The Adblock Project Forum Index The Adblock Project
Pull up a seat ...stay a while.
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Should Filterset.G allow text ads?
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Adblock Project Forum Index -> Main
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Should Filterset.G allow text-based advertisements?
Yes
38%
 38%  [ 40 ]
No
61%
 61%  [ 63 ]
Total Votes : 103

Author Message
G



Joined: 10 Oct 2004
Posts: 550

PostPosted: Fri Jan 07, 2005    Post subject: Should Filterset.G allow text ads? Reply with quote

Currently, text ads are blocked by Filterset.G, leaving websites with no way to generate revenue through advertising. Text ads that do not distract from site content are widely touted as the "solution" to the problem of flashy, distracting advertising. I am therefore posing the question to you, the users: Should Filterset.G allow unobtrusive text ads? Doing so could point advertisers and site owners in the "right" direction, and keep users from being blasted for "destroying websites" and "stealing content" by proving that we are not against the business model, but rather against the format.
_________________
Filterset.G


Last edited by G on Sat Jan 08, 2005; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
idbehold



Joined: 03 Oct 2004
Posts: 174

PostPosted: Fri Jan 07, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would be very disappointed, plus it would be very annoying to have to find what parts of your filter were updated so that I would be able to keep the text-blocking part of the filter.
_________________
Firefox Speed Tweak
Block Ads With userContent.css
Gecko/20050212 Firefox/1.0+ (MOOX M3)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
yuri.ccp



Joined: 07 Jan 2005
Posts: 1
Location: Brasil/Alagoas/Macei

PostPosted: Fri Jan 07, 2005    Post subject: Sugestion Reply with quote

Perhaps either better to place the blockade of text ads as opicional. As an option of the AdBlock. Thus only it blocks who wants.
_________________
|
_|_
|0 0|
===
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
s_g



Joined: 07 Jan 2005
Posts: 1

PostPosted: Fri Jan 07, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

I didn't vote because I'd rather suggest to offer two filtersets - one with text ads and one without them. This way every user could decide for himself - like he can decide in the AdBlock prefs if he wants to hide ads (and in some cases still support the websites he visits by loading the hidden ads) or completely block them.

I do not know however how much more work it would mean for G to provide two filtersets.


btw and OT: Thanks for helping me with my map24.com problem, G, it works now for me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ParagonX
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Jan 07, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd also like to vote for two lists.
Back to top
Guest






PostPosted: Fri Jan 07, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

But there is also a problem of the definition of "text ads", ist it e.g. still a text ad, if there is an image?
Whats with (flash-) layers with text? Also text ads?
Back to top
G



Joined: 10 Oct 2004
Posts: 550

PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm referring specifically to unobtrusive text-only ads, such as the "Sponsored Links" found at the bottom of many pages.
_________________
Filterset.G
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Michaelh
Guest





PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Text Ads Reply with quote

Yes, allow text ads.
Back to top
Guest






PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

no Wink
Back to top
cell1527



Joined: 16 Jul 2004
Posts: 44

PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

No way they should be allowed, I have my Screen Resolution set at 1280x1024 and these "Text Ad" windows still take up half of the screen, and not to mention almost all of them are a different color then the rest of the page, so quite frankly, I do find them obtrusive, They should do it like google.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
G



Joined: 10 Oct 2004
Posts: 550

PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

Let me stress that I'm talking about unobtrusive text-ads. If they're overly colorful or overly large, they're going to be blocked, no matter what.
_________________
Filterset.G
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
DEFIANT



Joined: 12 Sep 2004
Posts: 6

PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

an ad is an ad is an ad. either way you slice it, i dont want to see it. so no.

~DEFIANT
_________________
E=mc
The Ur-Quan Masters
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
threedaysrest
Guest





PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

I vote no. Block any and all ads, no matter how ostensibly unbobtrusive. Pop-ups were once small, unobtrusive windows...

~tdr.
Back to top
idbehold



Joined: 03 Oct 2004
Posts: 174

PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

G, which filters block the text ads in your filterset?
_________________
Firefox Speed Tweak
Block Ads With userContent.css
Gecko/20050212 Firefox/1.0+ (MOOX M3)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
IceDogg



Joined: 19 Oct 2004
Posts: 109

PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

I know I'm going to be hated for this.. but the kind you're talking about G I don't mind.. never really did.. but because they got so greedy I kind of declair war so all ads get blocked. But I will use your list either way. Like I say, they are not all the bad.. If not Over size or Goofy colors and such, or a lot of them on one page. But you take the time to do this list I think you have to do it your way.. whatever makes you happy. It's your time.. BTW THANKS
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JPWhite



Joined: 10 Jul 2004
Posts: 33

PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: No thanks Reply with quote

I vote NO for text adverts.

On some pages such as Excite.com they take up a LOT of real estate that I prefer to use for more useful information. I'd hate to see things compromised in filterset.g.

Keeping two lists is probably asking too much of G. It's not like he gets paid the big bucks.

Keep up the good work G and don't let webmasters talk you out of what you've accomplished thus far!!

JP
_________________
JP
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Guest






PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

text ads, like what Google uses, are not bothersome to me at all. I don't care what you choose one way or the other, but I hope you consider giving those that DON'T like the text ads an option. Maybe by maintaining two seperate versions of the list. One that blocks all ads, and one that blocks everything except text ads.
Back to top
Guest






PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

i think it would be hard to manage two lists all the time

if google type ads are the only ones you are allowing, i think that's ok

and besides for anyone who does want to block the google text ads its really easy

when you see the first google ad on your webpage
right click, click adblock iframe, and put astricks wherever there are numbers, and delete the string after the ? mark
Back to top
rangi
Guest





PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

One of the reasons Firefox is so popular is its Extensions and Adblock would be one of the most popular, selectively reducing its functionality defeats its purpose I would have thought. It comes down to a simple matter of choice, if you don't mind Ads do not install Adblock for those of us who do object to them please do not change Adblock.
Back to top
Guest






PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

First, many thanks to G for his excellent work. I can't seem to vote (because I'm a guest?) but I favor permitting unobtrusive text ads. I'm willing to accept a small penalty to permit free websites to generate some income.

Daniel
Back to top
kingtone
Guest





PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Yes, allow UNOBTRUSIVE text ads Reply with quote

If we are talking about Google type text ads, I say allow them to show. Pop ups and unders are pure evil but little text ads are ok IMHO.
Back to top
Zachariah



Joined: 21 Jul 2004
Posts: 703
Location: Earth

PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

leave filterset.G alone -- make a competing filterset if you want one which allows text ads

can't have enough competing filtersets IMO
_________________
Latest Adblock!

If all else fails try a really fresh install of Firefox
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Guest






PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

Seeing as how the filterset maker is asking the public for a poll, you happen to be in no position to tell others to shut up, pal.

+1 for text ads, as long as they're not too obtrusive. The Google ads are fine, as are anything else somewhere along those lines. As long as the REAL crap gets filtered... hey, webmasters have to eat, too.
Back to top
Guest
Guest





PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

I vote to block them. It's not like someone actually licks on sponsored links anyway, so why would you want to see them?
Back to top
wallace
Guest





PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: no to text advertising Reply with quote

I think Ad Block and your maintaining of the filtres list is a great service...Thank you!...and would encourage you to block text ads.
Back to top
Postman
Guest





PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Hmm... Reply with quote

Well, I understand the whole concept of advertisement on the Internet and for some sites it's the only way to get some revenue from the 'net. I would like, to some degree, to support the site and make sure it stays up but that also depends on how annoying the ad is. I think the Filterset.G is great and all but I would like some way to support some sites in through ads if no other form of support is possible. While I am on the topic, Adblock is pretty awesome! Very Happy
Back to top
Zachariah



Joined: 21 Jul 2004
Posts: 703
Location: Earth

PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anonymous wrote:
...shut up, pal
What, you've never posted past your bedtime? Wink

Obviously I failed to recognize it was G posting the poll, but my sentiments should have been clear.

To clarify, my post should have read:
Quote:
please leave filterset.G alone (in spirit keep it a list which blocks a lot but with few false positive) -- make two filtersets if people want one which allows text ads (I can see the benefit of that)

can't have enough differing filtersets IMO

_________________
Latest Adblock!

If all else fails try a really fresh install of Firefox
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
No, Thanks
Guest





PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

I vote not to allow them
Back to top
neithian



Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Posts: 1
Location: Fort Myers, FL USA

PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

I like the idea of the reason, I also do believe these sites do need to generate some money in order to stay alive. I mean, can you really expect a site to continuously stay running without some form of income? Sure, the site could stay alive by other means of income, but advertising has become one of the mainstays of income for a website. I'm voting yes, because I don't see any problem whatsoever with text-based advertising, especially the kind you can find on Gmail.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ken Cooper



Joined: 29 Dec 2004
Posts: 110
Location: Holland, MI USA

PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

I voted no, since I never click on advertisements anyway. The folks in this forum who block ads do so for a reason. It is only a matter of time before blocking text ads will become impossible anyway. Yahoo groups text ads cannot be blocked now.
_________________
My Firefox Page
NOTE: Firefox is spelled F-i-r-e-f-o-x; only the first letter capitalized. The preferred abbreviation is Fx or fx.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
.G
Guest





PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Surely keep text ads blocked Reply with quote

It would be a great waste for FilterSet.G to allow text ads... I would like those to be kept banned. Google does text ads and they are annoying... Yes, indeed this is against the spirit of advertising.. but isn't this the reason that we have Adblock in the first place and your user community updates their list each week. I think a good start would be as many have suggested... offer two versions.. and you could see which one gets downloaded more.

I think keeping text ads block is the right way. But surely if some have pangs with that-- then the only way forward is offering choice and not showing text ads.

G
Back to top
IceDogg



Joined: 19 Oct 2004
Posts: 109

PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Re: Surely keep text ads blocked Reply with quote

.G wrote:
It would be a great waste for FilterSet.G to allow text ads... I would like those to be kept banned. Google does text ads and they are annoying... Yes, indeed this is against the spirit of advertising.. but isn't this the reason that we have Adblock in the first place and your user community updates their list each week. I think a good start would be as many have suggested... offer two versions.. and you could see which one gets downloaded more.

I think keeping text ads block is the right way. But surely if some have pangs with that-- then the only way forward is offering choice and not showing text ads.

G


Why did you try to make your post look like you was G?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Phobos
Guest





PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't mind text ads, I do mind flashing or annoying text ads though - any that utilise scripts to make them "stand out".

My vote is with no.
Back to top
Guest






PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think 2 lists would be best, but G has to decide it, if its to much work or if he can handle it...

Perhaps another person would like to make another list?
Back to top
Guest






PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

I vote no for this as well. By complicating the filter process you open the door for workarounds. We end up right back where we started when someone finds a way to disguise an annoying ad as a text ad.

They blew their chances at online advertising when they did 2 things:
1. Obnoxious ads that are distracting, annoying, and intrusive.
2. Made ads that appear to be part of the site, essentially tricking people into visiting the advertisers web page.

When the annoying ads disappear entirely and we no longer NEED to block them, then we'll talk.

Another alternative may be a white list. Most of the blocks are for specific sites that flood the internet with ads. If a site produces ads that meet specific criteria(not annoying, intrusive, distracting, etc.), then we can agree to allow their content.

But if we try to unblock text ads alone, mark my words, advertisers will start to abuse it. My vote on this is definitely no.
Back to top
G



Joined: 10 Oct 2004
Posts: 550

PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anonymous wrote:
By complicating the filter process you open the door for workarounds ... We end up right back where we started when someone finds a way to disguise an annoying ad as a text ad ... But if we try to unblock text ads alone, mark my words, advertisers will start to abuse it..


It's child's play to avoid being filtered - there is absolutely no reason for someone to make an image-ad look like a text-ad. Once again, I am only talking about unobtrusive text-ads. If it was "abused" it would obviously be obtrusive, and would therefore be blocked.
_________________
Filterset.G
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
venoman



Joined: 26 Dec 2004
Posts: 7
Location: earth

PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm abstaining, and here's why:

The points made in favor of allowing text-based ads are very valid, and I strongly agree that it's a format of advertising that deserves our support, but, while text ads detract less from the layout of a website, they still get in the way.

I feel users should be given the option to choose between a yes-text-ad version and a no-text-ad version of Filterset.G, since it's a given that the views here will be pretty divided, and there are valid arguments either way. Again though, the option to allow text ads would be nice.

Edit: speaking of text ads, (and this will obviously be dependant on the outcome of the subject of this poll), when reporting unblocked ads, should unblocked text ads be included as well?
_________________
-Venoman
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
G



Joined: 10 Oct 2004
Posts: 550

PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, you should report them, at least for now.
_________________
Filterset.G
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Eric
Guest





PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

First I wish to commend G on a job well done. Hats off to ya! Second,if you look at the Angefire web site you will see all text advertising is not blocked. I refer you to my own Angelfire web site for the purpose of reference. http://www.angelfire.com/poetry/byeric/ At this time I see no reason to change anything. Simply put "if it works don't fix it".
Back to top
BakeSnake
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Jan 09, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

The first thing I did with Adblock before I discovered your filters was kill Google's Adwords. I'm fine with the notion of internet businesses collapsing from lack of revenue. The first great sites were hosted by internet "afficionados", and those people will still maintain the content worth viewing.

I've yet to see a website that I couldn't live without. If the majority of sites cave, the net will simply evolve in the opposite direction that it has devolved thus far - likely gaining back the ground it has lost to the "masses" and becoming more of a niche for geeks like me Smile

This is a good thing, IMO. I've never once in my life seen a television commercial without my lip curling into a disgusted sneer. Same goes for all advertising. I already know what I want/need - when it comes time to make a buying decision, I can do my own research, thankyouverymuch. I certainly don't need any pompous advertiser thinking he has such fabulous powers of persuasion that he can convince me I need his Widgets.

Every byte of unnecessary text that I don't have to download makes my life infinitely better than any text ad ever could. Advertisements belong in a separate sub-section of the net where one may go to research his purchasing options at his leisure. Perhaps a ".advert" domain could be created.

Whatever. The point is, I decide what I want to see, not the advertisers. And if a site cannot cover the cost of bandwidth without ads, that site needs to be closed to make way for fresh, new blood which is motivated by enthusiasm for the medium rather than lust for the almighty dollar.

However this poll turns out, I'll be blocking text ads - one way or the other.
Back to top
Guest






PostPosted: Sun Jan 09, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

Please god no, I hate ads period. I'll donate to a site even, just NO ads.
Back to top
Spudge
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Jan 09, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

Keep blocking everything, please.I'm with BakeSnake on this one for the same reasons.
Back to top
JPWhite



Joined: 10 Jul 2004
Posts: 33

PostPosted: Sun Jan 09, 2005    Post subject: A few extra thoughts Reply with quote

I've already voted but here are some extra thoughts.

The main argument FOR text ads is to allow websites to unobtrusevly generate income.

Reality Check: Very Very few of the total web audience knows about or uses AdBlock. In addition only a fraction of the AdBlock users use or know about G's filterset. If G could sucessfully block all ads for all time the effect on any particular websites revenue would be very small IMO. Only if AdBlock becomes mainstream would there be a significant impact. I don't see that happening anytime soon. IMO the websites will not miss the small amount of revenue they'd get from our browsing.

JP
_________________
JP
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jpt



Joined: 09 Jan 2005
Posts: 9

PostPosted: Sun Jan 09, 2005    Post subject: But I AM against the business model Reply with quote

An unobtrusive advertisement makes about as much sense as a cute zit. There is no such thing.

I donate to the sites I care about, and hence they generally don't try to advertise at me anyway. Those sites that can't live without advertising revenue can die as far as I'm concerned.

No on any ads.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ken Cooper



Joined: 29 Dec 2004
Posts: 110
Location: Holland, MI USA

PostPosted: Sun Jan 09, 2005    Post subject: Re: But I AM against the business model Reply with quote

jpt wrote:
Those sites that can't live without advertising revenue can die as far as I'm concerned.


Except for Google and a few others right?

Regardless of the 'reason' (not revealed) by G for this poll, I will always attempt to block any and all ads -- I have no use for them. As others in this thread have stated, we (adblock users) are a very small sample of the overall surfers on the net. Those of us who want to view ads on certain sites only have to Ctrl+Shift+B before clicking the link to the website.
_________________
My Firefox Page
NOTE: Firefox is spelled F-i-r-e-f-o-x; only the first letter capitalized. The preferred abbreviation is Fx or fx.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jpt



Joined: 09 Jan 2005
Posts: 9

PostPosted: Sun Jan 09, 2005    Post subject: Re: But I AM against the business model Reply with quote

Ken Cooper wrote:
jpt wrote:
Those sites that can't live without advertising revenue can die as far as I'm concerned.


Except for Google and a few others right?

Wrong. If google asked for a donation I would pay. If I could hide their sponsored links, I would.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ken Cooper



Joined: 29 Dec 2004
Posts: 110
Location: Holland, MI USA

PostPosted: Sun Jan 09, 2005    Post subject: Re: But I AM against the business model Reply with quote

jpt wrote:
If I could hide their sponsored links, I would.


You can.

Place the following in your userContent.css file

From idbehold:
Code:

/* google search: product search (store linkage) */
body[onload="document.gs.reset()"] p.e table[cellspacing="0"][cellpadding="1"][border="0"] {
   display: none !important;
}

/* google general: sponsored links: top */
body[onload="document.gs.reset()"] p.e table[width="100%"][height="40"][cellpadding="3"] {
   display: none !important;
}

/* google general: search tip */
body[onload="document.gs.reset()"] table[cellspacing="0"][cellpadding="0"][border="0"] td[valign="bottom"][height="30"] {
   display: none !important;
}

/* google general: sponsored links: right */
body[onload="document.gs.reset()"] table[width="25%"][bgcolor="#ffffff"][align="right"] {
   display: none !important;
}

/* google groups: sponsored links: right */
body[onload="sf()"] table[align="right"][width="200"][cellspacing="0"][cellpadding="0"] {
   display: none !important;
}

/* google groups: sponsored links: top (everything but header) */
body[onload="sf()"] td[id^="taw"].ch {
   display: none !important;
}

/* google gmail: text ads */
tr[class="metatable"], td[class="rhh"] {
   display: none !important;
}

_________________
My Firefox Page
NOTE: Firefox is spelled F-i-r-e-f-o-x; only the first letter capitalized. The preferred abbreviation is Fx or fx.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
idbehold



Joined: 03 Oct 2004
Posts: 174

PostPosted: Sun Jan 09, 2005    Post subject: Re: But I AM against the business model Reply with quote

Ken Cooper wrote:
jpt wrote:
If I could hide their sponsored links, I would.


You can.

Place the following in your userContent.css file

From idbehold:
Code:

/* google search: product search (store linkage) */
body[onload="document.gs.reset()"] p.e table[cellspacing="0"][cellpadding="1"][border="0"] {
   display: none !important;
}

/* google general: sponsored links: top */
body[onload="document.gs.reset()"] p.e table[width="100%"][height="40"][cellpadding="3"] {
   display: none !important;
}

/* google general: search tip */
body[onload="document.gs.reset()"] table[cellspacing="0"][cellpadding="0"][border="0"] td[valign="bottom"][height="30"] {
   display: none !important;
}

/* google general: sponsored links: right */
body[onload="document.gs.reset()"] table[width="25%"][bgcolor="#ffffff"][align="right"] {
   display: none !important;
}

/* google groups: sponsored links: right */
body[onload="sf()"] table[align="right"][width="200"][cellspacing="0"][cellpadding="0"] {
   display: none !important;
}

/* google groups: sponsored links: top (everything but header) */
body[onload="sf()"] td[id^="taw"].ch {
   display: none !important;
}

/* google gmail: text ads */
tr[class="metatable"], td[class="rhh"] {
   display: none !important;
}


Its been updated:
Code:
/* --- google.com ----------------------------------------------------------- */

/* general: search tip */
body[onload="document.gs.reset()"] table[cellspacing="0"][cellpadding="0"][border="0"] td[valign="bottom"][height="30"] { display: none !important }

/* general: sponsored links: right */
body[onload="document.gs.reset()"] table[width="25%"][bgcolor="#ffffff"][align="right"] { display: none !important }

/* general: sponsored links: top */
body[onload="document.gs.reset()"] p.e table[width="100%"][height="40"][cellpadding="3"] { display: none !important }

/* search: product search (store linkage) */
body[onload="document.gs.reset()"] p.e table[cellspacing="0"][cellpadding="1"][border="0"] { display: none !important }

/* groups: sponsored links: top (everything but header) */
body[onload="document.gs.reset()"] td[id^="taw"].ch { display: none !important }

/* groups: sponsored links: right */
body[onload="document.gs.reset()"] table[width="100%"][cellpadding="3"] tr[valign="top"] td[valign="top"][rowspan="26"] { display: none !important }

/* groups-beta: sponsored links: right */
body[onresize=""][onload="sf()"] table[width="200"][align="right"][style="float: right;"] { display: none !important }

/* gmail: text ads */
div.c.xs#ad { display: none !important }

_________________
Firefox Speed Tweak
Block Ads With userContent.css
Gecko/20050212 Firefox/1.0+ (MOOX M3)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Ken Cooper



Joined: 29 Dec 2004
Posts: 110
Location: Holland, MI USA

PostPosted: Sun Jan 09, 2005    Post subject: Re: But I AM against the business model Reply with quote

idbehold wrote:
Its been updated:


I was sure my auto-update was enabled. Very Happy

Thanks idbehold.
_________________
My Firefox Page
NOTE: Firefox is spelled F-i-r-e-f-o-x; only the first letter capitalized. The preferred abbreviation is Fx or fx.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
A random guest
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Jan 09, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

Now, now. From what I can see, a lot of you just seem to be being selfish about this whole thing.

Some ads, like the Google ones, are VERY easy to ignore. Hell, I hardly notice the ones on Gmail. Google ads also tend to try placing RELEVENT ads, something that you MIGHT be interested in. Actually clicking on it is your choice.

However, there are some I'd rather not see at all. Ads with totally different colors from the site, just to stand out, need to be removed. G has stated that the obtrusive text ads would be gotten rid of, and unobtrusive would be allowed, if this passes.

Some people can ONLY generate revenue from advertising, and not even donations work because not many people visit their site. Workarounds should be forced out somehow, I agree, but... a textual ad that hardly catches your eye? There's no reason to block THAT.

Personally, I would vote yes if it weren't for the fact that I'm a guest, but honestly... not blocking unobtrusive textual ads would be easier for G, and letting JUST those get through would encourage less graphical or annoying ads if Adblock became mainstream.
Back to top
Happy Dude
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Jan 10, 2005    Post subject: Text ads are ok Reply with quote

I don't have a problem with text ads, labeled clearly 'Advertisement' as newspapers do. Make a little jack with your space, that's cool.

You guys who want to deny web sites any revenue for what they do are, in my opinion, missing the point. Adversting becomes obnoxious when it distracts from a given experience. As an example, I doubt many of you object to advertising in a magazine that you paid money for as vehemently as you object to advertising online.

The difference is that online advertising now takes the form of (and every cheap trick of) video advertising, yet it appears in the context of a printed page. It flashes. It dances. It changes colors and scenes....... It's distraction.

Text is text. If you didn't piss me off with the ad, I might actually entertain your message.

So my vote is text ads are fine. However, the unreasonable hardcore will hate you for it, seeing you as siding with the 'enemy'......... so I suggest some sort of toggle.
Back to top
McLurker



Joined: 10 Jan 2005
Posts: 1

PostPosted: Mon Jan 10, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

Another yes vote.

We should encourage sites to use text ads, rather than flashing images. some sites need this revenue.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Doomguy



Joined: 10 Jan 2005
Posts: 3
Location: Australia

PostPosted: Mon Jan 10, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well text ads are ad's and adblocker is an adblocker. I voted yes.

BTW, thanks so much for the filters G. They are soo good. Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
panzerboy



Joined: 10 Jan 2005
Posts: 1

PostPosted: Mon Jan 10, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

I voted to allow text-based ads, but it's a qualified "yes". Unobtrusive little text ads are fine, but not all text ads. Maybe there should be some guidelines definining "acceptable" text (or even unobtrusive non-text) ads. The idea of more than one list mentioned by others is also good.

This is all more work for someone not getting paid for their efforts though, so I feel bad suggesting stuff that creates much extra work.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pete 1
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Jan 10, 2005    Post subject: Re: Should Filterset.G allow text ads? Reply with quote

Laughing i vote yes to allow text ads Rolling Eyes

G wrote:
Currently, text ads are blocked by Filterset.G, leaving websites with no way to generate revenue through advertising. Text ads that do not distract from site content are widely touted as the "solution" to the problem of flashy, distracting advertising. I am therefore posing the question to you, the users: Should Filterset.G allow unobtrusive text ads? Doing so could point advertisers and site owners in the "right" direction, and keep users from being blasted for "destroying websites" and "stealing content" by proving that we are not against the business model, but rather against the format.
Back to top
kitchenutensils
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Jan 10, 2005    Post subject: YES IT SHOULD Reply with quote

Definately in agreement; the net is unfortuneately heavily built on ads and they are needed to keep it up. Text ad's are the way forward, because they are unobtrusive and both advertisers content hosters; and viewers can live in harmony without obttrusiveness.
Back to top
Guest






PostPosted: Mon Jan 10, 2005    Post subject: I'm on Dial-Up Reply with quote

I'm on a dial-up at 28.8 speed; not only that, but I share the connection between two computers. So, the more unnecessary, unrelevant crap that gets blocked out of my web pages, the better.

If I was on cable, I don't think the text ads would bother me.

However, I didn't vote. I think you should offer two filtersets or script a "switch" that would allow users to alter some code to enable the text-blocking.
Back to top
Another guest to register
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Jan 10, 2005    Post subject: Like many... Reply with quote

I vote for the option not on the list.. 2 lists with each user having the choice.. Otherwise, I would vote to keep the blocking. Ads are ads.. If I want to see them I turn adblock off.
Back to top
Phobos
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Jan 11, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

By the way, I meant no to blocking them - oops. Laughing

So yes, I think text ads should not be blocked - but, you could supply the information on how to as an extra.

To be honest, I do not really mind if they are blocked, so I'll go with the majority eitherway.

Plus the userChrome.css blocking method also works great and can probably be used to block text ads:
http://www.gozer.org/mozilla/ad_blocking/

Only problem is no enable/disable function - which adblock supplies - to help minimise problems when troubleshooting false positives.
Back to top
guest
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Jan 11, 2005    Post subject: an ad is an.... Reply with quote

ad so, no way no text ads!
Back to top
Guest






PostPosted: Tue Jan 11, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

If it's Google style ads only I am voting yes.
Back to top
Guest






PostPosted: Tue Jan 11, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

And keep up the good work!
Back to top
Guest






PostPosted: Tue Jan 11, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

The functionality should be there, but be user-selectable.
Back to top
ILF



Joined: 11 Jan 2005
Posts: 2

PostPosted: Tue Jan 11, 2005    Post subject: hell no Reply with quote

stuff all ads and the commercialising of the web. information for free, for everyone!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
venoman



Joined: 26 Dec 2004
Posts: 7
Location: earth

PostPosted: Tue Jan 11, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

notice the split opinions here I mentioned? It's to be expected. At this point if you choose to only offer a yes-text-ads filterset, odds are very good many will keep the january 6th filterset.g and someone else will pick up where you left off, keeping text ads blocked. Are there people that would use a filterset that allowed text ads? Obviously this proves there are plenty. In order to keep your current user base though, it means creating more work, maintaining two lists. I would reiterate what someone mentioned, though - the number of people using not only Adblock but filterset.g represents a very tiny percentage of all internet users. The odds of any website that earns its revenue from text advertising losing a remotely significant amount of income from adblock/filterset.g users is slim to none. To me it's really a non-issue as far as the main arguments are concerned.

Unless a large percentage of filterset.g users would strongly prefer to click on text ads than not see them, and therefore consider it an inconvenience having them blocked, there's not much point in allowing them.
_________________
-Venoman
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Guest






PostPosted: Tue Jan 11, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yep, user-selectable is the way to go. Although if we can only have it one way, don't compromise... keep blocking everything.
Back to top
pachyderm
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2005    Post subject: vote Reply with quote

Two lists.
Back to top
solace7x



Joined: 12 Jan 2005
Posts: 1

PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

I voted no.

Here is my reasoning:

1) As mentioned, not many use firefox (hopefully this will change), a smaller fraction of this fraction uses adblock, and another fraction uses this filterset. I found it through searching without knowing such a filter existed, and on my way i passed many forurms which asked the question 'why isn't there a master list?'. Point being, not many people use this specific filter. This fact may or may not change in the future...

2) Ads have always existed, they will always exist. I believe this filter, and obviously this fourm, exist since some people do not desire to see advertisements, even though it is well known that companies will not prosper without a way to let the public know what they offer: however there is a difference in quality. For example, i think certian companies are good because their products are good; therefore i check up on their webpages and am interested in their news. While they still need to advertise, a simple request mailing list or coherent website is all the advertising they need, if the product (or service) is good. A comany who only tries to sell one cheap product per person and profit off of sheer quantity, well these are the advertisements we all hate, even those who dont know about the filter or adblock. Therefore since ads will always be there, let them be there, but do not be passive about what is displayed on your specific screen, ESPECIALLY if you can control it.

3) 'Unobtrusive ads' do not exist. Lets take the main example, google. The defense is that it is a regular font, not all caps, a link, a short description, and off to the side of the screen. My main counter point is:
I did not request it.
Lets say i want to find out the difference between a phillips and a flathead screwdriver; i dont need ebay, shopping.com, and mytoolstore.com as results! If i want to buy these things i would've typed "purchase" or "buy" before my original terms!
I think another point in defense would be that certian companies would not 'get their name out'; however, consider this: if they had a great price or product originally, and competent management to properly 'advertise' without spamming or generating popups (etc...), do you think we'd never hear of this company? Conversely, if the company got really large, (ebay), do they really need to advertise on every search, 'unobtrusively' (sarcasm intended) ? The answer is no, its almost an insult to my intelligence, if i wanted to find a screwdriver on ebay i'd go to ebay, duh. People that (dont use the internet) dont know about ebay will hear about it soon enough without the aid of 'unbotrusive ads'.

Conclusion:
Filterset G is one of those things where the less popular it is, the better it works (since getting popular would almost surely terminate its exsistence, lets not kid ourselves about who controls the laws right now and that they are very for big business); the downside is that people who would use it because they dont click all the sponsered links (and thus reinforce these ads) dont necessarily hear about it. But the point is still that a minority uses this filter and the chances are strong that these people dont want any ads. (the poll results concur with this point currently: 26 NO / 15 YES) People who claim the text ads are unobtrusive or that they dont bother them, i dont understand since i explained above that you are either searching for something or you arent; if i could put a unobtrusive' jpeg of me smiling in the corner of your browser, (or some text about some stuff i could sell you) how can you be indifferent toward it, yet you are willing to go out of your way to install adblock and update the Filterset G? Since its purpose is to block ads, and we use it, we recognize advertisers will not be pointed in the right direction, and we acknowledge that the claims about "destroying websites" and "stealing content" are bunk. We are against the format, but most people (see #1) are not.

~SolAce7x
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Guest
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

block text ads - destroy the internet Exclamation Wink
Back to top
idbehold



Joined: 03 Oct 2004
Posts: 174

PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

Guest wrote:
block text ads - destroy the internet Exclamation Wink

My god... I figured out how to bring the entire internet to its knees, no hacking required. All I do, is get about 25 people to join me by not going on the internet. This will cause the site that I used to visit massive losses in money. We will crush the internet and then demand money if they want us to visit their sites. Twisted Evil
_________________
Firefox Speed Tweak
Block Ads With userContent.css
Gecko/20050212 Firefox/1.0+ (MOOX M3)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
ndwbr
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2005    Post subject: NO ADS OF ANY KIND Reply with quote

G - let me first say thanks for all your hard work. I have immensely enjoyed using Firefox with the AdBlock Extension and I faithfully check for an update about once a week (a more automated way of getting updates would be nice but hey, i'm not complaining). My vote is for NO ads whatsoever. I don't want to be hawked stuff left and right when I am surfing or working. I don't really have to elaborate on that do I? I don't understand why some people are really willing to go back to having ads at all. I think maybe the idea of two filters is a good one but probably more work than you want to take on. In any even, PLEASE KEEP THE FILTER BLOCKING ALL ADS AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE!!!!!
Back to top
greg
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2005    Post subject: no ads of any kind Reply with quote

thanks for an excellent tool and hard work to develop and maintain it

having said that, i personally ignore adds as i ingnore tv commercials so my vote would be to filter all

havings said that, i can see that after ffox achieves world domination Smile this filtering approach might really destroy the internet as many good sites survive on adverts

so on second thought, if it is not too difficult, split the filter in to two functional sets that could be selected individually or merged
Back to top
majic
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2005    Post subject: two lists.. Reply with quote

picture ads: go away
flash ads: go away
'green link" ads: go away

google unobtrusive ads: may stay (as long as they blend in with the site and are at the bottom/top or narrow ones on the sides)

I rarely click on the google ads anyway, so for me they just take up space but don't hinder my surfing experience THAT much. some ppl might want to have the option to block the ads, so maybe providing the option would be the best compromise.
Back to top
Guest






PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

First, thanks idbehold for the tip on cleaning up google!

A random guest wrote:
Some people can ONLY generate revenue from advertising, and not even donations work because not many people visit their site.

If they don't have any visitors, how are they getting revenue from the text ads?

And who says revenue is a requirement anyway? I remember a time before banner ads were common, the Web was fine without them. People didn't make money off their sites; there were still plenty of sites. Even today, there are very popular sites like The Best Page in the Universe that provide great content without resorting to advertising.

McLurker wrote:
We should encourage sites to use text ads, rather than flashing images. some sites need this revenue.

No, they don't. If they aren't making anything I want to pay for, why should they get paid for doing something their users don't evn like?
Back to top
Look! The random guest!
Guest





PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anonymous wrote:
First, thanks idbehold for the tip on cleaning up google!

A random guest wrote:
Some people can ONLY generate revenue from advertising, and not even donations work because not many people visit their site.

If they don't have any visitors, how are they getting revenue from the text ads?

And who says revenue is a requirement anyway?


Well, first off, they have to get a free host to keep their site up, because without revenue, they can't support their own server, or pay for a dedicated host. How do these free hosts stay free? They need to place some adverts around, and whenever they're shown, I believe it's detected, and whoever made the advertisement gives money to the host, allowing the free host to remain free.

When the site becomes popular, they can pay to have a domain, and that's when donations would possibly be good to keep the whole thing running, but... let's face it. Humans, and Americans in particular, are selfish, and tend to not touch the Paypal Donate link. In the browser's eyes, it seems like they get nothing for paying.

Now, on the other hand, when there's some advertising, people tend to click on these to find some offers. That generates money, and can help the site stay alive.

Not everyone can pay for a site through jobs and donations alone. And there's also another point. Some of you pay for magazines or newspapers, and tend to pass right by the ads, because they're not all that bad. Yet when you go on the internet and browse on sites that YOU get to see for free, you complain about adverts.

solace7x wrote:
...if i could put a unobtrusive' jpeg of me smiling in the corner of your browser, (or some text about some stuff i could sell you) how can you be indifferent toward it, yet you are willing to go out of your way to install adblock and update the Filterset G?


1. It's not flashing.
2. It's not animated.
3. It's just a corner, not taking up half the f*cking screen.

I went out of my way to get Filterset.G mainly so I could block the endless porn ads that I see all over the internet, and other kinds of ads that stand out more than the rest of the site, in cheap ways.

If all ads were just placed at the bottom of a website, not overly huge or eye catching, then I'd be fine with them. But they're not, so I got Adblock for all the other crap you find on the 'net.
Back to top
Dave
Guest





PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2005    Post subject: Yes, allow text ads Reply with quote

Please count me as a YES vote, though I'm too lazy to register.

I believe we should encourage sites to use unobtrusive text ads. If we don't allow some form of advertising and Adblock+Filterset.G becomes more widely used, sites will build workarounds to Adblock's filtering capabilities.

If that happens, it would:

(a) create more work for the Adblock developers as they try to catch up to the latest ad formats;

(b) increase complexity of the filtering rules, causing more work for G and the community of Adblock+Filterset.G users; and

(c) reduce the overall effectiveness of Adblock and Filterset.G.

Dave
Back to top
tannerjd



Joined: 13 Jan 2005
Posts: 1

PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2005    Post subject: My tuppence worth... Reply with quote

The way I see it is that you can unblock the text adverts if you want, but somebody else will provide the service that you take away.

It is fairly obvious from the current results of this vote that the majority of people (even with such a small sample) don't have a problem with the ethics of advert blocking.

How about not providing any block lists at all? That way your conscience is clear, and people can create and share their own lists?

Personally, I block as many adverts as I can as I frequently browse the web on my Toshiba Libretto (640x480 maximum). The way Firefox renders the text adverts on such a small screen leaves alot to be desired (the GMail adverts cover my Inbox).

Just my tuppence worth,
John D. Tanner
http://physics.open.ac.uk/~jdtanner
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Zachariah



Joined: 21 Jul 2004
Posts: 703
Location: Earth

PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

Look! The random guest! wrote:
...Well, first off, they have to get a free host to keep their site up, because without revenue, they can't support their own server, or pay for a dedicated host. How do these free hosts stay free? They need to place some adverts around, and whenever they're shown, I believe it's detected, and whoever made the advertisement gives money to the host, allowing the free host to remain free....


Or you could just do what I do and get a real job and share your content and pay for your bandwidth, hosting, and domain name out of your own pocket.

For example: I have a site offering free email aliases to those with my same last name, and I have no ads on the site (but do quietly accept donations) and don't charge any money to get the free alias.

I probably spend $2,500/yr. on hosting and domain names for all my projects each year. I do have 5 websites I have created for clients and charge them very reasonable yearly rent for their webspace, but it hardly covers the time and money I spend creating and hosting content on the web.

There's nothing anywhere that says people have to be able to get money from advertising in order to put information on the web! If your site can't survive in the face of ad-blocking software, then figure something else out to make a living -- but don't whine about it here (I'd love to sit on my <donkey> all day blogging for money, but I won't make people look at ads just to support my dream). If your site really is that good that people will miss it, then let I bet they'll make sure it stays up.

A very intelligent Anonymous visitor to this site wrote:
Quote:
...

As for free sites going away, bzzt, wrong. There are at least four kinds of free sites:

1. Sites that are done for the love of it, and funded out of pocket. This is every site I've ever put up, it's most of what I have bookmarked, and it's not going anywhere.

2. Official sites of organizations that don't draw their revenue from page views. This is most of the rest of what I have bookmarked, and it's going nowhere either. This covers everything from online stores to manufacturer support sites to government to academia.

3. Sites that are done for the love of it, only the owner can't afford the bandwidth costs out of pocket. These can switch to a donation and/or membership basis; generally it only takes a few concerned users to prop them up. Donation is usually better than membership for a forum, because the increased user base makes it more valuable. Also, bandwidth costs fall over time, and might fall even faster if there was less advertising revenue to prop them up.

4. Sites that exist only to make money through advertising. These could have a problem. Then again, most people are too lazy to block ads, so the impact is questionable. But there was a time on the web when category 4 didn't exist, and if that time comes again, we'll manage just fine, thanks.



I apologize about addressing this in this thread, but I couldn't stand bitting my tongue anymore.

I have already said how I feel about allowing text ads (it's a user's choice, and I prefer to block them, and I am a G fliterlist user, so I'd like to keep blocking them, but having two lists I think would be the best idea -- in fact other people should be creating lists also and offering them on this forum (like this Smile).
_________________
Latest Adblock!

If all else fails try a really fresh install of Firefox
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JPWhite



Joined: 10 Jul 2004
Posts: 33

PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dave said
Quote:
I believe we should encourage sites to use unobtrusive text ads. If we don't allow some form of advertising and Adblock+Filterset.G becomes more widely used, sites will build workarounds to Adblock's filtering capabilities.


Advertisers will try and circumvent filters regardless if the ads are graphical or text based. For the sake of argument, say we allow text ads (don't please) but block graphical ads. Do you really think that websites and their advertising hosts will not try and circumvent the filter for Graphical ads? They are hardly going to roll over and behave because we 'allow' text ads. They will try and get whatever advertising THEY see fit onto our desktops. What the filtering community does is unlikely to reduce the zealous nature of advetrizers out there no matter how 'good ' or 'bad' we are.

The advertisers and web masters have served up advertising without our prior permission or provide any type of opt-in/opt-out system. So I say screw 'em and block 'em.

JP
_________________
JP
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ParagonX
Guest





PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

Adblock has the ability to import filters in append mode as well as overwriting. Simply move text-ad filters to a 2nd list that can be imported in addition to the main one in append mode if you want to block them as well. Maintaining the list this way wouldn't be much more difficult. It would still essentially be one list, but spanned across 2 files.
Obviously a lot of people would like to allow simple text ads like Google's, but most would be afraid to touch the regex filters to delete them, and not too many would maintain their own filters. They need someone else's filters to use. The option should be there.
Back to top
G



Joined: 10 Oct 2004
Posts: 550

PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

Food for thought:

Without Geocities, an ad-supported host of free websites, there wouldn't be a Filterset.G. While there are certainly people willing to host it now, that wasn't the case before it caught on.

Also, many of the arguments I'm seeing here assume that everyone with something to offer the world is an adult with disposable income. I've had websites since I was just a child, for as long as Geocities has existed (over a decade now).
_________________
Filterset.G
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
idbehold



Joined: 03 Oct 2004
Posts: 174

PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

G wrote:
Food for thought:

Without Geocities, an ad-supported host of free websites, there wouldn't be a Filterset.G. While there are certainly people willing to host it now, that wasn't the case before it caught on.

Also, many of the arguments I'm seeing here assume that everyone with something to offer the world is an adult with disposable income. I've had websites since I was just a child, for as long as Geocities has existed (over a decade now).

www.f2g.net
_________________
Firefox Speed Tweak
Block Ads With userContent.css
Gecko/20050212 Firefox/1.0+ (MOOX M3)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Zachariah



Joined: 21 Jul 2004
Posts: 703
Location: Earth

PostPosted: Fri Jan 14, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

G wrote:
... Without Geocities, an ad-supported host of free websites ... for as long as Geocities has existed (over a decade now).


I, too, started my content life on the web at geocities, but took my site off and bought my own hosting when they started requiring ads. My geocities site now only is a complaint about the switch, along with the original geocities agreement. Officially this was the requirement:
Quote:
The only code that we require to be on all of your html pages is a reference back to GeoCities. This can be a reference to the main Neighborhood page that you reside in, or to the GeoCities Home Page at http://www.geocities.com/. Please see the FTP Procedures Page at http://www.geocities.com/homestead/homeftp.html#required for the preferred source code.
Now this was an ad for geocities itself, but to me that (1) meant that the advertising that geocities wanted to run was on geocities content, not mine -- and (2) the link was self promoting of the geocities community. I really wish it would have stayed that way.
_________________
Latest Adblock!

If all else fails try a really fresh install of Firefox
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BS
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Jan 14, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

I vote for the user option to choose between blocking text ads or not.

I simply don't believe that all advertisers behave like JPWhite wrote:
Quote:
Advertisers will try and circumvent filters regardless if the ads are graphical or text based. ... They are hardly going to roll over and behave because we 'allow' text ads. They will try and get whatever advertising THEY see fit onto our desktops.
JP


Yes, there will always some advertisers try to circumvent filters. And the filters will continue to improve. Is this a never ending arms race?.

Nobody can improve sales by placing ads on the browsers of those users that opt not to see any ads.
And we users can't expect to get free access to all the online information without ads. How do you think is Google generating revenue???

We can be glad that so many users are not filtering ads yet, because otherwise we would have to pay for most online contents. To stop an arms race both sides have to step back and think about the situation.

Let at least other users accept text ads to save your money.
Back to top
adsstealbandwidth



Joined: 14 Jan 2005
Posts: 3

PostPosted: Fri Jan 14, 2005    Post subject: absolutely not Reply with quote

Ads, whatever their nature, steal my bandwidth. I don't want to see them; I want them completely removed from the page!

If I wanted to look at ads I wouldn't be pursuing ad blocking technology!

Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JPWhite



Joined: 10 Jul 2004
Posts: 33

PostPosted: Fri Jan 14, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

BS Wrote

Quote:
Nobody can improve sales by placing ads on the browsers of those users that opt not to see any ads.


This is the logic that a calm sane person like you or I may use. Have you not noticed that saying no to a telemarketter doesn't get them to hang up? They persist to cling on like a leech never taking no for an answer. Often the only cure is to hang up on them without the usual courtesies. Blocking ads is just like hanging up on a telemarketer.

In the states at least there is now the option to opt-out of telemarketing calls. I hold out no hope of a similar opt-out scheme for internet advertising, what with it being global and beyond the reach of national laws.

I agree with BS that all advertisers are not necessairly overly agressive. IMHO the 'decent' advertisers are very much in the minority. One has to assume the worst unless proven otherwise.
_________________
JP
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
adsstealbandwidth



Joined: 14 Jan 2005
Posts: 3

PostPosted: Fri Jan 14, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

a quick google turned up this interesting thread:

http://computercops.biz/postt2705.html

the advertizer makes his inane claims and is quickly eviscerated.
_________________
uh oh
http://spychips.com/ -- RFID stealing privacy?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Random Guest
Guest





PostPosted: Sat Jan 15, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

ParagonX wrote:
Adblock has the ability to import filters in append mode as well as overwriting.

THIS is what I've been trying to get to. I just haven't been wording it right.

If text ads piss you off, don't overwrite with Filterset.G. Just append with every update! That way, said text ads won't be unblocked.

And also, personally, I'm just saying that some sites will need ads to keep going. Not everyone can get their own pay, or accept donations without getting in a load of trouble, people. (Let's consider the younger internet community for a change.)

Really, I could go with it either way. It's just that a bunch of you are starting to sound like this:
Quote:
OMG BLCK AZL ADZ OMG TEY SUX BLK PLZ!

And, honestly, the main reason I would allow them is because they're not necessary to block, and it's easier on G to not block them.
Back to top
G



Joined: 10 Oct 2004
Posts: 550

PostPosted: Sat Jan 15, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

When updating Filterset.G, you MUST overwrite existing filters. You can append a list of your own after updating.
_________________
Filterset.G
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Random Guest
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Jan 16, 2005    Post subject: Oop! Reply with quote

My bad. ^^;;

In any case, though, could you not just make it so that you create a secondary 'text ads' list, for those unobtrusive text ads, and have those people append said text ads to the main filter? That's what seems to be the best option so far. Lots of people are suggesting two lists, but it seems more sensible that the second list could be appended to the main one.

Or something like that.
Back to top
G



Joined: 10 Oct 2004
Posts: 550

PostPosted: Sun Jan 16, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

Most filtering is done by long, complex regular expressions. Any "additional" lists would have to duplicate a significant portion of the first to be effective.
_________________
Filterset.G
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Shining Arcanine



Joined: 16 Jan 2005
Posts: 3

PostPosted: Sun Jan 16, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

G wrote:
Let me stress that I'm talking about unobtrusive text-ads. If they're overly colorful or overly large, they're going to be blocked, no matter what.


Let me stress that any ad that pops up while I'm moving my mouse around is obtrusive. I don't know about other people but I won't have things poping up at me when I'm moving my mouse, especially when I use it to point out something to someone next to me.

kingtone wrote:
If we are talking about Google type text ads, I say allow them to show. Pop ups and unders are pure evil but little text ads are ok IMHO.


I can see it now, the very the moment I open an email in GMail the first thing I'll care about are the targeted ads.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
G



Joined: 10 Oct 2004
Posts: 550

PostPosted: Sun Jan 16, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

Obviously, anything that pops up is obtrusive, and is therefore not under consideration.
_________________
Filterset.G
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Kiai
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Jan 17, 2005    Post subject: Block all ads. Reply with quote

Please continue blocking all ads.

The two list idea also works for me; one with all ads blocked and one with all but text ads blocked.

Thanks for providing FlilterSet.G, I cannot stand browsing the internet without it.
Back to top
GeekGirl
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Jan 17, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

Does anyone recognize that this is a historic moment? The fact that this discussion is taking place shows that we are on the verge of the commercialization of the internet!

This parallels the path of the amateur radio ("ham") operators. In the early 1900's they were allocated all frequencies above 200 KHz because no one thought that there was anything useful above 200 KHz. Then came transatlantic communications, FM, and the rest is history. Now, they are battling against the telecom community to try to justify their meager remains of "free" spectrum (not to mention the corruption of shortwave via broadband over power line).

The exact same process is happening on the internet. Industry has suddenly discovered a very inexpensive distribution channel. They are using any means possible to access this distribution channel and they have a a very effective weapon - government regulation. Look at VOIP, taxation of internet sales, and the entertainment industry Evil or Very Mad .

By helping someone to recover "lost" ad revenue, you are succoming to the same thinking that prohibits me from skipping commercials during TV playback. Perhaps you will not be permitted to mute your TV in the near future?

This is not a fight about adblock! It's to preserve our freedom! What is next? Regulation of open source? We are under attack! NO ads! Fight! A call to arms! Block all referrer headers!
Back to top
GeekGirl
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Jan 17, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

G,

I very much appreciate the existence of your list. My previous rant is the frustration of seeing the open environment of free collaboration slowly being transformed into nothing more than a commercial venture.

I am very passionate about this topic. My previous rant is an expression of frustration- I see commericialization at almost every URL. Maintian your principles at all times.

If you compromise on your ads, then you have compromised on your product and reputation (regardless of free or shareware). Please think about what you intend to do.
Back to top
idbehold



Joined: 03 Oct 2004
Posts: 174

PostPosted: Mon Jan 17, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

GeekGirl wrote:
Perhaps you will not be permitted to mute your TV in the near future?
and if you try to turn the TV off the FCC will come to your house and kill you Laughing
_________________
Firefox Speed Tweak
Block Ads With userContent.css
Gecko/20050212 Firefox/1.0+ (MOOX M3)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Guest






PostPosted: Mon Jan 17, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

Your website requested me to come vote here but i'm not supprised at the results considrein how biased your go and vore text speech was.
Back to top
idbehold



Joined: 03 Oct 2004
Posts: 174

PostPosted: Mon Jan 17, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anonymous wrote:
Your website requested me to come vote here but i'm not supprised at the results considrein how biased your go and vore text speech was.


Whats so biased about it?

G wrote:
Should Filterset.G allow text-based advertisements?

- PLEASE VOTE AT
http://aasted.org/adblock/viewtopic.php?t=1370

Currently, text ads are blocked by Filterset.G, leaving websites with no way
to generate revenue through advertising. Text ads that do not distract from
site content are widely touted as the "solution" to the problem of flashy,
distracting advertising. I am therefore posing the question to you, the users:
Should Filterset.G allow unobtrusive text ads? Doing so could point advertisers
and site owners in the "right" direction, and keep users from being blasted for
"destroying websites"and "stealing content" by proving that we are not against
the business model, but rather against the format.

- PLEASE VOTE AT
http://aasted.org/adblock/viewtopic.php?t=1370

_________________
Firefox Speed Tweak
Block Ads With userContent.css
Gecko/20050212 Firefox/1.0+ (MOOX M3)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
JPWhite



Joined: 10 Jul 2004
Posts: 33

PostPosted: Mon Jan 17, 2005    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Whats so biased about it?


G''s original call to vote seems OK to me, maybe the guest was referring to G's subsequent comments here where he reiterates that he's only talking about unobtrusive text ads. I certainly get the impression that G is in favor of unobtrusive text ads from his comments. My assumption could be 180 from what he really feels, but that just the impression I got and I agree with Guest that G has 'steered' the discussion to a certain extent.

JP
_________________
JP
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Adblock Project Forum Index -> Main All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group