[Ghostavo]

http://www.geek.com/news/adblock-buys-ads-to-advertise-adblock-1568612/

In what is both hilariously ironic, yet justifies the existence of advertising on the internet, esteemed ad blocking software, Adblock, is currently running a crowdfunding campaign with the goal of buying and distributing internet image and video ads.

So let me get this straight, Adblock is advertising their crowdfunding campaign, to buy ads for their ad blocking product...

I'm still trying to decide if this is pure genius or just plain stupidity.

[headdie]

look at it like this the only chrome users this wont annoy are the users that either dont care about ads or already have adblock so its good allround for adblock

[Dragon]

Well, they're gonna get to the people somehow. If you're annoyed by their ads, then click on them and get rid of them. I say, pure genius.

[redsniper]

Exactly. If you see them, you don't have it, and if you have it you won't see them.

Basically,

If you have it you don't need it, and if you need it you don't have it. You need it to get it and you definitely need it to get more of it. If you have it, you want more of it, and if you have more of it, you don't need less of it.

[Fury]

While I am using adblock these days, I often have moral issues with doing so. As most websites provide their services for free and rely on ads for revenue. Not all ads require someone to click on them, simply displaying them may generate revenue depending on ad and ad provider. But ads and trackers slow down page loading a lot and many ads are really intrusive it's annoying.

[Phantom Hoover]

AdBlock Plus have added a whitelist for ads which meet acceptable standards of privacy, intrusiveness and bandwidth load. I think that's the right way to go about it (and for all advertisers and people who run websites might moan about adblockers, it's their own fault for forcing consumers to resort to their use).

[Fury]

Yes indeed. It's kind of the only redeeming thing about using adblock. Unfortunately, I can't recall when I've last seen any whitelisted ads. Makes me wonder if any website actually goes for them.

[mjn.mixael]

Most ads don't bother me. (See banner ads, sidebar ads, etc. Anything that just sits on the page in one spot.) However, more and more I keep getting 'fade the article, here's an ad' ads. No thank you. I have no moral issues with blocking those types of ads that go the extra 3 miles to make sure I've seen them, read them, and/or accidentally clicked on them.

[Mongoose]

Given how ancient my processor is, some ads just lag the hell out of the page, so those are no-brainers to ditch.  I don't use any of the built-in ABP filter lists, though; I'd rather block stuff manually so I don't screw over any of the sites I want to support.

[AtomicClucker]

Until the day we get ads that aren't laced with trojans, exploits, and malware, I'm not going to support in-your-face malware.

The few infections I've got came through cleverly laced ads, so I no longer buy "click to support us!" until they admit they suck at keeping an eye what goes through the ad network.

[Phantom Hoover]

Yes indeed. It's kind of the only redeeming thing about using adblock. Unfortunately, I can't recall when I've last seen any whitelisted ads. Makes me wonder if any website actually goes for them.

ABP have a pretty stringent set of requirements for whitelisting, and I suspect most advertisers just haven't noticed.

[Nuke]

i started blocking ads when they started making noise.

[Scourge of Ages]

i started blocking ads when they started making noise.

This. Is the only reason that would drive me to overcome my laziness and do that. Is there a blacklist version of adblock, where no sites are blocked except the ones you want to?

[Klaustrophobia]

Well you can just not use a subscription and block manually.