-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
When sites force you to disable adblocker to browse, do you?
- Thread starter -Pyromaniac-
- Start date
Yes, ERA Clear. It's at the bottom of the page on desktop, or otherwise go into your account (sidebar on mobile and then click the person) and click Account Upgrades. Or click this.
I'll try to bypass it and if I can't I just don't read the article.
There is a VERY small list of sites I'll actually disable it for.
There is a VERY small list of sites I'll actually disable it for.
I've never used adblock out of principle. I can accept some basic annoyance so that people get paid, especially if I'm consuming their content
Honestly for news websites I just leave the website. Mostly because the few times when I've tried to disable my extensions, it STILL asks me to disable it.
I assume it's somesort of adblock Firefox now has builtin to the browser. But at that point I don't really want to figure out how to change Firefox's default behavior. And secondly I reason, if after I've disabled my extensions and default Firefox still shows me plenty of ads on OTHER websites, I'm not sure I WANT to browse a site that has ads that get blocked by default Firefox, because I can only imagine how obnoxious they'd be.
So yeah for most news websites that behave that way, I just leave and go somewhere else.
I assume it's somesort of adblock Firefox now has builtin to the browser. But at that point I don't really want to figure out how to change Firefox's default behavior. And secondly I reason, if after I've disabled my extensions and default Firefox still shows me plenty of ads on OTHER websites, I'm not sure I WANT to browse a site that has ads that get blocked by default Firefox, because I can only imagine how obnoxious they'd be.
So yeah for most news websites that behave that way, I just leave and go somewhere else.
I mentioned this earlier and I STILL don't know what default setting Firefox has that blocks stuff like business insider even with adblock disabled.
Leave. It means I wouldn't enjoy the site anyway. I don't block ads, but even blocking cookies sites say I am blocking ads which I am a-okay with. Cookies, crumbs, tracking pixels, autoplaying videos, video ads have all killed the enjoyment of the internet for me on many of the sites. I don't mind ads, but the ones that absolutely slow my experience down on a fairly new phone or computer can get bent.
I leave. If the content being is something I just have to see then I'll temporarily whietlist then never visit the site again. Ad blockers are too important in protection against malware and non-disclosed tracking for me to turn off.
Leave. And never coming back if they don't even give you the option to continue browsing without whitelisting them.
This is next level, I've never tried this. I just leave the site.
If it's something I don't really care about, I'll just leave, otherwise, I'll block or otherwise bypass the warning in order to read the content. I almost never disable adblock in these situations, because it's typically not necessary, and any site that's forcing you to disable adblock is also going to be utterly cluttered with obtrusive ads.
A lot of sites won't even let you browse without turning it off, so usually yes as it only takes like 3 seconds.
And as someone who works in the industry I have more sympathy than most.
And as someone who works in the industry I have more sympathy than most.
I use NoScript instead of an ad-blocker so the majority of sites don't work unless I set several things to trusted on them. Unless it's a site that I visit regularly I usually don't bother because it's a pain to figure out what parts I need to enable to actually get the page to load. If it's something which I know is harmless but just has a bunch of ads that prevent the page from loading correctly I'll usually open it in Chrome instead where I don't have any blocking stuff turned on, read the page, then close it and continue browsing normally in Firefox after.
Same.
I typically only have a fleeting interest in things, so once a roadblock occurs, I shrug and visit another site.
It depends.
Sometimes it reminds me to unblock a site that does good work but I don't visit often (at least on that PC). I'm also more likely to unblock ads if that pop up gave me the option to continue without deactivating my plug-in.
I get the fuck out 100% of the time when they're really obnoxious about it.
Sometimes it reminds me to unblock a site that does good work but I don't visit often (at least on that PC). I'm also more likely to unblock ads if that pop up gave me the option to continue without deactivating my plug-in.
I get the fuck out 100% of the time when they're really obnoxious about it.
People lie.
You also didn't account for people who don't use an ad blocker at all.
And it remains the case that sites don't want you to "support them". That just means you cost them bandwidth and don't deliver any revenue. If you don't visit at all then that's a net positive for them.
I only disable if it's a really small site that i like and know they need the support and don't have obnoxious ads.
If not, i either leave outright or press F12 and remove the html of the popin stopping me from reading what i went there to read. My job is to make websites after all, i know my way around most bullshits of the sort.
If not, i either leave outright or press F12 and remove the html of the popin stopping me from reading what i went there to read. My job is to make websites after all, i know my way around most bullshits of the sort.
If a site tells me "it would be nice if you could disable adblock, we need it for revenue", and I like what the site offers and/or I use it regularly, I'll do it. If a site tells me "you cannot access this site unless you disable adblock", I'll just never go on that site again, even if I was going to read an article on it. If a site has invasive ads (like Youtube...) I'll keep adblock on, even if I use that site regularly.
Problem is that people don't realise that websites need the ad revenue to stay afloat. If everyone used adblock who visited my site, I'd not be able to keep it going. I barely can as it is due to how ad rates divebomb each year which has made me have to use some ad techniques I'd really rather not use (but doing it tastefully and only for certain campaigns)
I still maintain that using adblock is tauntamount to piracy.
I still maintain that using adblock is tauntamount to piracy.
I have some sympathy with your predicament. However http(s) protocol is based on public data. It's up to the http client to decide which of those public items to request. The server has the option to serve the request or return an error code.
I know, it just bugs me that some people feel entitled to view people's hard work without the creators getting anything back.
I do the site because I love doing it, but I couldn't do it if it wasn't self sufficient from ads and people continually don't realise it.
Not all sites run bad ads. My site has two ads perp age. One at the top, one at the bottom (sometimes sticky) and occassionally, if there's a Nintendo Switch campaign, both of those are replaced by a large, but collapsable, ad for a game which won't appear on the data pages and typically no more than once a day per user at about 5% of US/UK impressions. My ad network prides themselves on not serving dodgy ads. If any get through with their partners, the partner is typically dropped.
I get that sites really abuse it, some of the other Pokémon sites are riddled with disgusting amounts ads (one actually recently had a sticky ad on top of a sticky ad), but not all are like it.
Donations and Patreons just wouldn't cut being able to keep a large site alive.
If it's a site that I use regularly and the ads are unobtrusive, yes.
If not, I just leave the site.
Sometimes I click on a news article and instantly regret it due to the 4,000 scripts running on a single page, video ads that play at full volume, etc. I smash X on that tab faster than no other.
If not, I just leave the site.
Sometimes I click on a news article and instantly regret it due to the 4,000 scripts running on a single page, video ads that play at full volume, etc. I smash X on that tab faster than no other.
OP
OP
I feel for sites in your situation because I just visited Serebii now with it off and it really is pretty good ad wise. If all the sites asking were that fine I think I'd have it disabled a lot.
One thing I've seen some sites do who get a lot of foot traffic but ad blocked traffic is hardcode ads into the site as images or whatever and do sponsors that way. Though I get not everyone can find sponsors and it would still have to be unobtrusive.
It's a pickle. Some sites I'll visit on my PC at work where I don't use adblocker most of the time and the fans go ape shit on random pages. Out of curiosity, what are the other ways you make money? And if everyone who visited your site disabled ad blocker would you need to do those things?
Just wondering.
It's just the site. If everyone used adblock, I'd be screwed. I do know my ad network is developing technologies to get past ad blocks without annoying people
I can't do Patreon and offer exclusive content as all content would be elsewhere for free anyway. I can't ask for donations because it's unsustainable, which is the same with Patreon. I can't do merch because it's so heavily reliant on someone else's intellectual property.
Most of the time, people don't notice the ads on my site, it's a small price to pay. I really wish people would have no adblock first and then block sites with problem ads, not adblock all sites and then only unblock certain ones on a whim
Whatever will they do without you consuming their content and using their bandwidth without you giving them a fraction of a cent.
Yes, but the moment i see obtrusive ads they are back on the list and i won't use that website.
I have a poor internet connection so adblock is the differences between the website fully rendering in 2 or 30 seconds. Websites are already bloated with tons of data that isn't necessary, ads and the billion scripts that come with them only compound that. I also use privacy badger which blocks a lot of CDNs and sometimes I will unblock them if the content is relevant enough.
OP
OP
it still depends on the site though, some sites are able to retain sponsorships based on traffic so having people not avoid the site altogether is beneficial. There's one site that has awful ads that I block but I do listen to their podcasts which are all ad supported.
And having a lot of traffic even if they use Adblock can help a site grow. But I get it. Clearly there's a problem here and it's easy to blame those who are getting the content but there's definitely something more here.