> Now that the legalities are out of the way, we want to reach out to other publishers and advertisers and content creators and encourage them to work with Adblock Plus rather than against us. Let’s develop new forms of nonintrusive ads that are actually useful and welcomed by users [...]
This is one of the reasons I chose another adblocker (uBlock). I have no moral qualms when it comes to blocking ads, but I don't feel too hot about this guy building a business by making other businesses pay him money to let their ads through.
I also prefer uBlock. Allowing some ads through in order to extort advertisers is not only shady, it interferes with Adblock Plus's only function--blocking ads. Does any user prefer an extension that blocks most, but not all of them?
Users that recognize that some websites rely on their ad revenue for their existenc eand want to support the continued existence of this business model might prefer not to block all ads, yes.
I'm not one of them. I'm ready for ad-supported businesses to die.
Personally? I want ad filter that creates a huge barrier to entry. A barrier that stipulates that an ad must be honest, non deceptive, non invasive, and that the companies behind them arn't using them to mass aggregate users for later sale.
I don't think Ad Block Plus is doing that, to be fair. It IS what I want though.
I just use uBlock because a filter is more compute overhead... These days web browsers are seriously heavyweight software that my older, weaker machines can barely manage in the first place.
This is one of the reasons I chose another adblocker (uBlock). I have no moral qualms when it comes to blocking ads, but I don't feel too hot about this guy building a business by making other businesses pay him money to let their ads through.