4 ms·
Just heads up, for anyone who hasn't read the article: The publishers mainly went against AdBlock Plus not because it blocks ads (though surely a welcome side e
by germanier 12y ago
Just heads up, for anyone who hasn't read the article: The publishers mainly went against AdBlock Plus not because it blocks ads (though surely a welcome side effect) but because they offer advertisers to put their ads on a whitelist for a fee.
- btdollar 12y agoI went into the article expecting to be having a laugh at publishers but I agree wholeheartedly. ABP is a yelp-style racket. uBlock all the way.
- shmerl 12y agoIt's just an angle of attack. They couldn't just say "hey, the user has no right to block ads!". But of course they don't like it to begin with.
- nsomaru 12y ago@btdollar, just to note, your account is hellbanned.
- abandonliberty 12y agoI thought the strategy was not to tell them?
- LukeShu 12y agoGenerally, yes, because hell-banning is for trolls, bots, and those who routinely make bad posts. However, sometimes someone gets hell-banned for one extremely down-voted comment, but in general are making decent comments. It's a common courtesy to inform these people if you run across it.
- saganus 12y agoWhat does it mean to be hellbanned and why can we see the posts anyway?
- jakejake 12y agoThere's a user setting to view dead (banned) posts. If you see them then you have yours enabled. But nobody can reply to a dead post.
- charonn0 12y agoAccording to the article, ABP claims that 90% of the whitelist did not pay to be on it.