4 ms·
The last time I checked with Adblock or Adblock plus (I don't remember which) I seem to remember it filtering out commonly used indicators of ads like divs with
by stevesearer 11y ago
The last time I checked with Adblock or Adblock plus (I don't remember which) I seem to remember it filtering out commonly used indicators of ads like divs with ad-related names or filenames containing _300x250_ etc... I could be mistaken though.
Thanks for the kind words too, I've really tried to make the site a place that I would personally like to browse and am glad to hear other people feel the advertising is nicely done.
- oneeyedpigeon 11y agoI happen to disagree with that method of blocking ads because of false negatives and false positives; isn't the solution simply to remove the offending patterns from your filenames? I'll add to the praise for your site. Your ads remind me somewhat of those from The Deck [1], although yours are nicer because they're 1st-party. Are you able to share any info. about the model? Do advertisers pay per click or per impression? If the latter, how do you prove your traffic figures to them, or have you built up a suitable level of trust? [1] http://decknetwork.net/ http://decknetwork.net/
- stevesearer 11y agoYeah, filename changing is what I would end up doing. As far as the model is concerned, a lot of the industry is familiar with magazine advertising so I just go with a monthly rate to keep things simple. There is trust involved, though most run a trial before committing to anything longer-term so they are able to see if the level of generated activity meets their expectations. It is much easier to do this kind of advertising because the content itself is so narrow that the readership ends up being narrow, whereas a general site like BBC or CNN you end up having a wide audience and then end up needing tracking tools to help narrow the audience into smaller groups.