“I think you'd be better off just accepting this. The user and their user-agent has a "right" to display a website how they want, including in ways that the dev

“I think you'd be better off just accepting this. The user and their user-agent has a "right" to display a website how they want, including in ways that the developer didn't think of - and including ways that are broken. The user can break your site if they want. I appreciate that this causes problems when they've not realised that it's their choices that break it, or put in annoying requests ("why doesn't this site work in Lynx"). But fundamentally they're customers, customers are always annoying.” It’s something at least akin to unethical to deliberately break something I’ve built and then come complain to me that it’s broken. And sure, they might be would-be customers, but not all would-be customers are worth serving. Just as customers have the right to buy from whoever they like so to do seller have the right to sell to whoever they like (barring certain narrow exceptions like racial discrimination.) It’s always the negative value customers that throw the biggest tantrums when they are told a business would rather not serve them. Or in the case of ad block users, not even customers just people that want something for nothing.