Jimquisition: The Adblock Episode Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 . . . 29 NEXT | |
I hate ads, but I've no idea how bad they've gotten here, as I've been PubClub since its inception, and I wouldn't have it any other way. I love the site, I love the content (for the most part), but unless the ads are easy to skip around or are silent and unobtrusive I refuse to watch them. For what it's worth though, I will remain PubClub as long as I can for the sake of my sanity, the site, and the fact that I love the high def HTML5 videos, the Flash player can fuck right off. Keep doing what you do Jim, you make my Mondays a little better every week. | |
OT: I do use the software but have specific ads (Jim,Yahtzee and bobs in particular) whitelisted so they still show when I view certain content on this website. I do however fully block most websites out there because I don't usually care for ads in general, to me they serve no purpose other than to annoy me. It just happens that some here are the exception but not the rule. | |
While I agree that safety is a priority, there's a difference between blocking all things, and blocking some things. Whitelisting sites that you frequently travel isn't a bad thing, even if it exposes you to a bit of risk. There is that in all things, risk is the nature of life. The trick is to cover your bases without doing much hard. To suggest that you pre-emptively head off all security risks is somewhat akin to the behaviors you see in games like Day Z. In order to verify that no one will shoot you, you shoot everyone first. Saves everyone the trouble of knowing who's friendly and who isn't: simply make everyone unfriendly, problem solved. However, collateral damage is a side effect of that approach. Everyone's threshold for tolerable is different, so everyone deserves a fair shake. Adblocking everyone, and script blocking everyone, is not too dissimilar from that. Guaranteeing no issues by always heading off trouble while still getting benefits is a little unfair to the people who make a living this way. That's not to say it's an all-or-nothing approach, but that is to say making this the common, default approach will create problems, at least potentially in the future if not immediately. Everyone's mileage may vary, but it may help some to reconsider. :3 | |
I do run Adblock and no-script on my browser, but I do turn it off for sites i frequently visit like The Escapist. That said, The Escapist does not make it easy. Compounding that, I don't feel like I even have a 'choice' to put up with the annoyance; I have a hyper-sensory disorder, which means that a sudden burst of loud noise, or even something like 2 different audio tracks churning out gibberish by playing over each other that my brain can't interpret causes me PHYSICAL HARM, and in an absolute literal sense ruins my entire day by putting my body into a long-lasting panic-state (and sometimes night as well if I can't sleep due to the pain from said response). Every time this site's ad-network permits this kind of assault, I have to pay for another dose of my medication (which still ruins my day by crippling my mental faculties, but it's my only option to deal with my disorder). I love the hell out of the escapist content, I'm on here daily, and it's the only reason I'm even trying to tolerate the grotesque ads allowed. but as I simply can not afford publisher's club in my financial situation, that puts me in a major dilemma. I'm not threatening to turn adblock/no-script on because I do agree its a form of revenue-denial for someone I think deserves their revenue, but that just leaves me with the options of a) continuing to put my health at risk if these practices aren't reigned-in, or b) walking away. Guess which one is going to win sooner or later? | |
I have no problem turning it off when I am viewing a column or series that I follow (such as The Jimquision) but often times, like you said Jim, sites like IGN have these massive, intrusive, elaborate banners and overlays that seemingly don't want me to even view their content. In addition it's a real deal breaker when 30 sec commercials air before a 1 min video or even better yet, when the commercial loads up and plays instantly but the video I want to view takes 5 minutes to load...and it's only a minute itself. This image sums it up nicely, http://weknowmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/google-servers-for-ads-for-videos.jpg | |
I first heard of and found adblock shortly after learning about banner ads capable of infecting one with malware simply by browsing to the page on which the ad is located. The problem is I don't know this shit at all and thus can't make an informed decision about whether any website, even in the less dodgy bits of the internet, can be counted on to stifle this shit so I err on the side of caution. Also, I don't always agree with Jim but even when I think he's off his rocker I at least get some enjoyment from having something to be pissed off about and write angry rants on the forums for a while. Can't those who hate him and want him to suffer financially see that he's still providing them a valuable service? | |
It's EXACTLY what you said, Jim. While it currently might be a vicious cycle... Adblock was born as a response to the BS of advertisers.... if they hadn't been so obnoxious for years... why would I feel the need/want to make them go away? So I adblock because I don't want to see that shit. EDIT: AAAAAAND as soon as I unblocked the adds.... a lovely embedded musical add started up mixing with your video producing a cacophonous racket that the word "noise" fails to even encompass. | |
This is my thought as well. I never intend to use any sort of adblocking. I do, however, place a reasonable weight on simply feeling respected by the content creators who's works I happily partake of. I want to support those who make content I enjoy, and I'm perfectly happy to support them via ads. If, however, I feel that no attempt is being made to respect me by at least choosing an ad service that doesn't intentionally mess up my browsing experience then I will stop partaking of that content. | |
I understand they're busy, I'm the lead developer at my company so I understand what it can be like. That said, only they can ensure the user experience is what they intended. We don't know if those ads are or aren't a mistake, so why would we report them? Not all problems are as obvious as a 404 and those are the ones that require UX validation. It's usually a matter of process, not a task assigned to an individual. | |
And as I mentioned, I watched their stuff like 10 years ago, but stopped. I'm not the kind of person who forgives or gives second chances. They ruined the experience for me, and I have not and will not go back to them for it. So forgive me for not knowing what they're up to these days.
Firstly, MREs can not be substituted for food, at least not on a long term basis. The damage to your colon would be catastrophic. Secondly, what I was driving at is that if they suddenly started using negative reinforcement to make me watch their ads or if the blocked me from their website for not using ads or if like above with Rooster Teeth, the website became unusable due to the ads. Then I would have no problem doing something else for 5 - 10 minutes a day then watching their video. I could just as easily be playing TF2, or painting my 40k figs or driving nails into my head. It is to say, there exists an alternative. And this is the whole thing about ads, they exist as negative reinforcement for the content. And to a point they outweigh the positives of the content. Especially when the site in question starts using ads that host malicious software like megaupload and other such sites did. Ads are not a solution to a problem, they are at best a short term solution to make things work. As for this 'premium' stuff with the pub club or whatever they're calling it. I've done things like that on some sites. DakkaDakka.com for instance, I'm one of their DKMs or what ever they call it. I paid their fee and got the extra crap. But I'm still undecided about doing that for the escapist. On the one hand, I would be supporting things I like, such as critical miss and jim. On the other hand I would be supporting the things I don't like, such as movie bob and these forums, which are renound throughout the internet for being some of the most stuck up their own ass of all time (I know, people in glass houses). But the point I'm driving at is why should I support something I don't support? | |
Having actually written for a website, I understand the importance of ads. They generate revenue and allow sites to stay up while also allowing the site owners to continue pushing out content that, for the end-user, is entirely free. Because of that, I tend to whitelist sites which I respect/trust. However, there are three big reasons why I still use adblocking software for the majority of the sites on the internet, with one being a bit selfish and the other two being quite reasonable (at least in my eyes); 1. I use certain sites WAY too much, to the point where I would end up spending 40% of my time starring at ads if I whitelisted them. (The biggest offender of this is Youtube.) 2. I have no idea if scrolling over a specific ad will result in nothing happening or several pop-ups coming out at me. It's easier to me simply remove the ads then try to play a game of computer mouse Frogger. 3. Some ad-heavy sites can, literally crash my browser if I don't have adblocking turned on. More often than not, The Escapist has fallen victim to the third point. During several times when I decided to whitelist The Escapist and just deal with the ads, my browser ended up crashing because there was simply too much stuff going on in a small handful of tabs. Having just turned off adblock before writing this comment, it seems that The Escapist is not being stuffed with ads. If that trends continues, I'm very willing to keep adblocking turned off for this site. I just don't hope it changes back to very ad-heavy pages. | |
This was pretty much his stance in the video though. Jim said he didn't consider adblocking a video stealing and I consider what you said, "admitting that not giving out "hypohetical future profits", is not the same thing as stealing. The important thing is that our content producers make a living, but beyond that, it's a matter of helpfulness and courtesy, versus hanging on for the ride as an extra freeloader but without bringing much extra burden either" to be a perfect summery of what Jim was saying in the adblock video.
Lol, just got mine too. | |
That's fair. I actually know next to nothing about the tech on the site, so I don't fully understand that last bit... All I know is people have reported those kind of ads before, just 'cause it annoys them, and the Techies are willing to look at it. | |
I don't adblock "The Escapist". I've seen all the ads, including that one with the bear. I do, however, admit that I've never clicked on a single ad. Not once. Sorry. One of said ads (it was one of these dating site ads) managed to trigger a "object blocked due to malicious content" warning from BitDefender. I can't say how accurate this was, but BitDefender doesn't give me hundreds of false-positives like this. That ad was shown on "The Escapist". There's a general perception that all internet advertising is scamming ("You're the one-millionth visitor to this website! Click here to claim your prize!") that's generally aimed at people too young or inexperienced with the 'net to know any better. Some of them aimed at children (the Spongebob-themed one "shoot the jellyfish to claim a prize" comes to mind) strike me as particularly repulsive. I'm not sure that ALL advertising is like this, but nowadays I wouldn't dare to click even on the ads that name legitimate companies. Yeah, it might SAY it's from a reputable banking website, but so did those e-mails I used to get, before content filtering became a "thing", that wanted my online banking username and password for a "security update". Jim, I would never want to stop you from being paid for your content. I've received hours of entertainment from it, and with the exception of one video of yours that I particularly disagreed with (the idea that people shouldn't object to you liking stuff that they don't - I think this is a fair point for someone posting on a forum, but not for a professional games critic who's paid to give a fair and unbiased opinion) I've never tried to dictate to you what you should or shouldn't publish. Quite the opposite in fact - you've got popular on the basis of the content that you produce by your own standards, so what sense would it make for you to suddenly give up doing this and start pandering to a vocal subsection of your audience (who might be in the minority anyway)? Having said that, I think the advertising "revenue stream" is not necessarily as permanent as it may seem right now. It'll only work as long as the advertisers can convince the product sellers that the ads are shifting stock, which may be the case, but it's difficult to see who's buying on the basis of internet ads alone. I wish I had an alternative for you... I just don't. I'm not a "pub club" member (sorry) so I can't say "the subscription model is best". I just don't want you guys to get wedded to a revenue stream that may turn out to be less-than-reliable, and then turn into the modern equivalent of the horse company who tried to ban the model-T, or the record companies who said that MTV would ruin the recording industry. (Even if it turns out that last group may have had a point there.) | |
I do not use adblock and haven't in the past, but the content by and large on this site lasts a little over 5 minutes. a 30 sec ad (at most where I am) for a 6 minute video isn't that big of a deal, especially considering how bad it is on other sites. Plus, most of the ads I've seen are at least in the "ballpark" of something I might be interested in, so I can give that a pass. Hell, most of the advertisements are for the Escapist shows themselves. All I am saying is the Escapist does a pretty good job of keeping adverts to a minimum while delivering consistently entertaining content. I don't know what the alternative will end up being, but I hope sites like this one don't suffer because of the need for advertisement money. I guess I can just become a pub club member :) | |
Advertising as is a nasty see-saw. Too many ads drive viewers away, too few drive content away. For the "consumer", it trades a direct monetary cost for an opportunity cost, which is generally much lower risk. I literally cannot leave my neighborhood without being advertised to at least once. And I have no control over that at all. But I do have more control over that online. It's awfully damn tempting to just block known noise and focus on the product, but I whitelist my regular sites, and just opt to not visit them when they're pissing me off (I've nearly left the Escapist for good a few times). It's an "entitled" attitude to take, but like Jim, I cannot judge anyone too harshly for it; because we are practically under siege by advertisements for a large part of our waking hours in real life, and everywhere online. | |
I think the whole topic revolves around a lack of control over what ads are distributed. Now, I don't think that Escapist staff can possibly go through all the possible ads and blacklist some (partly because different browsing habits and especially countries receive different ads) but I think somewhere in the chain between the people producing shitty ads and between the end users there needs to be control put in. What Jim said in the episode is true: Most people use adblock because of annoying and intrusive ads. As an experiment, I turned off adblock and loaded several pages of the Escapist in different tabs. The ads I received weren't in front of the video but either on the right side or down at the very bottom of the site. Results: Unacceptable: The first two ads I received were of an auto-playing video posing as "celebrity news" that started playing on a much louder volume than the actual video (and at the same time, too!). Questionable: Another ad was a "view movies for free" auto-playing video ad (thankfully silent; my Web-of-Trust addon marked the site behind it as deeply orange, which even some porn sites don't get). Bearable: A third ad is comprised of a auto-starting but silent video ad comprised of several smaller but harmless ad videos (e.g. osteo porosis medicine (???), car tires and other stuff). This one is actually bearable but I am on an unlimited (total traffic, not bandwidth) connection and I'd hate something like that to guzzle up a limited data plan (that I had for some time in the past) while I leave a tab open or write a post just because it doesn't stop loading more video ads. Ok: Another ad was just a 1:34 (silent) video for "flowplayer". While the ad was unobtrusive and overall ok, it looked a little long for my taste, but meh, whatever. I'll leave Adblock inactive on the Escapist for a little while longer. However, I'll turn it back on when I'm annoyed by ads again :( | |
Please also consider doing this for other websites you visit. Every little bit helps, for all content creators.
Unfortunately, this probably wouldn't really be all that workable. People who visit the sites to watch one or two rogue videos (which is a large percentage of users, especially since direct-to-video links from sites like reddit and slashdot) wouldn't be supporting the site at all. The dedicated Support Us page would likely be the one for PubClub.
In this case, I would have to disagree. That already happens. People who go to concerts often walk into stadiums lined with advertisements. Every concession stand proudly has Coke emblems on their drink fountains and Budweiser taps on the countertops. The drive to the concert hall is teeming with billboards and business names. Somewhere, everywhere, there's an advertisement. Be it someone's branded shirt to a flyer drifting on the floor on the way in. However some may feel, advertisements are everywhere in this society. That said, "blaming the user" isn't the route this is taking. It's saying to consider whitelisting or not using adblocker so the ads don't get more abrasive. And if you do cut off this man's paycheck, perhaps he shouldn't listen to you as you're not his paying audience. Seems like a pretty reasonable response to me. Also, there is a subscription system in place, called the Publisher's Club. Find it's benefits here. | |
I do try to actively support people when i can. I will try and pay subscriptions or buy from places i frequent because i know they don't get revenue from me otherwise. BUT From bitter experience i know that, time and time again, when i have had lax security online i have paid for it by having almost irremovable spyware and malware. I'm not being paranoid and i don't think it's akin to being isolationist. It is simply good security practice. Browsing the internet without controlling scrips is like having sex with multiple partners without a condom. It's very risky. Sooner or later your digital crotch is going to drop off. In two subsequent posts i have talked about whitelising, automatic whitelisting and the possibility of some kind of code of practice. I do maintain a personal whitelist and, again, i am a pub club member.
| |
Spot on jim thank god for you, and thank god for pointing out out that most of us start using that stuff because advertisers/markerters are intrusive asses. | |
I just wanted to post to let you know that I was moved by your episode, and have officially decided to whitelist websites including, but not limited to, this one, Giant Bomb, and Destructoid. | |
I've been infected with viruses from ad sites. I work from home. You're asking me to risk my livelihood for yours. Luckily I've been able to afford a tablet. I watch stuff from it without adblock. If I didn't have the tablet or adblock I just wouldn't watch your show. Would that be okay with you? What would you rather have? I dunno. Just giving you my perspective. | |
I don't use Adblock at all, because I don't think the ads are bad for the most part. I tend to wonder if this is because I live in New Zealand and they have different laws and/or attitudes regarding invasive adds. However, there are times, including on the Escapist Magazine, when I wonder if the people running it pay any attention to what's being run on it. For example, the standard "there's a virus on your computer, click to scan" or "you're the one millionth person to browse here, click to claim your prize. I mean, really? Everyone knows those are crappy scams designed to pull in gullible idiots. Crap like that makes me reconsider my stance, because if a website is willing to put that kind of blatant "click here to download your malware" bullshit on it's pages, it doesn't deserve a single cent from me and can fuck right off. | |
*Waves the Publisher's Club flag* Okay, so it does cost me a little bit, but honestly? Just over £10? A year? To watch all the content of The Escapist, in HD, without Ads? | |
I obviously have a pub club subscription, I suggest other people who hate adverts do the same. It's only $20USD a year and you get a whole bunch of benefits. | |
That works too, if you get enough. I enjoy the HD format shows, with no ads. Everything else is just a bonus. | |
It certainly does prevent people from starting threads "Hey, I need a good adblocker, give me some recommendations" and people actually linking people to adblockers in response to complaints about ad related issues. Preventing the discussion itself is silly though, but they need to specify it in order to actually be able to give out warnings for them. OT: I have an adblocker that's specific for the Escapist, it's called Publisher's Club and I intend to keep using it. More for the fact that I don't have to watch the shows in flash than for the ads though. God how I hate flash. | |
I think I'm (un?)fortunate enough to not live in the US, because while there is only 1 or 2 slightly annoying ads, it never gets intrusive enough for me, I swear I DO use AdBlock, but I've whitelisted The Escapist (and Massively and Destructoid and TGWTG) for a few years now (in Destructoid's and TGWTG's case, 9 months, since that's the time I started to browse there), every so often I see comments saying the ads are incredibly obtrusive and annoying, and I just can't see what the heck they're talking about, because it isn't obtrusive or annoying enough to dampen my experience browsing through this site. Again, I use AdBlock, I admit it upfront, but honest to God, I do whitelist The Escapist*, even if there aren't enough ads for me to even justify enabling AdBlock. *Nope, you don't have any guarantee I do tell the truth, you only have my word, wich is next to useless, but I promise, I'm telling the truth. | |
I don't use adblock, actually. I block ad servers through my host file. I don't know which ad servers you guys get your ads from, so it's difficult to actually fix that. I'd remove those ones from the list if I knew. | |
Didn't even realise they had such repercussions. | |
Yes, but blocking ads isn't stealing. Are you stealing a TV show when you go to make a cup of coffee during the ad break, rather than watching the ad?
That doesn't seem logical. The people blocking the ads are not the ones who create the ads, or run the ads. Why do you not blame the sites that choose to run these ads? They are the people responsible for running the ads, not those who block them
You're going to need to show some evidence for your claim that ads are getting more intrusive because of ad blocking. Do you really believe that ads would suddenly get less intrusive if everybody stopped ad blocking? There's also many other reasons why ads have gotten more intrusive over time: 1. Technology - people have fast connections today, so streaming video and animation, etc. is a lot more viable than in the past. The idea that Adblock users have an significant impact on this seems absurd. The vast majority of people browse without Adblock. And because of the growth of internet users, the number of people viewing websites without Adblock has grown over time, not shrunk. So how does it make any logical sense to blame more intrusive ads on Adblock? I feel that your sense of outrage and blame may be wildly misplaced. | |
People seem to have an issue with discussing something versus advocating something. The rule WAS don't encourage or enable other people to block our ads. Of course, many people/children like to do the "so have you heard of Adblock *nudge* *wink*" which they like to insist is discussion rather then encouragement. So in order to save our very overworked moderators from having to deal with constant sophistry on what does or does not constitute discussion, we've added the line that says don't talk about it at all. Very little of use was lost (people on a non-advertising forum that isn't read by anyone who makes such decisions can no longer talk about a topic that only causes more work for moderators), but threads like this can open the discussion in a more controlled manner. In response to the multiple people asking if Pubclub is a good alternative, of course it is. That's the primary reason Pubclub exists. For perspective however, while it might generate enough money to pay for a lot of the back-end (recurring hosting/network/power costs), we need significantly more to pay the people handling tech/in-house editorial/art/marketing/project management/contributors. In response to the people only blocking part of the site. While your favorite content producer often gets paid based on views to their content, the MONEY that pays them comes from everything, not just their content's personal ads. Speaking of niche! When the site started, we were exclusively multi-page articles. We paid for stock photos for our artists to use as a base to make custom layouts for every article, and did it every week for months. In regards to the "people hate reading" comment, we had stats for our early articles that would show views per page. We saw this again with many contests (on WarCry back when it was an active site) that gave away free things where we'd have more prizes left over then contest entries (these days we're big enough due to non readers and more aggressive promotion where that rarely happens). Effort. So, then we got videos to bring in the page views so we could keep making a website. Which brought in orders of magnitude more people because it's so much easier to sit there and absorb something amusing. We still try and run articles every chance we get, but it's more whenever the higher page view things bleed enough cash where we can pay a writer to make something that won't pay for itself. Due to the above, I personally find it insulting when other sites (occasionally with people who have worked with us and know these facts) decide they can do high-effort pretty long form content for free or ad-supported "the right way." When the many brilliant people I've worked with here sacrificed so much to try and make that model work. Speaking of Patrons, we ran on Venture Capitol for many years. There was at least one point where they forgave our debt and gave us more money to keep doing our thing. There were several points where we had to lay off some great coworkers/friends because of funding being cut and no money coming in. There were several points where our fantastic leader (the guy speaking in the above TED talk video) managed to bring these people back under other job titles to keep them employed. Eventually we managed to get bought by a real media company with successful sites before our investors finally cut the cord (we never made them money of course). While we are still dealing with integrating with a larger entity, it's fantastic to have more connections into both places people can see our content and people who will pay for ads on it. Oh yeah, I didn't mention how hard it is to actually GET ads on a site. Most ad companies interested in our content will only buy for US audiences (larger paying gamer audience/just don't care about "foreign" markets due to various good and bad reasons). Out of the ones that do, they typically will only spend their limited advertising budgets in very specific places. Requirements like "top 3 trafficked video game related website". You know what ads the #4 most popular website gets? AS FAR AS OBNOXIOUS ADS are concerned, they come from two directions. (As a quick aside - first time we tried to use Google Adwords as filler years ago, they kept pushing MMO gold seller ads that we expressly forbade. Our only option was a LITERAL (no wildcards) HAND MAINTAINED BLACKLIST OF SPAMMER DOMAINS that had something like a 200 domain LIMIT. EVERY GOLD SELLER URL was a unique throwaway domain, and later they started using web searches for their URL. We couldn't even ban all the domains we knew about due to hitting the size limit on Google's blacklist.) These days as we're slightly bigger and can give the companies running these filler ads a harder time, they've been pretty good overall about keeping crap out. However, each region has their own ads and stuff slips through. I'd really love to self host ads and get rid of the annoying Javascript includes (WHICH ARE SO EASY TO BLOCK, my personal favorite is blocking the "blockmetrics" include) - but A SELF HOSTED AD ISN'T TRACKED BY THIRD PARTIES. Which means ad companies will very rarely pay for it because they can't "trust" the numbers. Which means that they use braindead Javascript that's easily filtered. Also notice that sites you see who host/design their own ads typically have higher quality ads and relatively little user complaints - often the users enjoy the community targeted humor/etc that these kinds of banners tend to employ. PLEASE LET US KNOW if an ad is playing noise (without you starting it) or won't close/is otherwise obnoxious. Unfortunately the other annoying types of ads (rollovers that do close, flashing idiocy) probably can't be removed because they pay for the privilege. But if it's bad please complain and we will pass it along to our ad people. Most people don't say anything (again, effort or indignation at having seen the ad in the first place generally leads to blocking everything) Pretty much all of us here despise the entire website advertising ecosystem outside of self hosted custom designed things (i.e. effort was taken to make it look good for the target audience - which also costs more money/time). BUT! They are the only way to PAY for a website to run. One last note on ad trackers that you see so many of everywhere. These are the trackers ad companies used of "impartial traffic monitoring" - when we tell them we have X traffic, these trackers back up our numbers (or for things like Google Analytics, are often a "modern" website's only form of personal traffic analysis - which also saddens me greatly for various reasons). Or in the case of shit like Comscore, companies pay an unreasonable sum (several thousand) to be added to Comscore's database which is an aggregator for many large advertising companies to pick the top 3 sites in their niche and only advertise with them (I think/hope we're done with them). Anyway, the other trackers are generally how ad companies actually track impressions, so blocking them is sometimes worse then blocking the ads for a website. SHORTER VERSION: Pubclub helps, but can't pay for enough to run the site by itself unless MANY more people use it. We're always trying to think of ways to make it more attractive, but it's hard to come up with things that we wouldn't enable for everyone. People as a whole really really hate effort, which is why the only way you can make money on the Internet is from people paying you to show lazy people shiny things repeatedly until they lazily/accidentally click through and give the product flashing in front of them their low effort business. On a related note, here is a funny picture: (a bit garbled, but hope it's informative for someone and doesn't get us blacklisted from the internet advertising cabal) | |
DARN! I forgot about my own ABP. O_O Personally I have no problem with normal ads since for me they're basically part of a web page. Yes annoying or in your face ads do drive me crazy as well and I'm happy to see them go, but those weren't my reason for blocking. For good sites and creators that I watch -or as you said it if we blockers are ASKED to support then- I'm glad to white list pages. Although I have no idea how much it's worth since I never click them and most of the times I don't even notice ads. :-P But anyways The Escapist is white listed from now on. Sorry for not doing so before, but I actually didn't notice that ABP was on. :-) | |
| Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 . . . 29 NEXT | |
