> do I think a company should be required to offer a zero ad service for money? No. Not the question. It was "if the company already offers a less ads for mone

> do I think a company should be required to offer a zero ad service for money? No. Not the question. It was "if the company already offers a less ads for money service" then should "less" mean "zero"? > People still subscribe to newspaper even though they are full of ads. Is this supposed to prove anything? They don't have a choice. If they offered a) Lots of ads for $X b) Many ads for $Y c) No ads for $Z How do you see that working out? I would expect (a) and (c) to be massively more popular than (b).