3 ms·
As a user of AdBlock, unless it's a site I desperately need to function (there aren't very many of these), having it be broken with AdBlock turned on clues me i
by zeta0134 10y ago
As a user of AdBlock, unless it's a site I desperately need to function (there aren't very many of these), having it be broken with AdBlock turned on clues me in that something shady is going on. I'm more likely to simply leave and never come back.
Note here that I'm not against certain kinds of advertising, and I'm all for subscription models and donation incentives and a great many other ways to fund sites. But third party advertising networks have forever lost my trust, and I simply won't tolerate the security risk nor the annoyance any longer. Your site is welcome to require me to disable AdBlock, and that's fine. I don't need to read your posts that badly anyway.
- dgfgfdagasdfgfa 10y ago> having it be broken with AdBlock turned on clues me in that something shady is going on The "something shady" is AdBlock muscling their way into the ad revenue game using you as a way to bludgeon the sites serving the ads. Under no circumstance should an ad blocker prevent the site from working as expected; that's the purview of the site itself.
- JetSpiegel 10y agoBy that argument, people using IE6 are also "bludgeoning the sites serving the ads"?
- dgfgfdagasdfgfa 10y agoYes.
- CaptSpify 10y agoSites can easily design themselves to work well without ads. In fact, it takes more effort to make your site break if ads aren't working.