I don't think it would be that odd, it's just like how people who work for the government still have to pay taxes.  It keeps things fair and in the end having us count as views for ads helps the site get more money which helps us get paid.

Hey, if your view is just an extreme 'deal with it or go away', then I guess that's it.  I was trying to entertain a different approach, showing you that I was even putting up with ads for quite a while and I could ignore quite a few ads.  But many ads are obnoxious or controlling.  Its a balance that has tipped the scales and, as this thread has shown, gotten out of control.  You can either choose to see that this site has more than the avg users tolerance of ads (and some ads that are annoying) or, as you said, we'll just have to deal with it until we 'just leave'.

As I said before and I still stand by it, I can deal with a few ads.  But when they start redirecting me, taking over parts of the screen or popping up over areas I'm trying to type...its no longer just an ad.  Its like the equivalent of a trojan on my screen.  And I have to decide every day whether or not I want to come back to the site and hassle with the ads (or even if they're going to get worse and infect my computer, as I believe they have once before).

And yes, I've actually run websites before.  Out of my own pocket.  Because I didn't want people to deal with ads.

If you guys read further back in the thread, ioi already said those who work for vgc or are helpers will probably get the ad-free version for free.

... and that seems perfectly fair and standard business practice.

im paranoid now, the ONLY site I can get working on my PC is VGC...what have you done to me ioi! I turned off adblock plus, let me have my internet back!

Maybe I'm risking a ban by saying this but I'd rather be honest about it. I use an ad blocker when visiting VGChartz.

I use an ad blocker when visiting most site but I whitelist specific sites that I visit to support them. I'd like to do this with VGChartz... but the blunt truth is that VGChartz is plastered with a ridiculous number of annoying ads - hell, even with the ad blocker on, too many of them get through. It makes site navigation a real pain and in fact it was this very site that caused me to look up and start using an ad blocker because of the beyond annoying ads that played sounds... "Congratulations, you just won an iPhone!" And if you opened multiple pages in separate tabs, hoo boy, you were in for some hurt to the ears.

Ars Technica (the linked site), on the other hand, has only a few ads that are relatively unobtrusive. I whitelist that site. I'd like to do the same for VGChartz.

Sigh...fine.  Nevermind.  You don't seem to be seeing the other side of the coin.  Just that its an all or nothing thing.  I've stated my view multiple times now and all you're looking at is 'this is the bottom line and you refuse to see it'.  So fine, I guess I refuse to see that redirect ads and pop up ads are 'necessary' or something.  If that's the case, I'll just deal, as you said before.  I'm not running the site and I was doing just that before this thread was made.

But I would like to say, if that's the attitude that is to be taken, you can't really get angry at people for blocking ads.  Because you are basically telling people they have to 'deal' with the ads and then when they try to tell you which type of ads are annoying, you just say 'well they're not annoying so deal with it'.  We don't really have a choice with the way you're coming at us.  And I'm not even blocking ads.

And I'd lke to state once again, I'm not 'complaining' about viewing the ads.  Just that certain ones are redirecting me or taking over my browser.

-_-

internet works again, that was annoying and random

i have never,used an add blocker ,my only complaint about the adds stems from watching a news item on Australian TV from the office of fair trading warning about a bogus google cheque rebate scheme only to see an add for this scheme on this site showing a picture of a bogus Australian government cheque ,I mentioned it in a thread and was told that the site would has it grew, weed out these adds, this said to me we don't care if you get ripped off we need the money but its OK well go legit when we can .

Let us know what malicious programs you get.

That's of course when you eventually get your PC fixed.

O:)

There's a lot going on here, so I'll keep it brief.

The first bolded bit above (that guests outnumber members 4 or 5 to 1) suggests to me that much of this thread is misdirected. All the stuff about Terms of Use for example, because guests don't sign up to it. All the stuff about blocking adblockers for example, because so long as ioi keeps doing the good job he is doing getting links and clickthroughs in the press, the last thing that's needed is for a new guest to visit the site for the first time only to see 'you have to turn off your adblocker'. If I saw that on a site I would be deeply deeply suspicious. About as suspicious as I am about reverse charge calls from Nigeria.

So that seems to me an empty threat until such time as the site is segmented to separate out the numbers stuff from the games stuff and the forum stuff - because probably the vast majority of drive-by visitors are coming through numbers links.

So all this threat stuff should never really have come up.

The second bolded bit (it's a power struggle) is, I think, a bit over the top. The thread degenerated fast after that jibe - not from ioi personally but from one of the guys - that all adblockers are thieves. Much of what happened since then ihappened as a reaction to that. And pretty justifiable reaction, I think, to an unwarranted, untrue and very definitely rude statement.

It's not a power struggle. It is just a conversation that got a bit out of hand.

I guess most people reading this thread are, like me, supportive of the idea behind the original article; generally supportive of the need to persuade people to avoid using adblock except where necessary, but are slightly nervous about the prospect of adblocking being used as a means to deny access to content - not only for personal reasons, but also for fear of what impact it would have on the site's viability going forward given the high volume of guest traffic generated by exxternal links/casual visits.. But that last point is a business matter for ioi, and it isn't for me to speculate about it.