[Rejected] Whitelisting broken sites

Various discussions related to Adblock Plus development

Re: Experiment: Whitelisting broken sites

Postby Ares2 » Thu May 12, 2011 7:03 pm

Till wrote:Sure, not many ABP users visit these sites, they just serve as examples of currently broken websites.

Can you please give some other examples (no matter what list is causing the problem)? To be clear: I'm asking for a reason for the 3rd point in Wladimir's post and why the definition is so broad (or why it is even there as it has no nothing in common with whitelisting acceptable ads).
Ares2
 
Posts: 1275
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 1:47 pm

Re: Experiment: Whitelisting broken sites

Postby Hubird » Fri May 13, 2011 12:55 am

Till wrote:ABP is growing to a userbase that is less technical savvy, most of them don't care at all about filter rules (they are probably not even aware of the fact that ABP itself doesn't block anything)..


Less technical savvy users is exactly the reason this whitelist scheme should not be forced upon users without their express permission (manually ticking a box).

Till wrote:I agree that you are doing a great job in fixing false positives very fast in EasyList, other filter list maintainers may not.


Some author somewhere might not fix a false positive in a timely manner so we start whitelisting domains just in case :shock: :?

Rolling out a bunch of whitelists for domains is defiantly not

https://adblockplus.org/en/about wrote:putting users in control


I would say it is the complete opposite.
User avatar
Hubird
 
Posts: 2850
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: Australia

Re: Experiment: Whitelisting broken sites

Postby Till » Fri May 13, 2011 9:58 am

Some author somewhere might not fix a false positive in a timely manner so we start whitelisting domains just in case :shock: :?

No. The point is that if there should be an issue with the filter list, ABP should to be able to correct that in order not to put off the users who won't understand why this is happening. This is a protection against negative user experiences and in no way intended as criticism against the filterlists authors here in the forum.

I would say it is the complete opposite.

Currently, the user subscribes to a filter list without knowing what this filter list does (and there are major differences). So adding more options to give the users the choice how much they want to block seems to be exactly the right thing to do in order to give them the control imho.
Till
ABP CEO
 
Posts: 242
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 2:16 pm

Re: Experiment: Whitelisting broken sites

Postby Ares2 » Fri May 13, 2011 7:00 pm

Till wrote:The point is that if there should be an issue with the filter list, ABP should to be able to correct that in order not to put off the users who won't understand why this is happening. This is a protection against negative user experiences and in no way intended as criticism against the filterlists authors here in the forum.

What I'm seeing here is that we have several independent filterlists that do not have any control over each other - a healthy environment. And now there is this suggestion which will put all the power back to 1 list/individual that will override ALL subscriptions - and it even wants to do it by default!!! - a bitter pill to swallow not only for filterlist authors if you ask me. For such a powerful list, I would expect a very clear policy that leaves no doubt about what sites will end up on it and that clearly advertises it's purpose (in this case the list will more than anything else allow acceptable ads, the title of this topic "Experiment: Whitelisting broken sites" would be an example of a misleading definition of the purpose).

I hope the list will be viewable well before the experiment starts, because I am still not sure what will actually be added to it (and you don't seem to like the idea of providing any examples either :wink: ).
Ares2
 
Posts: 1275
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 1:47 pm

Re: Experiment: Whitelisting broken sites

Postby Ares2 » Fri May 13, 2011 8:21 pm

Wladimir Palant wrote:I don't know. We have the option to assume "not checked" or to show them the first-run page again (probably in a reduced form). The former has the disadvantage that it will make the user base for the experiment significantly smaller, we might not get useful results then. The latter also has obvious disadvantages, we don't want to annoy users.

What about trying the slow approach first (= new users -> checked by default, old users -> not bothered at all) and then decide whether you really need more participants in a later release? As you might have already noticed, I'm not really convinced by the list, but even if I would it seems to be the safer approach to start slowly instead of risking a potential uproar by moving most users at once without any idea of how they might take it. Or is there any time pressure?
Ares2
 
Posts: 1275
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 1:47 pm

Re: Experiment: Whitelisting broken sites

Postby Michael » Fri May 13, 2011 9:07 pm

Just to clarify: is there any money involved in this decision? Wladimir, you mentioned eight months ago that you had "some ideas on how to make the project self-sustained by the time [the money for two years of development] runs out". Is this one of the ideas?
Michael
 
Posts: 1361
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 1:29 pm

Re: Experiment: Whitelisting broken sites

Postby anonymous74100 » Fri May 13, 2011 10:20 pm

Till wrote:The point is that if there should be an issue with the filter list, ABP should to be able to correct that in order not to put off the users who won't understand why this is happening.

You do realize that by doing that ABP becomes responsible for all problems the subscriptions might have.
Don't pretend you giving users choice, when your obviously taking it away. If you prefer that ABP itself makes the decisions on which ads should be blocked and which not, then create an official ABP subscription and offer that as the only option. Don't try to fool subscription authors that they have control when every their decision can be overruled by this "special" list.
anonymous74100
 
Posts: 213
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 4:45 pm

Re: Experiment: Whitelisting broken sites

Postby Till » Fri May 13, 2011 11:48 pm

I am still not sure what will actually be added to it (and you don't seem to like the idea of providing any examples either)

I would if I could but we are discussing about early ideas for general imrovements of ABP, this hasn't been completely worked out yet.

Don't pretend you giving users choice, when your obviously taking it away.

How does adding an option equate to taking away users choice?
Till
ABP CEO
 
Posts: 242
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 2:16 pm

Re: Experiment: Whitelisting broken sites

Postby Hubird » Sat May 14, 2011 1:24 am

Michael wrote:Just to clarify: is there any money involved in this decision? Wladimir, you mentioned eight months ago that you had "some ideas on how to make the project self-sustained by the time [the money for two years of development] runs out". Is this one of the ideas?


I just hope that this is not ultimately going to be about all about the money. We've seen a controversial facebook campaign to increase usage numbers (seemed a bit weird and unneeded for an open source project), now this whitelist scheme is revealed where only sites meeting the good advertising criteria are listed. From there it is all too easy for money to change hands and the whitelists grow...
User avatar
Hubird
 
Posts: 2850
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: Australia

Re: Experiment: Whitelisting broken sites

Postby Hubird » Sat May 14, 2011 1:32 am

Till wrote:How does adding an option equate to taking away users choice?


You know all too well that a lot of ABP users are not very tech savy. They choose a subscription to block any and all ads (because this has always been what ABP is about). Now you want to sneak in a whitelist subscription that overrides everything else.

You would be better off creating a subscription that targets only bad sites, then users have some choice (don't go over riding other subscriptions with whitelist rules that force a user to see content you've deemed acceptable).
User avatar
Hubird
 
Posts: 2850
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: Australia

Re: Experiment: Whitelisting broken sites

Postby revolutions » Sat May 14, 2011 6:49 am

Hubird wrote:
Till wrote:How does adding an option equate to taking away users choice?


You know all too well that a lot of ABP users are not very tech savy. They choose a subscription to block any and all ads (because this has always been what ABP is about). Now you want to sneak in a whitelist subscription that overrides everything else.

You would be better off creating a subscription that targets only bad sites, then users have some choice (don't go over riding other subscriptions with whitelist rules that force a user to see content you've deemed acceptable).


I find it interesting that those against this new whitelist fail to address Till's point below:
Regarding the unblocking of certain ads we need to think ahead: At some point ABP will have so many users that some websites can't afford producing high-quality content for free anymore.


If ABP is to adopt a less technically savvy and much larger user-base, we face two choices:
1) Stop blocking safe ads, allow websites to make some money from ads that people don't mind too much.
2) End up at a point where websites can only make money with a paywall.

I think a forced check box today from an open source project is something I would much prefer to a forced paywall from a bunch of websites. A bit of a slippery slope, perhaps, but look at it this way:

When the user base of ABP was small and tech-savvy, as user # increased, quality of the internet for that user-base increased.

After a certain point, as the user # increases, quality of the internet will decrease for everyone.

Do we really want to wait for that certain point?
revolutions
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 8:43 am

Re: Experiment: Whitelisting broken sites

Postby anonymous74100 » Sat May 14, 2011 7:43 am

Guest wrote:1) Stop blocking safe ads, allow websites to make some money from ads that people don't mind too much.

Why do websites have to make money? Can't the website owner get a job to pay for hosting without relying on advertisement money.
Guest wrote:2) End up at a point where websites can only make money with a paywall.

That won't happen. Paywalls reduce userbase, no website wants that.
anonymous74100
 
Posts: 213
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 4:45 pm

Re: Experiment: Whitelisting broken sites

Postby p2u » Sat May 14, 2011 8:09 am

@ Wladimir & Till

I'm all in favor of white-listing. I just have a simple question: Does one really have to be "technically savvy" to use the "Disable on example.com" button? If the answer is no, shouldn't it be the sole responsibility of the ABP user to choose to sponsor certain sites in this way?

Paul
p2u
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:43 am

Re: Experiment: Whitelisting broken sites

Postby Till » Sat May 14, 2011 11:27 am

I'm all in favor of white-listing. I just have a simple question: Does one really have to be "technically savvy" to use the "Disable on example.com" button? If the answer is no, shouldn't it be the sole responsibility of the ABP user to choose to sponsor certain sites in this way?

That is fine as well but maybe we can come to a more sophisticated solution in the long term. For example, I think it would be great if I could block banners but allow text-ads on some websites. With a feature like this we really had an incentive for advertisers to follow our rules for acceptable ads.
Till
ABP CEO
 
Posts: 242
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 2:16 pm

Re: Experiment: Whitelisting broken sites

Postby p2u » Sat May 14, 2011 11:36 am

Till wrote:That is fine as well but maybe we can come to a more sophisticated solution in the long term. For example, I think it would be great if I could block banners but allow text-ads on some websites. With a feature like this we really had an incentive for advertisers to follow our rules for acceptable ads.

Personally, I don't mind text-ads. I'm only concerned about active content (+possible infection) and data-mining.
P.S.: How about developing a user-based [in-the-cloud] ranking system for sites? I mean: by certain "pollution" parameters. The less pollution, the higher the ranking. Wouldn't this be an incentive for sites and advertisers to be high on this ranking and produce better quality?

Paul
p2u
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:43 am

PreviousNext

Return to Adblock Plus development

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron