Selling Ads

This is the place to discuss issues with the acceptable ads list like a website no longer complying with the criteria.
Post Reply
disneybuff2002
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2016 7:48 pm

Selling Ads

Post by disneybuff2002 »

I've been using this for a while for the strict reason that you block ads. If you do something stupid like start selling that blank space to...guess what...ADS, then I'll delete this and go somewhere else. You are not the only site that blocks ads, and it is a HORRIBLE paradigm for you to sell advertisement space in the very areas that we are trying to block.

I use this site to stop constant streaming, banners, and flash media because it slows down the websites as they load and causes substantial lag. Plus it's just annoying and opens the opportunity for malware that comes through the back end when they are piggybacked onto sites. Since I have been using this, I haven't had as many attempts to take over my PC and I don't have issues with spyware the way I once did. Even though I have a good front-end protection, they still sometimes manage to get through. Ad Block has, so far, cut down on a lot of the extras getting through, so I use it as a third line of defense.

On top of that, you fail to understand that there are some of us who just want to peruse the internet without being bombarded on every front with flashing banners and the like every time a page loads. I have enjoyed the "quiet" that I get since using this.

NOW, you want to sell that privacy and put the very things back onto the website that we are trying to get rid of? Have you lost your minds? Who thought that THAT was a good idea? You violate the very reason WHY people are using the service in the first place, so I don't understand HOW you can think that this is a good idea. What good are your advertisers going to be when others, like me, bail on you to find alternatives...only to find that when we leave we're NOT coming back.

You SERIOUSLY need to rethink this. Find other ways to generate revenue, but quit getting caught up in the greed and go back to what you went into business in the first place for. Otherwise, I'm out, and so will others. Oh, and hiding behind buzz words like "targeted ads" or "tailored for you" is crap. If I want tailored ads, I'll use Facebook or WhatsApp (which I'm not). I just want freaking peace and quiet on the internet while I'm on a page.

If you cannot respect that, then we part on not-so-good-terms.
lewisje
Posts: 2743
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 12:07 pm

Re: Selling Ads

Post by lewisje »

disneybuff2002 wrote:stop constant streaming, banners, and flash media because it slows down the websites as they load and causes substantial lag. Plus it's just annoying and opens the opportunity for malware that comes through the back end when they are piggybacked onto sites
You clearly are not aware of the Acceptable Ads criteria, which do not allow Flash ads or autoplaying streaming-video or other animated ads, and which only allow some static banners: https://acceptableads.com/en/about/criteria
There's a buzzin' in my brain I really can't explain; I think about it before they make me go to bed.
User avatar
mapx
Posts: 21940
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:01 pm

Re: Selling Ads

Post by mapx »

Probably is talking about this article on blog (and its interpretation in media: ABP is becoming ads platform / ads provider, ad network)
blog/new-acceptable-ads-platform-launch ... l-websites
disneybuff2002
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2016 7:48 pm

Re: Selling Ads

Post by disneybuff2002 »

lewisje wrote:
disneybuff2002 wrote:stop constant streaming, banners, and flash media because it slows down the websites as they load and causes substantial lag. Plus it's just annoying and opens the opportunity for malware that comes through the back end when they are piggybacked onto sites
You clearly are not aware of the Acceptable Ads criteria, which do not allow Flash ads or autoplaying streaming-video or other animated ads, and which only allow some static banners: https://acceptableads.com/en/about/criteria

Then you clearly missed the point of the entire rant unfortunately. You're trying to get into semantics. The entire purpose of my thread was over the issue of filling the void even with static banners. The entire purpose of the site is not only to stop the moving ads but to give control over ALL adds. Even static ads fill bandwidth and even if they didn't, it's the idea of constantly having stuff thrown in our face. Before starting to use this, I would have literally hundreds of static ads that were causing issues with loading and that were cluttering the screen...sometimes to the point of interfering with what I was trying to read. Using this fixed that, and like I said, it became a third line of defense against malware and has been effective in that.

The idea of blocking the and advertisement and inserting one of your own is preposterous to me. That would be no different than allowing people to block commercials during TV shows only to start filling that void with your own...or temporarily blocking the view of a billboard only to put your own sign up. If it's going to block ads, then block them. Otherwise, this is no different than the other sites.

I enjoy not being overloaded with 1000 ads a day. I don't care to have that changed for "my benefit" somehow.
User avatar
mapx
Posts: 21940
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:01 pm

Re: Selling Ads

Post by mapx »

You know you can disable the acceptable ads, right ?
disneybuff2002
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2016 7:48 pm

Re: Selling Ads

Post by disneybuff2002 »

yes, but I shouldn't have to. It shouldn't "assume" that I want them in the first place. I have never understood why the mentality in the US is to opt out of things instead of giving us the ability to opt in. I'd appreciate that more than having stuff railroaded all the time. What you call acceptable and what I call acceptable are two different things. You're calling these acceptable because of some filter that you defined. Acceptable ads on a freaking ad blocker is NONE unless there is an expressed permission to do it in the first place.

That being said, I've said my part. I'm out. Wasted too much time on this already. The entire point was to express displeasure of having to go through these hoops in the first place because of an assumption that we somehow WANTED ads in an ad blocker unless we turned them off. I thought that was the entire purpose of having it in the first place, so my argument for selling them and forcing us to take another step to turn THESE off is still my issue.
User avatar
xraiderv1
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 5:48 am

Re: Selling Ads

Post by xraiderv1 »

so...I can treat this news article http://www.theverge.com/2016/9/13/12890 ... -sells-ads as worth little more than toilet paper fodder?
User avatar
mapx
Posts: 21940
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:01 pm

Re: Selling Ads

Post by mapx »

from
blog/new-acceptable-ads-platform-launch ... es#c006631

Reply from Ben Williams:

We allow ads through if they meet our criteria, and although it’s printed in the press that we’re “selling ads” we’re not. We’ve been running the whitelisting program for FIVE YEARS, and this is a platform to help publishers sign up for it. That’s all.

Most importantly, you can always opt out if you think it’s a bad idea, and block ALL the ads: en/acceptable-ads#optout
lewisje
Posts: 2743
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 12:07 pm

Re: Selling Ads

Post by lewisje »

disneybuff2002 wrote:I have never understood why the mentality in the US is to opt out of things instead of giving us the ability to opt in.
That isn't even true (cf. the rules surrounding e-mail lists), and besides, the developers of ABP and the maintainers of the Acceptable Ads whitelist come from outside the United States, mostly from Central Europe. (I come from the US, but I'm not a developer or a list-maintainer or even a moderator.)

Anyway, my understanding is that to make the Acceptable Ads Initiative viable, Eyeo needed to have a user-base ready to see vetted non-intrusive ads but not unvetted or intrusive ones, and their research had shown that the great majority of ABP users are fine with the less-intrusive ads and wouldn't even bother changing the settings on their ad-blockers (that is, they're not of the same mind as the "block all ads by default" partisans that frequent these forums and any other discussion venue about the Initiative in particular and ad-blocking in general).

In furtherance of this goal, Eyeo has set up ABP to be subscribed to the Acceptable Ads whitelist by default: If that were opt-in, a very small number of people (those rare ones who go out of their way to whitelist certain sites to support them) would be subscribed to it (the great majority, which I have referred to as "the unwashed masses" before, would be fine with it on but wouldn't make the effort to turn it on or off), and with such a small base of people ready to see known-decent ads but not other ads, the Initiative wouldn't have been seen as worth the time of the ad-publishers or content-providers, and the march toward anti-Adblock trickery and subscriptions or micropayments would have continued unabated (that is, those things would be worse and more widespread than they are now), hastening the death of an ad-supported Web of good content that is free at the point of use.

The more recent development is all about making it easier for ad-publishers to participate in the Initiative: Instead of guessing at whether their ads meet the criteria, and then requesting manual review, they can just use the new Acceptable Ads Platform to design ads that they know will meet the criteria of the Initiative and will be approved right away.

---
I do agree with the critics of the Acceptable Ads Initiative that if ABP made the Whitelist mandatory, the extension's reputation would be bad enough to trigger a wholesale exodus; furthermore, even if there weren't a better solution for some platforms (uBlock Origin), ABP itself is licensed under the GPLv3, so if it truly went to pot, a more noble team could take that code, fork it, and also fork the existing filter-lists (which are also under open-source licenses), to provide a workable alternative. Basically it would be like Adblock Edge, but with a legitimate grievance against ABP.
There's a buzzin' in my brain I really can't explain; I think about it before they make me go to bed.
Uh Clem
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2016 7:10 pm

Re: Selling Ads

Post by Uh Clem »

I posted elsewhere a larger monologue, but I pay for my bandwidth. I do not want to have my bandwidth consumed by flashy, animated video ads. NEVER. If they would post ads that are text blocks, GREAT.

But leave MY bandwidth to ME.

Everyone seems to ignore this side - we ALL pay for bandwidth. Nothing is "free".
lewisje
Posts: 2743
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 12:07 pm

Re: Selling Ads

Post by lewisje »

Oh look, another complaint about the type of ads that the Acceptable Ads Initiative doesn't whitelist.
There's a buzzin' in my brain I really can't explain; I think about it before they make me go to bed.
Post Reply