hours a week working on their site? The earnings work out to $1.50/hour. The crappiest minimum-wage job is going to pay more than that. I don't mean to imply that every site owner is looking to get rich, but that should say something about how much love one needs to have for their site to continue running it for years on end.

 

Considering this, is it really fair to try and further limit the revenue that many site owners already get?

 

---

Now, I've seen the "I'm just one guy of thousands; there's no way my choice is going to make a difference" mentality, and it is often a deciding factor in someone's choosing to use an ad blocker. IGN has 19 million readers. It won't matter if only 18,999,999 of them see any ads, right?

 

The problem is, this mentality has become so widespread - people thinking of their individual choice as inconsequential - that all the collective choices of millions of Internet users have, together, made quite a noticeable impact. For an anecdotal example, just about half of MLP Forums' pageviews display any ads at all. The other half comprise traffic (that costs every bit as much to pay for) by users who have chosen to not see them, whether by refusing to opt in to them or using an ad blocker.

 

Another common misconception is that ads only earn money if you click them, and that you won't cause any harm by removing them if you weren't planning to click them, anyway. This is, again, quite false. Advertisers are willing to pay more to show their ad to a larger audience (that's why a 30-second slot during the Super Bowl costs eight figures). As far as the advertiser is concerned, if you do not see ads, you do not exist and they will not pay for an ad slot that won't be shown to you.

 

Even without clicking ads, their value increases for every impression they get. Newspapers, TV, and magazines have no conception of a "click" whatsoever, and the advertising industry thrives in them, does it not? A well-trafficked ad space will be more valuable. It's basic supply and demand, really, and it's odd how many people do not realize this.

 

---

Here's where the irony begins. The very ad blockers that tens of millions of users believe to be performing a valuable service to the Internet by "killing" a corporation-driven economy where the wealthy only get wealthier are an advertising spiel in and of themselves.

 

Look carefully and critically at the various ad blocker extensions' descriptions and their developers' comments. These developers are people who want to get their own product out to as many people as possible. Sound familiar?

 

Here is how the developers of several popular ad blockers try to convince you to install their extension in your browser:

 

The most popular Chrome extension, with over 6 million users! Blocks ads all over the web.

 

AdBlock for Chrome! Block all advertisements on all web pages, even Facebook, Youtube, and Hulu.

It works automatically: just click "Add to Chrome," then visit your favorite website and see the ads disappear!

 

Safari users can get my Safari version too, at safariadblock.com.

 

 

PS: Like it? Please click "+1" above and Share about it. Thanks for your support! - Michael

 

~ Chrome Adblock

 

Annoyed by adverts? Troubled by tracking? Bothered by banners? Install Adblock Plus now to regain control of the internet and change the way that you view the web.

 

Adblock Plus allows you to regain control of the internet and view the web the way you want to. The add-on is supported by over forty filter subscriptions in dozens of languages which automatically configure it for purposes ranging from removing online advertising to blocking all known malware domains. Adblock Plus also allows you to customize your filters with the assistance of a variety of useful features, including a context option for images, a block tab for Flash and Java objects, and a list of blockable items to remove scripts and stylesheets.

 

~ Adblock Plus

 

Block ads on the right hand side of the screen when using Yahoo Mail, Hotmail and Gmail thereby expanding your message space

 

Removes the ads and sponsored links and squeezes out the empty space left behind by other ad blockers to give you more room to write your messages.

 

 

For Gmail users: You can choose to remove the People Widget in the options.

 

Great for parental control to child proof those ads. There are also options to hide various other items on your Google Mail page to make it more zen.

 

 

Try my other popular apps http://jasonsavard.com

 

~ Webmail Ad Blocker

 

Each ad blocker developer is trying to earn your click. They value your click on that "Install" button every bit as much as an AdSense advertiser values your click on the ad you saw in the New York Times. Your installation of their extension means that you trust them to run their code on your computer, and not a rival ad blocker's. In fact, some of them have amassed so many installations that the developers have begun to act like they have the entire advertising industry at their beck and call. When one guy's whims decide whether several million people see an ad or not, you'll probably want to pay attention as an advertiser, too.

 

There's nothing inherently wrong with this - as I already stated, it's simply how the advertising industry works - and capitalism, by extension.

 

The thing is, you're not supporting a "death of corporate greed". If anything, by installing an ad blocker, you are making a single individual more powerful by granting them control over what, if any, advertising you see.

 

And like I said before, you might not think your choice means much - but most people tend to think exactly the same way and ironically create a much larger effect together.

 

---

Let's return to the topic of revenue for a moment. Programming a good ad blocker that is desirable for users takes effort just like anything else. Most, if not all, of the ad blocker developers I've come across ask their users for donations. And because people perceive the removal of ads from their web browsing experience as a valuable service, they're willing to pay for it. And they do.

 

In fact, the developer of Chrome Adblock earns so much from donations that he quit his day job last year.

 

Don't believe it? Check out the reviews on the extension for yourself and see how many people are proud of the donation they've made. Honestly, it's working out pretty great for him so far.

 

There's a disgusting moral implication to this, however: when an ad blocker removes an ad from a site, that ad (and therefore the site owner) can no longer earn any money from you. When you make a donation towards the ad blocker's developer, you are directly supporting the removal of a revenue stream for some of the very sites you love, and expressing your thanks for it. To a person who played absolutely no part in creating or hosting the content that made you love the sites you block ads from in the first place.

 

Consider this... might it not be more worthwhile, if you're going to throw money at the problem, to give that money to the site owners? Many sites fully embrace the "premium membership = no ads" model - you either pay directly, or you let the site make money from you by displaying ads for you. It's a great model and one that I personally stand by.

 

Comments like this one are sickening to me, as a webmaster:

 

I'm a very poor student and was able to give $2 to this amazing cause. If we don't chip in, the web will turn over to a terrible ad-funded and corporation-owned web. Help this guy's dream out!

I could not recommend this more heartily. There are not many ads I pay for, especially if I don't have to, but this one I cheerfully donated money to.

ii am just a teen therefore i cannot do the donation but as soon i get a job ..i will defenatily donate to you as much as i can =)and i think everyone should donate and not be greedy.

---

Another myth I'd like to dispel is that site owners either have no control over the ads that are being shown on their sites, or intentionally cherry-picked the ones that you see. Either way, if you get an annoying ad on a site, nothing will be done about it.

 

This is completely and entirely false.

 

While it doesn't go for every site due to the dizzying number of online business models, most site owners are more than willing to listen to and implement their users' feedback for a lot of things, including ads. At the end of the day, most of us want your attention and loyalty as a visitor. If our placement of advertisements jeopardizes your loyalty, we usually want to know about it and are happy to make it right.

 

While the vast majority of online advertising is displayed via automated ad networks such as Google AdSense, these networks still usually provide facilities to filter out "bad ads" (I did some of that just last night). Some have network-wide policies against certain things that resulted in the proliferation of ad blockers in the first place. It is against AdSense's rules, for example, to run audio ads with it that start playing sound without the user's permission. AdSense doesn't offer any support for pop-ups, pop-unders, or interstitials, either.

 

So next time you see an ad you don't like, consider getting in touch with the owner (or a higher-up, for larger sites) of the site you saw it on and give them your honest feedback. Site owners want happy users, and the good ones will pay attention to what you like and don't like about their site.

 

And if you're thinking that the "big" multi-million dollar sites will throw your email in the spam bin, you should see this article on deviantART's blog (which is the third in a series). They went to the trouble of developing a custom plugin themselves to giving users a chance to help out with fixing the site's ads. The mere fact that so many commenters are saying, "just use AdBlock instead!" is ethically repulsive. One particular comment seemed to get the point of what deviantART's admins were trying to say:

 

I think too many users might be missing the full point here.

 

AdBlock+ is sort of like wearing full bulletproof riot gear while walking through a bad neighborhood. Yes, it blocks everything and that's why we AdBlock+ users love it. If a bad ad ever does try to shoot at us, we don't get hurt. We don't even see it.

 

...But we also don't know when we get shot at, and then we don't know who to blame when it happens to someone who's less protected. We just automatically say "It's a bad neighborhood and everyone should be using AdBlock+", which actually is good advice in general.

 

But if just one person uses FF, turns off AdBlock+ and uses this plugin instead, and encounters a bad ad and reports it and it gets pulled quickly, that's the equivalent of taking a bad guy's gun away, which makes the neighborhood safer for everybody, not just the FF users! And that's the primary goal here, isn't it?

If a site as large as deviantART is willing to work with its users to improve the ads it shows, I hope that improves your confidence that other sites will do the same.

 

---

Before ending this, I wanted to take a moment to say a few things specifically about MLP Forums and what I'm doing as a site owner to address the issue.

 

First off, I only force guests to see ads. As soon as you register, they disappear unless you voluntarily choose to give them a chance and opt in. The reason I did this is because it gives me a chance to show the ad blocker users among you that, first of all, ads exist on the site (without the textual indicator in the UCP, you'll never even know there were ads here with a decent ad blocker).

 

I've been fortunate enough to be able to sustain this site mostly on donations and subscriptions, which means I can take this risk with ads. Based on the feedback I've seen, just about everyone who has enabled the option has seemingly been impressed with how "reasonable" my placement of ads is. If anything, this proves that it is indeed possible to run advertising on a site in such a way that you do not feel the need to block it.

 

For those users who do not opt into ads, the option still exists to donate or subscribe, both of which are ways of directly supporting the site (frankly, they're more effective, too). And the site does have enough revenue from users that see ads and donate for me to be able to still offer up a full, ad-free experience for free to those of you who neither donate nor opt in. Unlimited 100 MB attachments, huge PM inboxes, the goods. These exist because someone was generous enough to allow me to show them ads, contribute some money themselves, or a combination of both.

 

Hundreds of users have opted into ads here, and the contribution that has resulted in has been more helpful than you might realize. The revenue this site has not only means I can cover the costs of high-end hosting for it, but also gives us a lot of managerial flexibility. Roleplay World with its character database cost a good deal of money to implement, factoring in the software that had to be purchased to make it happen, but it has resulted in a tailored and organized roleplaying experience.

 

I was only able to make it happen because I had money to throw at it. Site owners having money to throw at things isn't evil, nor does it make them greedy. It is legitimately useful and a whole lot more sustainable than running an operation at a loss. It's directly comparable to an artist using money from contracted and commissioned work to purchase new art supplies and take advanced lessons to better their work for everyone who sees or orders it.

 

I have left the choice of ads or no ads to you, the user. How you feel about it morally is up to you, and you can opt in and out as often as you like. While I certainly appreciate it greatly if you opt into ads or donate (or even both), my staff and I will treat you no differently if you don't like ads and don't want to or cannot donate directly. That is my promise to you.

 

The other promise I have to make is that if any part of my implementation of ads here bothers you, I'm ready to listen to what you have to say about it. If there's anything I can do to make it right, I'll do my best to do that. Don't "vote" by silently opting out of ads if something about the ads themselves makes you want to turn them off. Start a feedback topic instead - I read each and every single one of them, and long-time members can attest to the fact that I take feedback seriously and am ready to act on it.

 

I'm here to run a pony forum for you to enjoy, and I'm more than happy to work with you to improve the site. Contrary to what seems to be popular belief, it is indeed possible to maintain a symbiotic, friendly relationship with a webmaster.

 

---

It's time to close off this editorial now.

 

Before you think cutting all ads out of a website will solve your problem with them, consider telling the site admins how you feel about their ads instead. By doing so, you are doing your part to help online advertising return to a state in which it is symbiotic for all three parties - the advertiser, the publisher, and even yourself.

 

Before donating money to the developer of an ad blocker, consider whether the developer or the site you're blocking ads from deserves the money more. Perhaps the site is willing to remove ads for you with no need for an ad blocker if you pitch in to cover their costs.

 

Before installing an ad blocker, think about the implications of what you're about to do. Consider how you'd feel if you were a site owner trying to earn something from ads and all your users thought you were evil, greedy, or irrational for doing so.

 

Before making the choice to strip out ads from your web browsing experience as a way to help you "gain control" of what you see on the Internet, realize that most, if not all, of the websites you visit are private property. You do not hire a team to destroy every banner in a mall before you go shopping. The banners aren't yours to destroy - someone owns the mall, and the decision of what goes on the mall's walls is rightfully theirs. Website ads are really no different - the website is the mall, and the ads are the banners.

 

---

If anything, I hope this piece has been an eye-opener for you. I don't expect most of you have had too many opportunities to get a webmaster's perspective on ad blockers, so I look forward to reading your thoughts and responding to them. You're welcome to vote in the poll now; as well, feel free to share this article with anyone you want.

 

 

Just remember this:

 

The Internet isn't only about you. Site owners and advertisers are human, too.

[go away seb 367]

To be completely honest, the only reason I use ad-blockers is because it massively slows down page loading times for me. Especially when ads load first, then everything else follows. I would know where I was going to click when all of the sudden a "CHEAP PORN" ad pops up right there and I accidently click that. I'm not talking about the forums in this case, just normal browsing. If ads were not able to be turned off here, I would have barely even started typing this.

Edited July 8, 2012 by Adam the Mudcrab

[Spaghetti 159]

I personally use ad-blocker programs because ads usually just get in my way and serve to annoy me. I would like to see ads implanted in a way that does not infringe on my browsing that still broadcasts the message it wishes to send. I would also like to see ads that are at least somewhat relevant to the content I'm viewing. For example, I do not want to see washing detergent pop-ups when I am viewing the forums. I am here because of my appreciation of Friendship is Magic, so I would be much more interested in ads that advertise MLP apparel, for example. (I'm not saying I am not pleased with the current ads, just my general opinion)

 

Balancing the viewing pleasure of the people who attend and contribute to the site and pleasing the ad-providers with the prevalence of their ads on your website must be quite the juggling act, but never let it infringe on us who are here to enjoy the content you created for us. If you want this site to continue being successful, the viewers need to come first, always.

[Doctor XFizzle 8,651]

If ads are simply visible and "blend in" into the page I'm on, I have no problem with them. Now if I'm trying to enjoy a site when suddenly I'm attacked with pop-up windows of ads, that's when I consult the power of the ad-blocker. I, myself, am looking to be involved in the advertising/marketing industry so I understand the advertisers' end of the situation. On the other hand, as a consumer, I would like my experience to be as smooth and uninterrupted as possible. If I find myself wasting my time and energy battling pop-up windows, then I'll turn that blocker on or stop viewing a site.

 

Also I just had to answer the last question with the last answer because it made me LOL

Edited July 8, 2012 by Doctor XFizzle

[Lady Rarity Pony 4,892]

*remembers my status update*

 

 

 

I'm not one to click on ads. I go to a site for the site, and have no interest in clicking here and there. None of the ads ever meet my interest anyway.

 

Normally I have adblocker on for everything, because I don't click them, so they seem to just be taking up space or flashing annoying messages telling me I should find out if my boyfriend is cheating on me or telling me to buy World of Warcraft.

 

After that status update, I white listed these forums, but I still haven't clicked on any ads. They don't meet my interest and they usually aren't on my mind.

 

 

By this, I'm not trying to defend not clicking on ads, or even blocking them altogether, but generally ads (at least for me) do not attract much sincere interest from me.

They are simply there, so unless it comes to my mind that I should click one just for the sake of the site, site owner, etc. then I probably wont click any.

[Starshine 16,330]

In fact, the developer of Chrome Adblock earns so much from donations that he quit his day job last year.

 

damn...

 

Never use any adblock myself, I prefer to steer myself as far away as possible from any site that contain harmful ads, regardless they got some sweet content or not.

[NewCalamity 3,454]

I, have never used an Ad-Blocker program in my entire web-browsing experience. One reason being, ads do not bother me, for they are inescapable in today's society. It is very hard to walk down the street without seeing some form of advertisement from companies to attract business. Adverts have become a daily part of our lives and they are what helps the world go 'round, without them, businesses and economies would have a tough time.

 

Adverts have always been something I'm accustomed to and do not mind, for as has been mentioned, they help websites thrive. Many say adverts are annoying, while they may be obnoxious at times, yes, but they don't truly damage your web viewing experience unless they contain material in which is offensive or mature for the viewer. That is resolved by reporting the inappropriate adverts to the respected site owners and getting that fixed, for, without ads, many many websites would not be where they are today.

 

In the end, we need ads, and ads need us, we all work together in this society and depend on each other. I do hope this article will shed light upon the advertisement business and show what they mean for site owners and users alike.

[Dragonshy 2,305]

I must apoligize Feld0, but I use an AdBlocker on my main laptop. I do opt in ads on everything else, but I don't on my main laptop. Why?

 

1. My laptop is easily hacked and has been before without even doing anything.

2. Coming on MLP Forums is one of the highlights of my day, and I want to just see a clean website.

3. I will gladly donate when I have money.

4. My laptop is extremely laggy and it slows down with ads.

5. The ads are always pony related, but I'm not an open brony with everyone.

 

Now like I said, I don't have AdBlocker on anything else. I will donate when I have enough money. Sorry.

[None42069 520]

[Wall of text]

 

So basically:

[Tom The Diamond 1,828]

Great piece Feld0! inb4 Tl:Dr

 

Now me personally, I have used an Adblocker App for Chrome, and I have fallen in love with it ever since. It saves time from loading and such, and is mostly a godsend. However, it thankfully has a Whitelist option, which I use if I enjoy using a website, like this one. Basically, if I enjoy using a website, visit it often, I'll support it by allowing ads. However, if I'm just dropping by, or leaving an angry letter to a company about their faulty product, I will not support them with my page view.

 

After all, I pay my ISP for an internet plan that allows me to see so much data a month, and if I go over said data, I get screwed and have to pay extra. And that ad takes up a bit of data that I could use for something else. Not much, but it is there. So in a sense, I'm paying to view an ad. Not to mention some ads can take a while to load and wait for, wasting my time that I could be using for things like charity work, building birdhouses, or knitting sweaters for kittens. So because of that, I'll only be willing to sacrifice my time/internets only if I enjoy and support a website.

[Starshine 16,330]

So basically:

<snip>

 

Holy blast ice cream truck! Genocide is much lighter of a sin than refusing to click advertisement!

 

[Ron Jeremy 2,032]

That was quite the read.

 

I agree with this wholeheartedly. When people block non-intrusive ads that wouldn't interfere with their experience negatively just because they can, that's selfish and inconsiderate of those who run the site. Ads are okay to me, as long as they aren't malicious. And any respectable webmaster won't let malicious ads on their site. You won't see SAVE THE QUEEN'S CLEAVAGE AND WIN A FREE IPOD ads here, for sure.

 

Now, the thing is, a lot of people go their merry way on the internet, not caring about ads. Then, one day, a page screams at them "YOU ARE THE MILLIONTH VISITOR! CLICK HERE TO CLAIM YOUR IPOD" at 90 decibels, and so they choose to block all the ads on all the sites. Does the guy who runs a forum, or a blog, or any kind of site, whose ads aren't malicious deserve not to receive his/her ad revenue just because that one ad on that one site screamed at you? Most adblockers allow you to set a whitelist, that the ad-blocker will disable itself on. If you feel the need to use an ad-blocker, block only the bad sites who refuse to take the bad ads off, and give the webmasters whose ads don't scream at you to claim dubious prizes their ad revenue. Though, I must say, honest websites really aren't known for flooding your screen with noisy popups....

 

Blocking all ads no matter what would be like if you spent your life eating burgers, then this shady guy in a van offered you a burger, and you got sick eating that burger, and then refused to eat another burger ever again, even from a reputable source.

 

Well, I can't really say much more without looking like I'm taking what Feld0 said and rewording it. So I guess I'll just leave my post at that.

[Shankveld 4,945]

I don't use an add blocker because I do a lot of online shopping, and ads help me find things I wouldn't normally see.

Although if a site has 'pornographic' ads.

I make a point to blacklist it and never visit it.

~

[None42069 520]

Holy blast ice cream truck! Genocide is much lighter of a sin than refusing to click advertisement!

 

 

Well, it was more of reducing the wall of carefully and logically placed arguments into a small easy to read and entertaining comic saying the same thing.

[NavelColt 22,875]

I do use ad blockers, because I never shop online, never have, and would use classic Google to find the specific things, if I ever did. Thusly, they do nothing but open up that small window of taking up room, perhaps extending page loading time sometimes, etc. That said, I do understand what they mean to site owners and developers, and this was interesting to look at.

[Nah 3,181]

I use adblockers mainly to block craptube (I mean YouTube) ads, their so damn greedy nowadays, I only use them to block certain ads. (In fact, it lets me choose what ads to block. )

[Swordfishtrombone 384]

I understand that someone's gotta pay for the site. Seeing something about Coca-Cola or nipple piercings in the far-side of the left of the screen out of the corner of my eye is hardly gonna ruin my experience. I don't mind.

[Starshine 16,330]

Well, it was more of reducing the wall of carefully and logically placed arguments into a small easy to read and entertaining comic saying the same thing.

 

More like potentially offensive to me. Comparing someone's precaution against wild ads with a generation of genocide horror? Yeah right :/

 

Blocking all ads no matter what would be like if you spent your life eating burgers, then this shady guy in a van offered you a burger, and you got sick eating that burger, and then refused to eat another burger ever again, even from a reputable source.

 

One severe case of explosive diarrhea should be enough to traumatize someone to never eat any burgers again, unless it was made by his own mother

 

Just like one time when I found this "man-horse-love" site on googleads.

[Doctor XFizzle 8,651]

Color me a little surprised, I thought adblockers were a generally accepted and widely used program. I'm starting to see that not everyone gets them or automatically approves of them

[I_wesley125 393]

If ads go too far (YouTube, for example) or slow down loading to a large extent (Project Free TV) I will use one but on smaller sites I will White-List them.

This is something I have done ever since I got ABP.

[None42069 520]

More like potentially offensive to me. Comparing someone's precaution against wild ads with a generation of genocide horror? Yeah right :/

 

I wasn't trying to be offensive to anyone and I doubt that guy behind Nuzlocke was trying to be offensive either. In fact, I doubt he was being serious around that part either.

[Lady Rarity Pony 4,892]

Color me a little surprised, I thought adblockers were a generally accepted and widely used program. I'm starting to see that not everyone gets them or automatically approves of them

 

From Feld0's wall of text, I would take it as they are in fact, widely used, which is part of the issue here.

[Envy 5,997]

I used to use Ad Blocker for what you would consider selfish reasons, but I would always turn it off when streaming content, because I knew that's how legal streaming sites got revenue.

 

One time I turned it off altogether, and I was browsing an official forum for a big video gaming series by a large corporation, and one of the ads on that site gave me a really bad virus. After that, I have been very leery about turning them back on. I don't mean to deny sites of their revenue, but at the same time I don't want to add an new desktop computer to my list of expensive things to buy. And if an site like that could have an ad that would give me a bad virus, exactly which sites can I trust?

[Lady Rarity Pony 4,892]

I don't mean to deny sites of their revenue, but at the same time I don't want to add an new desktop computer to my list of expensive things to buy. And if an site like that could have an ad that would give me a bad virus, exactly which sites can I trust?

 

One of the big reasons I use adblocker on almost all sites. ^^

[MVC NVMXD JVRXD 2,406]

I used to use ad-blockers until Feld0 said something about it. I disabled it for the mlpforums domain, and eventually just stopped using it all together.

Though now, 4chan ads are plaguing me