View Single Post
Old 11-23-2003, 11:21 AM   #57
Gracklor
Registered User
 
Gracklor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Colorado Springs, CO USA
Posts: 549
Post

While I wouldn't try to find a way to circumvent a user's settings, I might not be opposed to blocking access to my site if a user was using an ad blocker.

Some webmasters may be out to just put up a site just to have people enjoy it, but once traffic starts increasing, and the costs of maintaining that site increase, serving ads (whether they be text or banner) become a necessity, not just a choice. (Unlike buying a car, where you pretty much know what the "costs" will be, besides the occasional large repair.)

Other webmasters (I'd venture to say at least half of those on this board) are putting up web sites as a business. And businesses must make money. Therefore, businesses must show ads of some type. Some can use Adsense, others text links. Some can use subscriptions. Others must use the plain old banners.

Unfortunately, a lot of people (most of them probably within the US) are stuck on the "free" craze. Everything must be obtained for free. Yet, there is *rarely* anything that is absolutely free. And the internet is partially to blame. It takes a few seconds to visit a page. Yet, can that person see the hours, weeks, or years of work that a webmaster put into that page? That would be a negative. My jokes site--in its present form--is the accumulation of *six years* of work, sweat, thought, trial-and-error, and investment. I think that's why a lot of people say, "forcing the visitor to view ads is unfair," because they think that the effort that it takes to endure a few seconds of ads is equal to the effort that it takes to view the page. Yet, for every second that a person views a page, it usually takes me ten to twenty times (or more) that amount to find content, upload it, make sure that the content fits the site, format the page, test the page, update keywords, etc, etc, etc.

And the best part of it is, the user doesn't have to click a banner! Advertising (given that it shouldn't be the advertising that kills a user's browser, blocks the window, or pop 16 windows), in its "natural" form is something that is put there to interest the surfer. If it's something interesting, fine. They click. Just as if I see something on a commercial that I like, I buy it. If I don't I can still enjoy the show I'm watching.

But that's why ad blockers are coming into the picture. Ads just aren't "showing" themselves to the user. They're popping 16 or more windows in front of the content, adjusting homepage settings, crashing the browser, etc. This--to me--is not advertising. But neither should we take the other extreme and say "all ads are evil," because that is denying that webmasters like myself put their sweat and work into these sites.

It also amuses me that most "free hosting sites" have been forced to insert one type of ad or another (from popup/under windoes to layer ads to banners to text ads) to keep from going under. It just shows that you can't get something for nothing. Someone, somewhere, has to pay the price.

And it's my thought that--as long as you aren't showing ads and popunders down someone's throat--they should be obligated to view a few ads. It's unfair to ask the webmaster to pay the double price of putting together the site *and* footing the entire bill for the upkeep of the site. If he or she is like me, the webmaster has already paid a far higher price in time and effort to get his or her site where it is today.

</ end rant >

Last edited by Gracklor; 11-23-2003 at 11:24 AM.
Gracklor is offline