Blocking ads will force online publishing to change

Blocking ads on sites that use ads to generate revenue is basically piracy.

You're obtaining content without paying for it.
 
Chevron said:
Blocking ads on sites that use ads to generate revenue is basically piracy.

You're obtaining content without paying for it.
Click to expand...

Well, stop making irritating ads that come over the content you are trying to read (if your mouse accidentally goes over the banner) or as the guy with the tablet stated, the background ads that's on the MyBB home page and NEws24 for example, you want to use you thumb or finger on the side to scroll, so the add there is very irritating, content providers must learn irritation leads to piracy (not just cheapness).
 
supersunbird said:
Well, stop making irritating ads that come over the content you are trying to read (if your mouse accidentally goes over the banner) or as the guy with the tablet stated, the background ads that's on the MyBB home page and NEws24 for example, you want to use you thumb or finger on the side to scroll, so the add there is very irritating, content providers must learn irritation leads to piracy (not just cheapness).
Click to expand...

If you don't like the ads, don't go to the site.

You do realize you're just as bad as those that say "Well if they didn't make blurays so expensive I wouldn't pirate".

Really now...
 
Chevron said:
Blocking ads on sites that use ads to generate revenue is basically piracy.

You're obtaining content without paying for it.
Click to expand...

Hijacking my browser by opening multiple pop-under windows and playing a very loud Flash ad while I am in a quiet office or home and attempting to install malware are perfectly acceptable behaviour, though.
 
koeksGHT said:
While I agree with adblock I think people who block ads should be forced to pay a sub fee (if Google would implement) otherwise the owner of the site has no obligation to provide content for "free" and should block people.

Ad supported with subscription ad free version.
Click to expand...

He can block people, sure. Forcing people to pay for content which is openly available is wrong. It's like walking across an unmarked bridge and getting to the other side to be told it was a toll bridge and you have to cough up.
 
Chevron said:
If you don't like the ads, don't go to the site.

You do realize you're just as bad as those that say "Well if they didn't make blurays so expensive I wouldn't pirate".

Really now...
Click to expand...

The issue is not the sites I go to regularly (like MyBB). The issue is sites I visit through a Google search, where I have no idea what I will end up with. Or is there a way to preview the site before I go there?
 
Chevron said:
If you don't like the ads, don't go to the site.

You do realize you're just as bad as those that say "Well if they didn't make blurays so expensive I wouldn't pirate".

Really now...
Click to expand...

So if I turn down the sound, change the channel or go to the toilet during a TV ad break I am also pirating?

Should that behaviour also change?

And who said I can't filter what I see?
 
Chevron said:
Blocking ads on sites that use ads to generate revenue is basically piracy.

You're obtaining content without paying for it.
Click to expand...

What's in MyBB T&C's? Does it mention ad blocking at all?
 
Chevron said:
Blocking ads on sites that use ads to generate revenue is basically piracy.

You're obtaining content without paying for it.
Click to expand...

Most of the time, the content is not worth paying for. That's also a problem. Sites with premium content, such as Statfor charge for it, but it's premium content, most web stuff online is garbage, recycled from free sites such as CNN, BBC, science journals, wikipedia or what people post themselves.
 
koeks525 said:
Personally, I do not mind seeing one or two adverts on a web page, provided they are placed neatly and do not annoy me. What really annoys me is a web page that will be full of adverts...one at the top, one in the middle of the post you are reading, one at the end of the article, one that automatically pops up when you click a link on that web page, or those redirect adverts as you are about to download a file.
Click to expand...

The worst are the fake links, such as fake NEXT button or DOWNLOAD button. Basically the owners of the site treat the users with contempt.
 
Space_Chief said:
He can block people, sure. Forcing people to pay for content which is openly available is wrong. It's like walking across an unmarked bridge and getting to the other side to be told it was a toll bridge and you have to cough up.
Click to expand...

Huh?

You do know that viewing ads is a form of payment right?

By blocking ads you're not paying for your "free" content.
 
Chevron said:
Huh?

You do know that viewing ads is a form of payment right?

By blocking ads you're not paying for your "free" content.
Click to expand...

Noooo, I didn't know that, you know all along I thought ads were just for lulz!!!!!1 You're my hero Chevron! I'm online from 1995 and all along I thought that. And those early ads.... lol.

If you want to charge for something, you have to be upfront about it. You can't present a page, someone modifies in their browser - perfectly legal-and then charge people. You must have a paywall.
 
So is it acceptable to leave during a TV ad break or change the channel or have a chat with someone or is that piracy?

Should we also be adding that to the list of unacceptable behaviours or are web devs special snowflakes?
 
Space_Chief said:
Noooo, I didn't know that, you know all along I thought ads were just for lulz!!!!!1 You're my hero Chevron! I'm online from 1995 and all along I thought that. And those early ads.... lol.

If you want to charge for something, you have to be upfront about it. You can't present a page, someone modifies in their browser - perfectly legal-and then charge people. You must have a paywall.
Click to expand...

Well that would be the paywall.

Show two different pages based on if an adblocker is installed.

If an adblocker is installed the user can choose to enter CC details or move to another site. That seems very fair to me.
 
Chevron said:
If an adblocker is installed the user can choose to enter CC details or move to another site. That seems very fair to me.
Click to expand...

Well no, hopefully Google will just add a sub option where users can opt in to receive an ad free experience for a small cost split to publishers. Rather than force everyone to a paywall
 
Chevron said:
Well that would be the paywall.

Show two different pages based on if an adblocker is installed.

If an adblocker is installed the user can choose to enter CC details or move to another site. That seems very fair to me.
Click to expand...

No. You suggested forcing people who block ads to pay. That implies sending them an invoice after the fact. Paywalls are upfront. You pay and you get to enter. Or there is a free trial.

By all means maybe do create paywalls. Most people will not subscribe. And online promotion will die completely.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X