Necronomikro
join:2005-09-01 | reply to swhx7
Re: Ethical use of blocking please
90% of ads are pay per click. Pay per impression is a much less common payment type, but it exists.
I occasionally click on ads if I like the site, but, for the most part, I have ads blocked. |
|
swhx7
Premium
join:2006-07-23
Elbonia
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to evilt00l
Aren't some pay-per-view and others pay-per-click? (I don't run a commercial site myself) Maybe some advertisers pay only per click, but I think some pay a smaller amount per view and a larger amount per click.
Anyway if you leave non-offensive ads unblocked and click on those that interest you, that's more support for sites than if you block all ads. |
|
evilt00l
join:2003-03-20
Winchester, KY
clubs:
| reply to swhx7
I'm not sure but aren't most sites paid for ads that people click on? So even if you let them load but don't click on them you still aren't making the site any money right?
(again not being sarcastic or anything... thats just the way I thought it worked.) |
|
swhx7
Premium
join:2006-07-23
Elbonia
·RoadRunner Cable
| I believe in supporting sites that I like by letting their ads onto my browser and monitor while visiting the site. They need the money from ads to pay for development, traffic, hosting and other costs. Therefore I don't use indiscriminate ad-blocking and I encourage others not to. I even click on ads sometimes if they are interesting.
On the other hand, certain ad techniques go too far, in my view. Any form of animation prevents me from reading text, so I turn it all off and block Flash. And tech that tracks users from site to site is unacceptable, so I block third-party scripts and iframes and known tracking companies.
If others followed these principles we could support sites and have less obnoxious ads. |
|
