Adblocker is awesome
 

I know I'll get slapped for this, but adblocker is awesome. As a consumer I'll still do my shopping online but at least I won't have to put up with unstoppable commercials for every single youtube video I want to watch.

And if you're a Mac user who surfs with Safari, It's DONATIONWARE. Pay anything you want, or grab it for free.

http://safariadblock.com

Works perfectly and doesn't even require a restart of the browser.

does not work with youtube anymore for me

Yup, across pretty much all OSs and browsers there are excellent adblockers. Shame they've come to be a necessity for surfers, just another result of webmasters cramming every bit of real-estate with irrelevant shitty eyesore & browser-slowing ads.

edit: yeah, a lot of Youtube ads get through for me nowadays, I think they've changed their embedding code to make it tough to detour around...

Can I block only popups and such and not block static banners?

We all want and demand free content, but cry when surfers want the same from us.

Ironic.

Yup, static graphical ads coded directly into the page are usually immune. Which is usually fine, it's the popups and networks that are the problem.

Again, the problem is that for years ads were totally overboard and just vomited at the surfer, our industry was of course one of the worst - slowing, freezing, crashing browsers and just generally looking like shit. IMO if any restraint had been used across the board most surfers wouldn't be trying to block them.

First dem tubes, now the ad block man, how's a pimp gonna eat :1orglaugh

agreed, could extend that to hidden cross sales, card bangin etc... grab the big loot and destroy your future, good product without hidden or annoying shit= happy surfers that return :2 cents:

Installed now on Windows Safari :thumbsup

"ironic" is a bit of an understatement... not sure if you guys failed to ponder this for a second or what, but a tool like adblocker reduces most webmasters' income... how could you all so openly support it or are you all surfers or something?

For me it's only for testing purposes :2 cents:

Hey, Pete Townsend said the same thing!

:1orglaugh

Jewish, therefore awesome.

Ya, adblockers should be illegal or sued for making them by webmasters who lose tons of income from them. Fucking rediculous how they are not being sued left and right.

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

When installed adblockers reach 20%+ of surfers google will have a laugh in court...

:thumbsup:thumbsup:thumbsup


As a surfer and an online consumer and youtube watcher, I am just tired of ALL of the ads.

If I'm watching youtube the ads presented to me should be (1) In the general context of what I'm surfing for, (2) let me opt-out of watching a whole ad after a few seconds and (3) be in my own language. Lately all I see are french-speaking 30 second ads for shit I have no interest in that I can't opt out of. Sorry french advertisers, I'm using Adblocker.

Next is just general surfing for porn. I enter my search keywords and begin clicking and find an interesting site and maybe kinda consider possibly maybe paying for more services but FUCK NO, I'm bombarded with pop-ups and pop-unders and pop-sideways and robotic chat boxes and shit and piss and crap.

We all rely on ads to make money but treating customers like idiots is the best way to go out of business.

I will check it out

thanks!

Mitch

FlashBlock is also good.

Nowadays mainstream websites are so overloaded with bullshit that they are almost unreadable. Try going to some tabloid news site.

Moaning about ads on a free service like youtube - are you fucking kidding me? :1orglaugh Holy fuck I can't believe the absurdity of someone in the business of selling things bitching about how they can't opt out of an ad after a few seconds in order to watch something for free.

General porn surfing - you are 'bombarded' with pop ups plus pop unders plus chat boxes? Got an example site? I'm guessing you are more likely hit with 1 popunder, and a chat box, at most. 2 clicks and done, where you carry on looking at your free stuff.

And you aren't a customer until you've paid for a service, at which point you can crack on intrusive-ad free :thumbsup

I work closely with mainstream medias in Finland, and they are pondering how to end ad blocking and they're even discussing that advertising based content has had it's day. Time for paid content and consumers bring that to themselves.

There's no such thing as free content.

I use adblocker as well,i think i doing favor to advertisers since they would only spend bandwidth on me as i would never click or buy anything.I dont see point of enforcing ads at all cost as someone who block them probably wouldn't click or buy anything anyway.

You never buy anything online?

What makes you think that you have the right to make the rules? content owners make the rules, not you, if youtube wanted to show a 5 min ad every 3 minutes they could, I know it sucks but tough luck, it's their site, don't like the rules watch the content somewhere else...:2 cents:

Only webmaster related stuff.

yea, doing them a favor... :1orglaugh

you are burning site owner's bandwidth + using up their server resources and contributing nothing back... so not only are you consuming their content but you are costing them money on top of that...

what's a good word for an arrangement like that? "parasite" perhaps? leech?

The debate about adblockers has been around for years, as has anonymous surfing and cookie blocking in browsers, among other things. And there will always be a debate over them and who controls the user's desktop.

But the reality is that AdBlockers are not going away anytime soon -- and not just in the form of add-ons. They are built into browsers, firewall software and even standard "anti-virus/firewall" software. Heck, Symantec has been bundling theirs for a decade now.

As such, it is simply not a smart business decision to ignore their prevalence without trying to use alternative means to engage those that do use them. Doing so means you are leaving money on the table.

At the very least, have a fallback CSS text block, in which you can place your advertising links, for display when a banner blocked.

Note:i am not completely against ads,i am only against intrusive ads.That is a huge difference.
And for the record,at the moment i dont have any banner nor im nor popunder ads on my sites and still make money,so your claim is complete nonsense.
And another example:i have blocked ads here on gfy because they are intrusive and annoying,but i always check pinned threads,and also announcement section as well.
And i have sigs enabled,but images disabled also due annoying factor.

What's an intrusive ad? a 15 second commercial before a video on youtube? an adsense ad on a site? not so long ago, ads like that were the standard and no one was bitching... did you ever watch tv? aren't there at least 3 mins of ads every 10 mins? so how could a 15 second ad before a youtube video be "intrusive"?

ads on gfy aren't exactly "intrusive" either, lets be real, it's not like there is a popup hell each time you click a thread...

my claim is not nonsense, I know for a fact that I'm losing ton of $$ because of ad blockers...

I'm sure you are losing $$ indirectly too, for example: some sponsor spends $10k on ad package on gfy and gets little to no results because half the people on here have ad blockers... that $10k is partially coming out of your pocket, maybe that sponsor will no longer have $$ for a new better converting design for their tours, or will have to cut back on their content, etc = less $$ for you

I must be a dying breed, I like seeing ads. I enjoy seeing how others market products, it gives me ideas.

leech! haven't heard that term since the bbs days.. too true.

I think ad blockers are far more of a threat to our industry than anything that gets complained about daily here. It's nothing new, we have been faced with these types of problems since the beginning, but we definitely shouldn't be supporting the cause either. It's like protesting against nuclear fallout while fuelling up the rockets for your day job...

I'm with you Ross, I could see it if I'm just a surfer but as someone in the online marketing business I want to see the ads. There's been a number of times over the years that I've come across different sorts of ads that I was able to inject certain aspects in my own marketing and thus making my clients or me more money. :pimp

There was an article at Salon.com just yesterday about ad-blockers and their effect on the online advertising industry: http://www.salon.com/2013/09/02/the_...m_advertising/

From the article:
"Faida is not shy about the club that Adblock Plus wields.

?I think we have come to a point where we have so many users,? says Faida, ?that blocking all ads would be destructive to the Internet.?

Intrusive ads are the ones which constantly repeat on site.For me it would be good to see just one banner when i come to site and not anymore.When they start to repeat,and even same content to start to repeat,that is what i cant tolerate.Another approach what would be good,is to add forum section called "Sponsor Advertisers"where advertisers would be able to post threads and those threads would be visible entire time till they pay for advertisement,if they stop then thread would be moved to announcements.But if you ask me i think boards,shows and adult newspaper are kind a bad sources of affiliate programs compared to sites like 6bot and signbucksdaily and even webmaster surfer sites(sometime i just check other sites and if i like content i check which sponsor is behind it).

Also to return to your previous post,according to your logic it would be better to see ad,click on it,not buy anything,and then advertiser loses money which he paid to google(or whoever servers ad)instead simply blocking ad and not seeing it at all.

you are saying you don't buy anything, which is complete bs...

you might see an ad for a cool new car, click the ad, check it out, etc, and few months later buy it... or see an ad for a new McDonald's sandwich, then go out and buy it... etc

or even on an adult site, you might see an ad for a dating site (even though you might be married and have no interest in dating)... you might figure: "I see this site all over the place so it must sell well", so you click, signup for affil program, etc..

so just call it like it is, no need to make excuses, you don't like ads... but who does? :1orglaugh ...but don't act like there is nothing wrong with using adblockers, cause in reality you are fucking webmasters over by using them...

"intrusive" is really just an excuse, it's really a weasel word, just like "fair" is in political discussions... :2 cents:

why do you not stop visiting sites with 'intrusive ads' and visit 'non-intrusive ad' sites? I'll take a wild guess, and say it's because you want to see the content.

You have a site that monetizes by selling cpm ads, and all of a sudden that site gets no ad views, so the advertisers stop advertising, guess what happens? The site(s) close(s) down. How people don't see that, especially those in the selling business, is beyond me.

The internet is going to kill the internet.

That's how I do it. If I visit a site and it has a popup, or popunder, or full of blind links, or fake IM ads, etc. Any of the above, to me, tells me the site owner has a different set of values, with respect to user's experience, than I do. Then I make a decision whether the content is worth enduring it or not. No adblocker needed -- it's personal choice and we all set our own criteria for acceptable user experience. I just make it a point to never visit websites that annoy me.

In the end, each person is in control of their own online experience and has the choice to frequent a site which annoys them, or not.

For the x time,i didnt said how i dont like ads,i said how i dont like INTRUSIVE ADS.You are now acting like intrusive ad lol.You keep trying to "sell me" how i should not use adblocker,despise i told you how i use it to avoid intrusive ads.
Oh and btw let me give you example of good money making without ads -twitter and tumbl - so how do you then explain them?
And to give you an example a last thing which i bought online - a vps account,which offer i found on lowendbox.com site,and that was not DEFINITELY not an classic ad,yet i bought it anyway.

Twitter/Tumblr both had investors with a final goal of selling out or heavy monetization in a similar fashion. YouTube was very slim on advertising for quite some time in the beginning.

Because i have adblocker installed?Lol.
I said in post before how i dont use standard ads which can be blocked,and even if i will start to put classic ads on them,i can simply use adblock bypasser which i have i made.But somehow i have feeling that wont increase CTR on banners much as such people dont click on ads anyway.

Interesting you say that. It has to be actually years -- certainly more than 1 year -- since I have clicked on any banner ad. Not sure why, but I hardly notice them on sites and just scroll or scan past them by default reaction. However, I find myself following text links rather frequently.

I wonder when was the last time everyone here honestly clicked on a banner ad out of genuine personal interest and NOT to see what a competitor was doing/advertising.

I though that too,but twitter is still having same model from start,they didn't suddenly start adding ads to user accounts,so i dont think they could be on investment pipe for so long.

I like text ads because text is far more descriptive then banners,and that is why i have sigs enabled here since you can find good stuff in it.

Hi Jel,

You don't understand what I mean. I'm a consumer and ads affect what I buy for sure. But I also know what I'm not interested in, and so do you.

The advertiser that forces the consumer to watch an ad that he has zero interest in is gaining absolutely nothing. Youtube is not TV. The consumer should be able to skip the commercial after a few seconds which is what youtube allows on some ads.

If the advertiser was smart enough, he should demand that youtube target the ads better, and track when customers opt-out of watching the entire ad.

This will tell the advertiser which ads are working and which are not, in what parts of the world, in what demographic, age range, etc. AND, it will make for a better experience for the end user, and Youtube can gain back some of the cool points it has been losing lately.


Adblocking software will never be sued away, DavieVegas. What Advertisers have to do is COMPETE for your end user attention. Be more creative. Allow opt-out. Collect and learn from the data.

peace.

Nah, because of that way of thinking - it's more and more "give me free, with zero limitations or hoops of any kind, because, well, it's the internet, and everything is free!" that we are seeing with the younger generation already, and spreading. Not you personally, but that whole mindset of the freeloader calling the shots on a content provider.

ps people do click on ads, just not the 2003 type banner ads. Stick a play button over a pic and see how many clicks you then get to tours, or not, if they have adblocker installed, and rely on text only, because as we all know the first thing our eyes are drawn to when we want to jack off is the text :winkwink:

Not to cherry pick the context of your entire message -- but this is the kind of thing I personally flat out refuse to accept on our sites. I consider this untruthful advertising if it does not actually play or perform as expected on click. At that point, it's nothing short of a blind click on a deceptive advertisement. I am of the belief that this sort of advertising calls a site's integrity into question.

Obviously differing opinions here, but I personally believe that deceptive advertising and invasive advertising, and certainly popups/unders, have all contributed to the widespread adoption of adblockers.

l o l :thumbsup

Hehe, laugh all you want, but consider this... we've been making money using predominantly contextual based advertising without any blind clicks, trading, skimming, etc for more than 15 years. It works just fine. :)

That said, we've certainly left money on the table. I have turned away an awful lot of popunder and mobile redirect money. Same with fake IM ads.

Like I said, different strokes for different folks. It's just two different approaches.