http://ad.doubleclick.net/ [Resolved]

[NoteMe]

What is it actualy...both here and a CodeGuru it is storing cookies about me...

[TomGibbons]

Isn't that where the banner ads originate from? Not 100% sure on that, but I think so. I don't have those cookies and I've blocked the ads, so it could be.

[brad jones]

It is an ad server that we use that posts the ads into our ad positions. It is not pop-up stuff from us, but is the stuff at the top, sides, and bottom.

Brad!

[brad jones]

Originally posted by TomGibbons
... I've blocked the ads, .....

From the acceptable usage policy (AUP):

By using these Forums, you agree to the following:

You will not attempt to ....., nor make use of any hacks, cracks, bug exploits, etc. to bypass or modify the features of the forum software at any Jupitermedia site.

You are publicly stating that you are violating the AUP. If your account gets blocked, this could be the reason why.

Brad!

[NoteMe]

Originally posted by brad jones
It is an ad server that we use that posts the ads into our ad positions. It is not pop-up stuff from us, but is the stuff at the top, sides, and bottom.

Brad!

Ok..thanks. Starting to think it was something you wasn't aware of. At least AdAware is deleting the cookies everytime I am running it. Hope at least thats not breaking the AUP.

[brad jones]

Deleting cookies is never an issue.



Just as you would't walk up to a cop and say "Hey I speed everytime I get in my car", you shouldn't go to a site that pays the bills with advertising and say "I disable your ads everytime I come here".

It is as if you would be asking for the cop to give you a ticket....
If the cop didn't, he would be derelict in his duties.

[NoteMe]

OK. thanks for clearinfying that up...in some weird manners...but still ********ing..


ØØ

[Slaine]

Brad,

Just a quick thought I had.

I have been using firefox for a few days and when I visited this site I noticed that the ads don't appear anymore - I didn't tell firefox to block them it just did - I presume it defaults to this behavour.

Now as I understand it, when XP SP2 is released it will add similar blocking to IE. This means by default no one will be able to see the ads.

Is it something you guys are concerned about?

[brad jones]

Slaine,

I'll ask our developers about this. I know they are aware of SP2 and are testing its impact on our sites. It is going to impact a lot of people, applications, and more.

I also know that FireFox is one the browsers that they test sites on.

Brad!

[Slaine]

Brad,

Is the following any help for your developers.

http://www.microsoft.com/uk/windowsxp/sp2/sp2.mspx

[visualAd]

Originally posted by brad jones
From the acceptable usage policy (AUP):

By using these Forums, you agree to the following:

You will not attempt to ....., nor make use of any hacks, cracks, bug exploits, etc. to bypass or modify the features of the forum software at any Jupitermedia site.

You are publicly stating that you are violating the AUP. If your account gets blocked, this could be the reason why.

Brad!

I feel I should make a comment here with regards to the AUP.

Ad blocking software does not constitute a hack, crack or bug exploit. Niether does it modify any features of the forum software.

Many personal firewalls come equipped with ad blockers, which filter out ad's from known ad servers. Proxy servers which allow internet access to large companies and educational acadameys also block ads.

The question I ask, is are these users violating the AUP?

I also ask:

Is a user who chooses not to look at an advertisment violating the AUP?

Is a user who chooses to disable Javascript violating the AUP?

Is a user who chooses to view this site in a text only browser violating the AUP?

This is my personal opinion: I feel that the user has a right to view a site as they wish. In all honesty the Internet is built on this very concept. The server sends the data and the client interprets that data - how they interpret it is entirely dependant on the platform and software being used and ultimatley entirely up to the user viewing the content.

I understand that Jupitermedia are a business and need to make money and advertisments aid this, but I think it would be extremely unfair to block someone for using ad blocking software - especially if that member is a well respected established part of the community.

[Electroman]

Posted by visualAd
I understand that Jupitermedia are a business and need to make money and advertisments aid this, but I think it would be extremely unfair to block someone for using ad blocking software - especially if that member is a well respected established part of the community.

I think the point more towards the actual posting the fact your blocking ads is asking for action to be taken. If you were to block ads and not tell anyone then its not really as much an issue. However normally when someone posts "I am blocking the ads" then it gets a reply like "I still see the Ads, how do I block them?", And I've seen this many times in ChitChat.

Posted by visualAd
Ad blocking software does not constitute a hack, crack or bug exploit. Niether does it modify any features of the forum software.

The focus would be more on the "bypass or modify the features", because the Ads could be seen as a feature of the forum, granted it says forum software but its down to interpratation here. Thing is JM have the right to alter the AUP at any time anyway so if its made into a issue then they may add Ad blocking to the AUP aswell .

[NoteMe]

Originally posted by Slaine

I have been using firefox for a few days and when I visited this site I noticed that the ads don't appear anymore - I didn't tell firefox to block them it just did - I presume it defaults to this behavour.

What? hmm..I am using FF, and I can see that the Ads are not always there...but they are there most of the time. So it has to do with something else.

[visualAd]

Originally posted by Electroman
I think the point more towards the actual posting the fact your blocking ads is asking for action to be taken. If you were to block ads and not tell anyone then its not really as much an issue. However normally when someone posts "I am blocking the ads" then it gets a reply like "I still see the Ads, how do I block them?", And I've seen this many times in ChitChat.

Fair enough - a user shouldn't come on the site and ask how to block the ads on the site or give others instuctions on how to do it.

Originally posted by Electroman
The focus would be more on the "bypass or modify the features", because the Ads could be seen as a feature of the forum, granted it says forum software but its down to interpratation here. Thing is JP have the right to alter the AUP at any time anyway so if its made into a issue then they may add Ad blocking to the AUP aswell .

It seems a very grey area to me. The way I see it - to bypass a feature of the forum software would require you to modify the content sent by VBF to such an extent that it delibertley missleads other users. Filtering out an advertisment is merely modifying the content delivered to suit the users preferences.

A blind user for example may ask his web browsing software to read out the topic titles of all the threads in a forum just as normal sighted users will scan through a forum and read only the topic titles.

I guess actively promoting the fact that you are blocking ads from VB Forums could be considered a breach of the AUP. But if all users were blocking ads then Jupiter Media wouldn't make any revenue from them and they wouldn't be there.

As I have ADSL and no cap on my monthly bandwidth, the advertisments really don't fuss me. When I go to college however, I often get a message in the top right hand corner saying "YOU ARE BEING WATCHED". To be honest I prefer the ad's

[Pc_Madness]

Users have the right to block ads. I think having someone asking how to get rid of ads specificaly for this site is wrong, but asking to get rid of any ads, theres nothing wrong with it. Nor is pointing out that you've blocked them.

[The Hobo]

Brad, didn't you say that you make money off the ads being there, rather than people clicking them? If so, what's the problem with a few users blocking them? They're still there. You can't lose any revenue off the few users blocking them.

[brad jones]

Yes - the real issue for me is when people say "I block the ads" or people who answer the question on how to block the ads. Whether you are blocking the ads or not -- I'll never know.

- - -

The site covers its cost with advertising. It is currently the only revenue for this site. If everyone blocks the ads, then there is the option to switch to a subscription model where you have to pay to use the site (ick). As a side note, if everyone starts blocking the regular ads, then I would expect our finance people to start pushing the "sticky post ads" and other styles of ads that don't get hit by the ad blockers. That is something I'd prefer not to see happen and have been pushing to prevent.


As to The Hobo's question -- advertisers pay to advertise; however, they renue their ads based on the click through they get. If they don't get click through, then they really have no reason to advertise again.


Just to be clear on the subject for those that like to push issues , let me go to a different point in the AUP:

You will, if asked by a representative of the Forums, cease posting any content, and/or links to content, deemed offensive, objectionable, or in poor taste by the staff of the Forums.


Because this site's costs are covered by the advertising, I personally consider it objectionable to post about the fact that you are blocking ads or to post how to block ads. Note I've not said anything about whether you are doing it -- only whether you are posting about it.

Now that I've said I consider it objectionable, and becuase you have read this post (), it is a violation for you to do so.

Brad!

[The Hobo]

Originally posted by brad jones
Now that I've said I consider it objectionable, and becuase you have read this post (), it is a violation for you to do so.

But how will you know I read that post?

Edit: Damnit! Shouldn't have responded.