3 ms·

I downvoted you because you are deviating the conversation. I find it hard not to attribute hidden intentions behind what you posted. The parent comment quoted

I downvoted you because you are deviating the conversation. I find it hard not to attribute hidden intentions behind what you posted. The parent comment quoted saying they were loading their ads before ads from competitor networks. Noone said anything about when the content was loaded. Google is the largest ad peddler. You are obviously trying to shift the conversation away from how Google controls AMP and apparently used it to gain an advantage in the ad market (basically an antitrust issue) towards a generic conversation of ads are bad, but Google is good. The parent was complaing about corporations being large enough to ignore antitrust legislation.

izacus 6y ago
> You are obviously trying to shift the conversation away from how Google controls AMP and apparently used it to gain an advantage in the ad market (basically an antitrust issue) towards a generic conversation of ads are bad, but Google is good. That is a really horrible accusation of something I haven't done. The OP is the one proposing jail-like punishment for actions that only lower the ad revenue and actually benefit the customer. It has nothing to do with defending Google (especially since I'm also talking about AdBlockers, which could easily fall into "coporation allows adblockers to lower revenue" interpretation). Please don't look for hidden agendas where there aren't any.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- ric2b 6y ago
  > for actions that only lower the ad revenue and actually benefit the customer. False, it only does that for their competition.
cjaybo 6y ago
Are you spamming this comment using multiple accounts?