> my behavior is not abusing the content creator in any way Abuse[0]: Abuse is the improper usage or treatment of a thing, often to unfairly or improperly gain

> my behavior is not abusing the content creator in any way Abuse[0]: Abuse is the improper usage or treatment of a thing, often to unfairly or improperly gain benefit. You go somewhere that use ads to finance the content, while making effort to block theses ads/thus the financing. It's certainly the improper usage of his website, to unfairly or improperly gain benefit. The benefit being access to the content. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abuse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abuse > Meanwhile the negative sides of advertising and ad tech are well-documented. Then why not avoiding anything using ad tech? The negative sides of smoke from cigarette are well known, I'm still not there trying to keep smoking while trying to avoid the smoke. Personally I have no issue with most ads. The only time I ever had an issue with them was over Engadget were I got 2 auto playing ads over the course of a few days, I just stopped going there. What are the negative side that you lived? That was the only one that I lived, a slight inconvenience, while everyday I get hundred of positive side. There so many content creator that I care deeply about that were able to live out of their content, that would never been able to otherwise. > Not to mention the fact that I am not the person responsible for giving advertisers access to someone's website. You are responsible for accessing it... > If anything I'm going easy on the content creator You are going easy on him? By accessing his content without respecting the terms he set on accessing it. That doesn't sound like anything generous. You act like you deserve the access to the content and now you even act like you reading it is some sort of reward for the content creator. That entitlement is seriously wrong.