4 ms·
>but it's sometimes hard to reconcile blocking ad-blocker-blockers ethically There is nothing unethical about it. If you want to be paid for your content, cha
by forgetsusername 10y ago
>but it's sometimes hard to reconcile blocking ad-blocker-blockers ethically
There is nothing unethical about it. If you want to be paid for your content, charge me for it and let me decide, voluntarily, to pay and receive it, or not.
This argument comes up every time there's discussion about ad-blockers: if your writing, music, poetry, punditry or photography is good, people will pay you for it. You don't "deserve" income merely by throwing something up on the web and having a user stumble onto it.
- epmatsw 10y agoSo, if they offered a PayPal button, and I decided I didn't want to pay via PayPal, would it be okay to not pay in that case? By putting up the blocker blocker, the site has clearly indicated how you can compensate them for the content, and the only ethical way I can think of around it would be to not consume it.
- nzp 10y agoFor crying out loud, what is wrong with people these days, are moral compasses so wacked out by constant corporate brain washing that people don't see there is simply no issue here. None at all. Not even from Facebook's point of view. If Facebook didn't want me to use their service without me seeing their ads, they WOULDN'T LET ME use it. It is that simple. No one is forcing them to let me in. Unlike a lot of their users who are in a real sense forced by their social connections to use it. In fact it's hilarious how “anti-blocking” people here think they're somehow philosophically and ethically upholding Facebook's part of the deal–by driving people away from Facebook. It's the exact opposite of what FB wants and needs!