adblock users are questionable

[chimmychunger]

I just wanted to know why I was full of shit. If I say I like Linus's content, but also use AdBlock, you'd say I'm full of shit, yes? For what reason? Is monetary support in any way required to like content that is created for free consumption? I haven't donated to Linus, but I have donated to other content creators that chose to ask for donations and disable ads themselves. That goes beyond the average role of a consumer though, and was entirely voluntary. I wouldn't say shaming or guilting viewers into supporting is coercive, but I do find it pathetic.

 

they would still earn a hell of a lot less than with ad revenue 

[cae]

they would still earn a hell of a lot less than with ad revenue 

 

And it would be their choice to do so.

[IdortMasterRace]

I'm sick of all the bitching about anything related to consoles and thus I do what Linus told us to: Vote with the "wallet". I have ADBlock enabled, pause the video right away, copy the URL, close the tab, download the video and then skip any and all of the ADs when watching the video. In short: Be a dick and it will backfire.

 

Besides, I use ADBlock to block any and all content that I'm not intersted in. Not just ads.

 

Oh god, very much this. Yet another reason why I have AdBlock enabled. The whole "LE PC MUSTARD RACE XDDD" thing is the most obnoxious thing I have ever seen, and that comes from a PC gamer myself.

 

I think the type of user you are describing is atypical. I highly doubt that the majority of adblock users are donating to every site or content producer that they are denying revenue from. And great a bunch of ad block users can share the video with their adblock using friends, , even more un monetised views. And maybe you have donated off of this site but I assume you are an adblock user yet I see no sticker on your profile to indicate that you have participated in any of the donations to Linus Media Group, or did you send them a cheque? 

 

If he wants to donate, he will. If he doesn't, he won't. Doesn't suddenly mean he's in the wrong for using AdBlock. You shouldn't be supporting ads in the first place, I consider that more ethically wrong than the opposite.

[ConfusedDolphin]

 

If he wants to donate, he will. If he doesn't, he won't. Doesn't suddenly mean he's in the wrong for using AdBlock. You shouldn't be supporting ads in the first place, I consider that more ethically wrong than the opposite.

 

If you claim to be a supporter but deny a content creator their earned ad revenue and simultaneously do not support them via donations, yes I think your initial claim to be a supporter was. Also I do not think that youtube ads are morally wrong, sometimes annoying but they are not immoral. Personally I think that the people claiming to be moral crusaders fighting against adblock are just trying to rationalize their lack of support for content producers when the real reason is  that they just don't like ads. 

[IdortMasterRace]

If you claim to be a supporter but deny a content creator their earned ad revenue and simultaneously do not support them via donations, yes I think your initial claim to be a supporter was. Also I do not think that youtube ads are morally wrong, sometimes annoying but they are not immoral. Personally I think that the people claiming to be moral crusaders fighting against adblock are just trying to rationalize their lack of support for content producers when the real reason is  that they just don't like ads. 

 

Good for you, I think forced advertisement is morally wrong so I will continue to block it.

 

No shit, of course the reason is people don't like ads.

 

deny a content creator their earned ad revenue

 

What about ad revenue is deserved? Just because some content creator and ad company made some kind of deal to display ads, doesn't mean it's suddenly deserved, or that I suddenly am part of that deal and have to watch the ads. That's their business if they want to shove ads into their videos, not mine, and I won't take part in it.

[elkenrod]

The fact that there is money involved is conflating the entire issue!

 

Forget that there is money involved! 

 

Is it questionable for me (am I a dick) to browse websites with a text-based browser?

 

Yes or No?

[IdortMasterRace]

The fact that there is money involved is conflating the entire issue!

 

Forget that there is money involved! 

 

Is it questionable for me (am I a dick) to browse websites with a text-based browser?

 

Yes or No?

 

People who defend ads to the death will say yes, you're a dick.

 

Ignore them people, by the way.

[cae]

If you claim to be a supporter but deny a content creator their earned ad revenue and simultaneously do not support them via donations, yes I think your initial claim to be a supporter was. Also I do not think that youtube ads are morally wrong, sometimes annoying but they are not immoral. Personally I think that the people claiming to be moral crusaders fighting against adblock are just trying to rationalize their lack of support for content producers when the real reason is  that they just don't like ads. 

 

Why must support be monetary in nature?

 

Yes, the real reason is I loathe advertising, period. There's no rationalization for the "lack of support" because support is not a requisite to consume content, and I would argue not always monetary in nature.

[ConfusedDolphin]

Why must support be monetary in nature?

 

Yes, the real reason is I loathe advertising, period. There's no rationalization for the "lack of support" because support is not a requisite to consume content, and I would argue not always monetary in nature.

 

Because people use money to run their businesses and feed their families, kind words and good intentions do neither. 

[ConfusedDolphin]

 I think forced advertisement is morally wrong so I will continue to block it.

 

 

Oh I forgot the point at which a google representative forced you to watch youtube videos. 

[elkenrod]

Oh I forgot the point at which a google representative forced you to watch youtube videos. 

 

Can you answer my question about text-based browsing?

 

If you browse websites like LTT in a text-only browser, is that "questionable"?

 

Thanks

[cae]

Because people use money to run their businesses and feed their families, kind words and good intentions do neither. 

 

If someone decides to run a business or feed their families using a system that offers content for free, how is that my fault as a consumer?

If someone decides to agree to an ad supported contract, how is that my fault as a consumer?

These are their decisions; if their business or family suffers as a result, they should take responsibility for those decisions.

If insulting their consumer base (supporting or not) is their idea of taking responsibility, they have my pity.

[chimmychunger]

If someone decides to run a business or feed their families using a system that offers content for free, how is that my fault as a consumer?

If someone decides to agree to an ad supported contract, how is that my fault as a consumer?

These are their decisions; if their business or family suffers as a result, they should take responsibility for those decisions.

If insulting their consumer base (supporting or not) is their idea of taking responsibility, they have my pity.

 

because adblock was not intended, the system isnt free, you watch ads as payment basically

[chimmychunger]

The fact that there is money involved is conflating the entire issue!

 

Forget that there is money involved! 

 

Is it questionable for me (am I a dick) to browse websites with a text-based browser?

 

Yes or No?

 

because the only reason ads are their is to make money thats it. Money is key in the argument

[cae]

because adblock was not intended, the system isnt free, you watch ads as payment basically

 

Monetization is a choice! If you want to be paid via forced advertisement, give me a contract so I can politely decline. Until then, most content uses YouTube's free platform.

 

If AdBlock was not intended, I could say the same thing of ads.

[elkenrod]

because the only reason ads are their is to make money thats it. Money is key in the argument

 

That's not true.  The ad model isn't integral to the internet, or even Youtube working.  The ad model is something that *some* content creators choose to accept.  I would site Linus as an example of this.  They did not start creating videos with the idea that those videos would generate ad revenue.  I challenge you to refute this.

 

The reason why this is important to understand is that some people just don't get how internet browsing works.  If you have a public site that is viewable to anyone on the internet, then you really have very little say in how people choose to access that content.

 

The ad model is a flawed one that people who create content can choose to accept or reject.  It is entirely their choice.  It is not however, the responsibility of those consuming the content (which is free to access BTW) to ensure that the content creator gets paid by a third party.

 

The ad model is arbitrary as well.  What if a creator didn't get credit for viewers who didn't watch 50% or more of the video?  Is it then the responsibility of the viewer to then watch all of the video, lest he/she get labeled as a "dick" who doesn't support the content creator?

 

What if only views from certain territories/countries are counted for credit by the ad agency?  If I use a VPN located in a country not included in the ad agreement am I still a "dick"?

 

This entire issue of ad block is not really about ad block at all.  It's about your rights as someone who browses the public internet.  To tell someone how they should/shouldn't browse i.s just laughable.  In the same way ISPs tell people they shouldn't "abuse the internet connection they paid for by using it too much".

[IdeaStormer]

Why must support be monetary in nature?

 

Exactly! I do my best to post helpful info and help those in need to keep people coming back, it may not make them rich but this is a forum not a pot of gold.

[IdeaStormer]

because adblock was not intended, the system isnt free, you watch ads as payment basically

 

The system (Internet) was made for research or for researchers to collaborate not to post ad's so by intent ad's was definitely not anywhere in the definition of the internet.

 

From day one there has always been ways to block ad's (content) that was not desired or pushed on us, in the beginning you could fool the annoying pop up by blocking them in your hosts file and preventing new windows to be opened if not clicked on. Now we have add-ons like Adblock Plus to block this undesirable content, there are others but I'd rather keep them to myself at present.

 

Being on the internet sans ad's will change your life, you no longer are bombarded with crap you don't need or want or care for. You instead buy what you need and make decisions based on your brain not someone pushing something on you. The world is all anti bully, which is basically someone trying to make people do something you don't want to and yet we allow ad's to do the same if mentally? Nope not me.

[VA6DAH]

I block ads, they are usually cluttered with information that really takes away from a good user experience on a website.

Instead I donate to sites I use, and profit in some way from.

I am a proud user and contributor to the Adblock Plus Project.

[Dudenstein]

I will still use ad block. I will support groups I like in other ways. For example in a premium member to tested because I really value their content