Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 28th Jul 2007 11:07 UTC
Permalink for comment 259819
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-01-11
I think I see the problem now. Since Firefox doesn't have any kind of "default filter that filters out...ads" or any other kind of ad-blocking built in, your ads must be being blocked by Firefox's popup-blocker.
I very seriously doubt that 100% of Firefox users are using ad-blocking software and 0% of IE users are, which is what you seem to be implying.
As for not serving ads of a server that doesn't contain "ads" in it... Champion idea. I support your right to subvert ad blockers just as much I support the use of them.
What I was trying to say is that it's not a black and white issue, I have adblock plus installed, but I use it as an annoyance remover rather than as a matter of course.
I doubt OSnews has ever lost any money because of me, since I've never blocked any ads from this site, or had cause to call on my other trusty friends greasemonkey, noscript, or flashblock either. It's nice to know that they're there to filter crap out if it's obscuring the text on the page or being annoying.
The last time I used adblock, it was to block a legitimate image served up by nytimes.com because the text flowed underneath the image.