3 ms·

No - we seem to be at a misunderstanding here. I believe content creators should not deliver their content to me at all if they feel that delivering content to

by Nadya 11y ago

No - we seem to be at a misunderstanding here. I believe content creators should not deliver their content to me at all if they feel that delivering content to me at a loss is not worth it. I have no privilege to receive their content and they are under no obligation to provide me with it. The fact that they continue to deliver content to me at a loss shows that they value their Google Ranking and the possibility of me sharing the article to outweigh the cost of providing me with the content. They are making a cost-benefit analysis and deciding to show me the content anyways. The benefits of showing me the content, even at a loss, are superior to not showing me the content at all. If they have an issue with that - they can bring it up with Google. It isn't my problem that they care about their Google ranking. It's their problem with Google.

bryans 11y ago
I'm sorry, but it appears you are completely ignorant of the technological complexities involved in denying a user content based on whether or not you are blocking ads from a third party provider. It has nothing to do with search engine rankings or the trivial potential of "free promotion" by sharing the content. It has nothing to do with Google at all, in fact. I'm not sure where you're even coming from with that argument.
- HappyTypist 11y ago
  I think the previous poster might be referring to the fact that if you click on a result in a Google SERP (search engine results page), and then hit back and click on another result (e.g. due to the site not allowing you to view the content), in aggregate that site gets a severe ranking penalty. Given the prevalence of adblock users, a site that implements this (which is not hard at all -- just check if `<div id='ad' style='height:1px'></div>` has a height of 1 or 0) will quickly drop off Google.
  - bryans 11y ago
    My point was that this has nothing to do with the morality of ads being delivered or blocked.

by Nadya 11y ago

bryans 11y ago

I'm sorry, but it appears you are completely ignorant of the technological complexities involved in denying a user content based on whether or not you are blocking ads from a third party provider. It has nothing to do with search engine rankings or the trivial potential of "free promotion" by sharing the content. It has nothing to do with Google at all, in fact. I'm not sure where you're even coming from with that argument.

HappyTypist 11y ago
I think the previous poster might be referring to the fact that if you click on a result in a Google SERP (search engine results page), and then hit back and click on another result (e.g. due to the site not allowing you to view the content), in aggregate that site gets a severe ranking penalty. Given the prevalence of adblock users, a site that implements this (which is not hard at all -- just check if `<div id='ad' style='height:1px'></div>` has a height of 1 or 0) will quickly drop off Google.
- bryans 11y ago
  My point was that this has nothing to do with the morality of ads being delivered or blocked.