Blocking ads
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| mdl Apr 14, 2005 1:17 PM EDT |
"If you block ads, there are those who would assert you are not holding up your end of a "social contract" between yourself and the Web site that you are browsing." I'll buy that, especially on Linux sites. However, I draw the line on "distracting" ads, those with movement, like Flash ads. My policy is to block all ads that bother me. Google text ads are OK. |
| Fritz Apr 15, 2005 1:27 AM EDT |
I just block flash and of course pop-ups. Banner ads are easy to ignore. -> Fritz |
| peragrin Apr 15, 2005 4:09 AM EDT |
I block all ads except for local ones. Some small community sites (userfriendly.org) have banner ads asking you to donate. I won't block those, but I will block just about everything else. I can't stand ads. Peroid. I mute them on tv and do something else. |
| ajt Apr 15, 2005 7:57 AM EDT |
If the advertiser only pays the site if I click through, then if I block ads, then there is no change, I refuse to click on adverts out of principle. There is a nice article over on useit.com that shows that most people ignore adverts, and have been so annoyed by them, that they assume that many legitimate ones are actually selling porn or something else undesirable. If the advertisers hadn't fouled the well so much then people would still drink the water. I feel sorry for the small sites, that a few quid from Google helps to keep them going, but I find it easier to block all ads, rather just some. |
| PaulFerris Apr 15, 2005 10:36 AM EDT |
I have to say that when it comes to extremely annoying flash ads, any "social" contract I have goes out the window. Nothing pissing me off more than having my web browser suddently turned into a stinking TV set. It was an information device until I go a web site that has a flash ad with a talking head, blathering on about why I should buy into this or that kind of mutual fund. It's bad, especially out of social context (say, your looking up information for work, and this happens). Some of us expected our informational devices to be just that -- not glorified trips to channel 13. |
| tuxchick Apr 15, 2005 5:00 PM EDT |
Social contract my ass. I didn't agree to any contract with advertisers. If advertisers cannot find a way to craft attractive ads that people want to read, instead of being annoying assholes, tough. Anyway they won't be happy until the entire planet is plastered with advertising, so scroom. I have spoken. |
| phsolide Apr 15, 2005 5:19 PM EDT |
Advertising is basically lying. Unless your ad says something like "Ribeye steak, $5.49/lb" and that's not a loss leader, you're lying. I don't believe I have a social contract with advertisers. Advertising has perverted modern society through its pernicious influence on the media that carries advertising. And you get called a "communist" if you don't just blindly agree that Advertising Is Good. Yeah, right. And spammers have a right to Freedom of Speach. |
| hkwint Apr 16, 2005 4:19 AM EDT |
But hey, I think the named paragraph of the story is about web pages that may trying to block you for something if you don't watch their ads. Is that really possible? Can they see you block their ads and then try to screw you, by f*c&i(g up the web page you're trying to view? |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!