4 ms·

Beats my why anybody would still use ABP over uBlock Origin. Their "acceptable ads" program is basically a protection racket scheme.

patrickk 10y ago
Inertia most likely. ABP was around earlier.
WayneBro 10y ago
Because as soon as I started using uBlock "Origin", I started seeing more ads and more sites that didn't work at all where they previously worked with ABP. Because the uBlock "Origin" UI sucks compared to ABP. Because acceptable ads is easy to turn off with one click. And because gorhill is a real asshole when you submit an issue. It's now obvious to me why uBlock had all sorts of drama at launch.
- erikb 10y ago
  The a-hole part is certainly bad if it is true. Can you show some examples? The "seeing more ads" part can just be the result of having fewer users.
  - gorhill 10y ago
    The "seeing more ads" is baseless, I can easily provide cases where it is the opposite, because ABP is vulnerable to the "display: block !important" trick used by many web sites on Chromium-based browsers, is unable to block popunders, does not support script injections, and many other shortcomings. For instance, just try focus.de with EasyList Germany enabled. I think it's possibly just a case of someone unhappy for whom I declined[1] to take care of their pet issue, so lashing out with vague supposed flaws so as to undermine my work makes him feel better. 1. https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/issues?q=label%3Adeclined+is%3Aclosed https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/issues?q=label%3Adeclined+...
    - WayneBro 10y ago
      > ... so lashing out with vague supposed flaws ... That's funny. Because the reason I said it was that you close issues without pointing out WHAT item in your huge list of ridiculous guidelines (like "I don't accept pull requests") has been broken. LOL. It's a real asshole move and if anyone actually reads the list of declined issues they can clearly see that people are annoyed by that.
      - gorhill 10y ago
        To just respect the guideline to contributing shouldn't be too much to ask keeping in mind the time and work I happily volunteer to this project. Given the amount of invalid issues that keep being opened[1], asking me to spend time to detail why issues marked as "invalid" are invalid is to ask me to spend a whole lot of precious free time on not working to improve uBO. CONTRIBUTING[2] is there to be read and respected. If you disagree with it, best is to not open issues. Countless other people understand why it is needed and respect it, and helps the project get better. 1. https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/issues?q=label%3Ainvalid+is%3Aclosed https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/issues?q=label%3Ainvalid+i... 2. https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.m...
        WayneBro 10y ago
        It's ridiculous to think that every single person will interpret your rules the same exact way. That is why it's rude to just close issues without comment. Furthermore, since the person closing the issue is already quite obviously aware of which rule was broken - how much effort are we haggling over? A couple seconds? Anyway, as I've said it's clear from reading many of the declined issues that people are annoyed by your behavior. It's also clear that you are annoyed by your users, so I wouldn't say that you "happily" volunteer.
        dingaling 10y ago
        You might wish to rename CONTRIBUTING.md to something like SUBMITTING_ISSUES.md. In most open source projects, contributing refers to contributing code not opening tickets for issues or requests. Even Github's help documents align with this understanding: https://github.com/blog/1184-contributing-guidelines https://github.com/blog/1184-contributing-guidelines I have never used uBlock or looked at its project pages before now and would have skipped-past CONTRIBUTING.md if I was looking for issue-reporting guidelines. The current title doesn't even tally with the first line of the document. There is also no reference to the appropriate issue-reporting process from README.md.

patrickk 10y ago

Inertia most likely. ABP was around earlier.

WayneBro 10y ago

Because as soon as I started using uBlock "Origin", I started seeing more ads and more sites that didn't work at all where they previously worked with ABP. Because the uBlock "Origin" UI sucks compared to ABP. Because acceptable ads is easy to turn off with one click. And because gorhill is a real asshole when you submit an issue. It's now obvious to me why uBlock had all sorts of drama at launch.

erikb 10y ago
The a-hole part is certainly bad if it is true. Can you show some examples? The "seeing more ads" part can just be the result of having fewer users.
- gorhill 10y ago
  The "seeing more ads" is baseless, I can easily provide cases where it is the opposite, because ABP is vulnerable to the "display: block !important" trick used by many web sites on Chromium-based browsers, is unable to block popunders, does not support script injections, and many other shortcomings. For instance, just try focus.de with EasyList Germany enabled. I think it's possibly just a case of someone unhappy for whom I declined[1] to take care of their pet issue, so lashing out with vague supposed flaws so as to undermine my work makes him feel better. 1. https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/issues?q=label%3Adeclined+is%3Aclosed https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/issues?q=label%3Adeclined+...
  - WayneBro 10y ago
    > ... so lashing out with vague supposed flaws ... That's funny. Because the reason I said it was that you close issues without pointing out WHAT item in your huge list of ridiculous guidelines (like "I don't accept pull requests") has been broken. LOL. It's a real asshole move and if anyone actually reads the list of declined issues they can clearly see that people are annoyed by that.
    - gorhill 10y ago
      To just respect the guideline to contributing shouldn't be too much to ask keeping in mind the time and work I happily volunteer to this project. Given the amount of invalid issues that keep being opened[1], asking me to spend time to detail why issues marked as "invalid" are invalid is to ask me to spend a whole lot of precious free time on not working to improve uBO. CONTRIBUTING[2] is there to be read and respected. If you disagree with it, best is to not open issues. Countless other people understand why it is needed and respect it, and helps the project get better. 1. https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/issues?q=label%3Ainvalid+is%3Aclosed https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/issues?q=label%3Ainvalid+i... 2. https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.m...
      - WayneBro 10y ago
        It's ridiculous to think that every single person will interpret your rules the same exact way. That is why it's rude to just close issues without comment. Furthermore, since the person closing the issue is already quite obviously aware of which rule was broken - how much effort are we haggling over? A couple seconds? Anyway, as I've said it's clear from reading many of the declined issues that people are annoyed by your behavior. It's also clear that you are annoyed by your users, so I wouldn't say that you "happily" volunteer.
      - dingaling 10y ago
        You might wish to rename CONTRIBUTING.md to something like SUBMITTING_ISSUES.md. In most open source projects, contributing refers to contributing code not opening tickets for issues or requests. Even Github's help documents align with this understanding: https://github.com/blog/1184-contributing-guidelines https://github.com/blog/1184-contributing-guidelines I have never used uBlock or looked at its project pages before now and would have skipped-past CONTRIBUTING.md if I was looking for issue-reporting guidelines. The current title doesn't even tally with the first line of the document. There is also no reference to the appropriate issue-reporting process from README.md.