If You're Blocking Ads While On ATS, You Get A Big Ugly Message

originally posted by: tebyen
What I do have a problem with are ads that take up as much space and are as distracting as those on ATS.

When logged-in, ads take up less than 2% of the page space on any given thread. That's too much?

originally posted by: eisegesis
The next time I went to log in, this ghastly thing prevented me from easily doing so.

I can't replicate that. There's no ad code from us operating on the log-in page. It's been that way for several months.

I also have a WAS score of 1, but still see ads on the home, top topics and live page. Is that normal?

Yes.

We're not checking your status until you're in the /forum/ section of the site.

originally posted by: Painterz
That's a good question the person above asks. If profits are to be made off user-generated content, when do the people who generate the content get a slice of the profits?

There are no profits. I don't understand those who think that there are.

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord
How much would you pay every month for an Ad-Free ATS?

Well, this thread exploded. As I said before I completely agree with other users about ad's being a bad idea. Putting aside the ethics of it for the moment (which I've already given my opinion on). You have tried to make the ad's on this site reputable, but that is not 100%, furthermore you cannot control the content that is placed on the websites the ad's go to.

It's my opinion that given the fringe material here, reputable companies will not associate their names with ATS, instead it's the companies that are more likely to be doing things that aren't entirely on the up and up. Therefore, I do not want to see ad's on ATS, I consider it something of a security risk and no matter how well you filter your advertisements that risk is still present.

When it comes to a subscription service, I'm not sure that the leading question should be how much are we willing to pay. Hosting for large sites can be expensive but it's still a negligible cost when spread among the entire user base. The question you should be asking is, would users be willing to pay the same (or preferably less) than what the advertisers do? A quick search tells me that ppv advertisements pay 0.015 cents per view. I probably generate around 100 page loads per day so that's 1.5 cents per day. Over the course of a year that's about $5.50 which means that I think somewhere between $5 and $6 per year is fair at current rates.

This is all beyond disappointing. I had no idea so many members were blocking. And that so many would exhibit such intense irritation.



I need a break from this.

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

Have you discovered that through reviewing the code and data, or are you extrapolating it based on the people posting the thread?

ATS has a lot of users.
Most I am familiar with would likely not care about ads as long as they are not doing horrible thing (redirecting pages).

For some reason Google seems to think I'm a Muslim, which is weird...

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord
This is all beyond disappointing. I had no idea so many members were blocking. And that so many would exhibit such intense irritation.



I need a break from this.

I guess that's what happens when you open your website to the world. You invite people of all sorts. And, from personal experience, I can tell you, you have some very mean people on this site. Nice ones too, but some very mean and vocal people.

a reply to: JackReyes

And many persons that are complaining about the advert policies on ATS, yet still patronise the likes of facebook without even considering what unfathomable things Facebook does with their data to exploit pure profits.

Apples and oranges, I know. But I consider FB a bad apple. And ATS a decent orange.

Sorry for the analogy, but my point stands clear.

originally posted by: smirkley
a reply to: JackReyes

And many persons that are complaining about the advert policies on ATS, yet still patronise the likes of facebook without even considering what unfathomable things Facebook does with their data to exploit pure profits.

Apples and oranges, I know. But I consider FB a bad apple. And ATS a decent orange.

Sorry for the analogy, but my point stands clear.

True, that.

Anyway, speaking of FB, I just recently, a couple of hours ago, wrote a post about my recent experience with it:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Interesting stuff.

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

ATS is your child, do what you think is best.

I for one would stay on board no matter. ATS is one of the best hang outs on line.

a reply to: smirkley

God, I hate Facebook so much. It is awful. Everything exploits your data nowadays, but sometimes it seems like it was Facebook that started the trend.

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

Thank you for your response.

I also tried to replicate it by logging in and out at least a dozen times. No luck. I did manage to see the exact same ad appear in the center of the log-in page, but this time it was a lot smaller and didn't cause me to have to close it to gain access. If it helps, after closing that huge ad, it reduced itself into a banner and found a home at the bottom of the page until I closed it a second time.

We're not checking your status until you're in the /forum/ section of the site.

Ok, I can live with that. I'm currently getting a top banner that instantly disappears when I scroll down (thank you), as well as a few ads on the right of the page.

You guys are worth it and it kills me to know how bad these ad-blockers are hurting you. With that said, you'll just never change some people and it isn't worth labeling anybody anything. Remember, a little healthy paranoia should be acceptable and I'd imagine its what brought many people here in the first place.

People don't want their brains invaded by advertising. It's not rocket science.

I'm sick to death of those f'ing ads that play right through my browser setting to prevent just that.

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

This is all beyond disappointing. I had no idea so many members were blocking. And that so many would exhibit such intense irritation.

Time changes everything.
On one hand, the ads of yesterday are not those of today.
On the other hand, time has changed people, as well.

ATS is a gift to our species but... there may be another step of evolution before it.

My best wishes to you and all here; mods and members... I hope it NEVER goes away.

Ever.



...

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

I feel bad for you in this pickle, S.O., I really do. I've appreciated this site for many years and I trust I will continue to do so for a long time. I'm not some big contributor but I pop in every day and see what is happening in the world. I understand the struggle - you need to generate income to keep the lights on, as it were, and that's alright by me. However, as others have mentioned, I too need this computer for work and having suffered malware before and lastly having no money to replace this machine should it get screwed up in some way, I am naturally very cautious about my internet travels, hence I have an ad-blocker.

Now I don't doubt for one minute that you and your team take great care in vetting advertisers and the ads that are posted; I have faith in that, I know you care for your community. But the great unknown in the equation is the advertisers themselves and their moral scruples, as it were. You may perform your due diligence, and I do not doubt that you do, but do they? Do they even care? It's that factor alone that is giving me pause in turning off blocking for this site (I have never turned it off for any site, ever - but I am not ruling it out completely for ATS. I just haven't decided for sure yet. I am a Slow Loris when it comes to decision-making). I will be honest and say that I would have no problem at all paying a subscription and would gladly do so in return for what I get from ATS, but at the moment that's a luxury I just don't have the budget for, not even a small amount.

I can't speak for other users, but I can't help thinking that perhaps the underlying issue for many is not the fact that they are being asked to turn off ad-blocking (I know, it is in the T&C), but more that it is the almost scolding nature of the on-screen reminders and notifications. I think many people would have been more open to accommodating the request if it was more of a "Hey folks, we depend on advertising revenue and voluntary contributions to keep this place running. We're looking at other options but in the meantime if you are not able to fund us directly through contributions then we'd really appreciate you showing your support by disabling your ad-blocker on the site so we can pay the bills, thanks" from the get-go, rather than the somewhat brusque, heavy-handed approach we got instead with talk of stealing (I know myself that my basic, in-built instinct is that I am always much more willing to accommodate a request when it is asked nicely; a barked order simply makes me want to resist and refuse). I think if your banners had gone that way many folks would have just obliged without a problem. I could be wrong, but that's just the way I figure it, I think it just irked people who maybe feel like they are being reprimanded when everything was fine before.

Anyhow, don't get me wrong, I love this site and appreciate the team for the work they do, and I really will do you a solid and put a lot of thought into turning the ad-blocker off. It's just a big decision for me to make as I can't afford to lose work because I lost use of this computer through malware or general nastiness thanks to some shady code that I clicked by accident. Good luck with your pickle, I hope you get it sorted out.

Wow what a bunch of whiney, self absorbed members we have here.

It's an advert, get over it. Really, get over it. . . . First world problems always look that much more stupid when they're in writing, and even worse when they're made out to be some sort of moral outrage issue.

You're not being forced to turn ab-block off, just asked to do so. Even then sites like Forbes wont let you on with ad-block.

I think, personally, you're all being a bunch of overly aggressive, self entitled, whiney children who are overly paranoid. Pretty much what an increasingly worrying amount of members are becoming. Scary stuff.

originally posted by: Joneselius
Wow what a bunch of whiney, self absorbed members we have here.

It's an advert, get over it. Really, get over it. . . . First world problems always look that much more stupid when they're in writing, and even worse when they're made out to be some sort of moral outrage issue.

You're not being forced to turn ab-block off, just asked to do so. Even then sites like Forbes wont let you on with ad-block.

I think, personally, you're all being a bunch of overly aggressive, self entitled, whiney children who are overly paranoid. Pretty much what an increasingly worrying amount of members are becoming. Scary stuff.

So...the moral of the story here is it's ok to dictate what others do or don't do to safeguard their electronics?

Can posters be the boss of your computer, too?

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord

originally posted by: Unity_99
I like my adblocking.

Thanks for allowing on ATS, but that statement is still unfortunate.

I fear for the future of independent thought online.

No, even though I posted that, its still a general statement, it would depend on the site. Adblocking is the only way you can watch a video, and even navigate online, I can't believe the popups even for a minecraft download for my kids.
So it depends on the site. There are a few worthwhile ventures where allowing it funds something.

Have to add this, only since last fall or so, has the need for adblocking been evident on many sites. Its a change they've made. Suddenly thrown into the dark ages instead of moving forward to eutopia. I didn't have to have adblock installed until much more recently.

a reply to: Joneselius

You don't know what other posters are experiencing. Congratulations on your blanket generalization.

I haven't gotten any big ugly messages so I guess I'm good to go.

In fact, it's been a while since I read the T&C but there was something there about allowing cookies and junk.
So I've let it all be -- as I agreed to do.