It is the sites their mistake that a lot of people use adblock, We have evolved from ads on sites, to pop ups on sites to video ads that start playing without your permission for people who use a lot of open tabs it is a nightmare... X_X...

Don't really know what you're trying to say, but I have a feeling I disagree.

What it seems like you're saying is that it's the sites fault people use adblock, which doesn't make much sense.  People would use adblock regardless of how the advertisment is done.  A lot of sites have abandoned the pop-up ads and stick with ads that run off the blank spaces on the site or something.  But there is another thing you need to know about ads.  It's that the site does NOT actually choose exactly the ad that appears on the site.  The people running the ads do.  While the site can pick from different vendors for ads, it is ultimately not the person hosting the site's decision.  Or that's what I believe how a lot of them work.

Normally sites can decide they don't like a form of advertisements...

I have no problem to go on a site like Vgchartz and see ads from games I am not interested in,  most ads are amazon related for me and are the form of ads I enjoy...

but when you have to read 500 posts in PS nation or +500 posts in the Xbo nation...and every time you go to the next page you get a pop up I can understand people don't enjoy it...and start to use adblock

I am one of those users with more than 10 tabs open and sometimes while reading a post a site decides to open a video advertisement for no reason well who would not use adblock then?

They can choose from a list, but they don't ACTUALLY choose WHAT it is, since they're only HOSTING is my point.  They have some control over their ads, but sometimes there really isn't a choice.  It's kind of like how you may have the illusion to choose not to have a car.  Depending on where you live, you can actually use other forms of transportation.  But in some places, if you choose not to have a car it is also essentially choosing not to have a job or a good life in general.  This applies to sites with advertisements as well.  

While certain situations might make people want to enable adblock onto a site, another thing you need to realize is that you're also opting to cheat and use a service for free and not in any way help out the situation.  The problem here is that there really aren't very many other ways for many of these sites to operate and choosing to adblock can lead to the site eventually disappearing or downgrading to something less than what it was before.  There are plenty of potential risks and I do NOT blame the sites for that.  I think it's mostly the peoples' fault.  Of course, as a business, you should also be trying to find ways around these tendency.  However, don't come crying when a site you like shuts down for something like this.

I would certainly feel better if I would not have to watch the 30 second video before the actual video but instead get a 5 second "this video is presented to you by GAME X" or whatever....  in the video.
5 Seconds is okay and not annoying  but wanting me to SKIP after 5 seconds is annoying again because It requires action.

He could let some small mini commercials show up in a corner for a few seconds like the ones when watching a TV show that are ads for other TV shows e.g "blah blah new season starting 1 June 2014 @ 8 p.m.)etc.

Make it 3 second ads. 
1st second GAME TITLE.
2nd second SAY WHAT IT IS e.g NEW RPG by company X
3rd second RELEASE DATE 

Other acceptable ways would be to get his wall decorated with posters of recently released games send to him by the publishers. He could also consume stuff like FountainPoo on his videos etc.

This way he gets payed a AND no most viewers are not annoyed. And everyone could be happy xD

But NOPE it seems way to bothersome for him so his arbitrary 30 second ads are way to bothersome for me too.

Again viewers want a compromise  "content creators" do not.  Their fault.

I agree with the analogy, but disagree that it is an apt analogy.

With the supermarket, you pay the vendor directly. Disagreeance with the vendors prices can be shown by directly denying the vendor your money and shopping elsewhere.

For internet sites, the vendor's (site owners) are paid by the advertisors, who in turn generate income based on your view. If you have an issue with the advertising, simply "shopping elsewhwere" sends the message that the site itself is undesirable. How do you let the site owner know that you enjoy their site, but feel the advertising is too aggressive/ performance hindering/ potentially virus-laden?

A closer analogy (though I still don't think perfect) would be a parking lot operated by a third party. If you disagree with the parking lot prices/management, but still require access to the building it is attached to, you can find another way to get there that doesn't profit the parking lot company.

I don´t know which Websites you are visiting but the ones I am frquenting I don´t consider overally agressive 

As someone that has worked in the online advertising industry for the last 10 years, Pach's response, this thread and topic itself is pretty hilarious.

According to latest stats, gaming and tech sites have up to 40% ad block usage, compared to 15% for most other categories. That really sucks for some of the content creators who truly provide quality gaming content.

However there are a lot of gaming sites that totally deserve adblock enabled as all the do is fish for clicks, and provide absolutely no value.

Its best to have an adblock blacklist. :)

There's a problem with this. People wouldn't pay for the show(s). The problem lies in the massive costs to make a show/movie. The ads intially paid for the content to be made during first run. And then netflix licences it later. At a cost people like. If ads were fully removed from all Networks. Compared to HBO and the like. Majority of shows would be low budget, be short like HBO seasons, or not exist. Because costs to subscrible to netflix, other online places, and your cable company would have to increase a lot more than what you pay now. reducing people legally doing it. Think about it. 200 channels. All requiring $500,000-$1,000,000 per ep budgets.

Would people accept the price hike to fully remove ads from shows, from first runs? What would happen to companies in the first place? Your favorite movie thats coming out would have no traditional ad on TV. That toy matel is trying to make will now have no exposure. it's a really fine line there. It gets rid of the totally shit ads. But it also will get rid of your favorite stuff. Where would Nintendo, Sony, and Mircosoft show their ads? They be stuck on the internet only. The famous Super Bowl ads would be also gone.

Assuming your neighbor agrees, splitter's should totall be legal.  Hell considering that sattelite and a bunch of other stuff is just being beamed into my backyard anyway, it should be legal for me to put up any pirate dish i want and "intercept" what's being broadcast in my back yard.  Cable and Sattelite company laws are kinda garbage actually.

That said, this situation is different in that, it's VERY easy for the creators to block people using adblock software.

They don't however, because they know that views are valuable even by poeople who use adblock.  

Store owners in this case are deliberitly letting apples go because it's good for buisness.  Just not as good as they want.

In this way, peoples views are just as much a commodity as the content people create.