Originally Posted by jfriend00
It would be more effective and more ethical for you to avoid using sites that have ads that annoy. What you're doing is analogous to pirating cable TV because you think their rates are too high. In both cases, you're refusing to pay for a service, yet consume it anyway because you don't like how they get paid.
So, you have no qualms at all about using this site while denying them any source of revenue to pay for running the site? Do you realize that if everyone did that, this site would either disappear or only be available only to those willing pay a subscription fee (more likely, it just wouldn't exist)? In fact, the revenue model for probably 90% of the web would be busted entirely.
In both cases you are completely wrong.
First off, there is no wall against not using ads. it is just like watching TV and shutting it off when there is a commercial break. Except I can skip forward "in time" without watching the ad. They provide that content for free. So I do not refuse to pay, because I do not pay regardless. I just save bandwidth and my eyes.
Secondly, I pay for my internet. And sites using heavy scripted ads are taking far bigger volume, meaning they force me to buy bigger and costlier packages in order to handle their site bandwidth. So aren't they also stealing from me?
Lastly, does a site come in the form of "warning, this site contain heavy ads and malware"? Because unless they do, how can you promise that if I whitelist OCN, tomorrow their ads vendor doesn't for some reason put a malware ad on my browser?
And to your second paragraph, sites have been using paid "advertisements" in the form of content without proper disclosure. So they are acting shady, being payed, in order to give me a "review" or "look what we found", when it is wholly untruthfully and misleading?
Why should they receive ads money from me, for being bad?
They want subscription payment? Sure, that is their choice. i would gladly subscribe to a site that give me true fully content with zero advertisements.
If a site ask me to pay for a subscription and give me crap load of ads, they can go to hell.
I'm completely fine with 90% of the current sites go down for lack of revenue because of their practice.
They we might see new sites that actually give real content, transparent, and they will be worth subscribing to.
I repeat what I said earlier. I block all ads because how they are being delivered everywhere, including OCN.
If sites stop being so crappy about it (sites or their ads providers), I would agree to stop using ad blockers, but not before. That is not a chicken or the egg kind of question. Either stop being crap, or I will continue using ad blockers as long as I can.
And one more thing about your BS about ethics.
Where is the ethics of the sites, not using disruptive ads? How about making sure their ads don't contain malware? How about ads that start to throw popups constantly? Where is their ethics? Why does ethics need to be one sided?
You want me to be ethic? I expect you to go to sites and demand that they act ethically as well.