"John D. Giorgis" wrote: > > Have any of you people that enthusiastically > > supported the various ad-blocking software > > programs ever considered the fact that these > > software companies prevent the owners and > > oeprators of the websites you visit from > > recouperating the costs of maintaining these > > websites?
I consider banner ads to be a necessary evil, but the advertisers routinely abuse this by coding pop-up ads that can spawn up to 30 different browser windows, each with defensive coding that opens more windows when you close it. This has crashed my computer on more than one occasion. The reason why ad blockers (and for that matter, initiatives for state-wide "Do Not Call" lists for telemarketers) are so popular is that these forms of advertising are so easy for the advertiser to abuse, AND there is no way to ignore them or discard them when they do. I know people who no longer answer their phones at all because of telemarketers. Junk mail, television, and radio are much harder to abuse, and do not require some acknowledgement on the part of the victim in order to decline whatever the offer is. In the days before telemarketing, there was a similar problem with door-to-door salesmen. There were, however, laws protecting people against them, namely the "no soliciting" sign which you can post near your front door, and which any potential salesperson is required to honor. The advertiser does not have a right to require interaction from you for unsolicited, unwanted advertising. -- Matt _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
