First, I want to inform users that Adblock Plus does not block ANYTHING AT ALL by default without filtering ... and there is no filtering in ABP by default, nor any subscriptions made by Wladimir Palant (the Adblock Plus' author).
ABP is an "empty" program that, when installed, is waiting for some blocking rules. The window that is seen after ABP's installation only contains a list of subscription "suggestions" that are created and maintained by others. They are NOT directly related to ABP but the authors usually DO work with the project. If your problem is with the EasyList, EasyElement, or ABP Tracking Filter then you need to direct your problem to me, NOT to Adblock Plus! Wladimir has nothing to do with Rick752's subscriptions. So on behalf of all the subscription maintainers, please direct any filtering kudos, questions, and problems to the maintainer who makes your subscription(s), not to the author of the 'filterless' program. The EasyList subscription seems to be getting labeled "the default one that comes with ABP" lately. It isn't fair to either Wladimir or myself depending on your praise or complaint because we both work on two different parts of that project. So please direct comments accordingly as there seems to be a lot of confusion about this lately (is it a program or a subscription problem?)
My explanation of what I do and how:
My code of ethics for the "Easy*s":
I have no favorable preferences nor any malice toward any one site in particular UNLESS there is a direct attack on ABP or my subscriptions that involves more than vocal opinion (but maliciously accusing us or our users of a crime is not acceptable either). Also any uncredited repurposing of my subscriptions can also be considered an attack too. But as far as normal sites go, the only thing that I do is "block and go" with the EasyList, EasyElement, and ABP Tracking subscriptions without any preferences to any sites whatsoever. To me, it is totally irrelevant what or whose site it is. I will constantly try to make slight adjustments to keep things running smoothly and as they should. The integrity of my 'blocking' strings has never been contested unless something was inadvertently blocked or we were directly attacked (as stated above). I will do what I have to do to insure the integrity of my subscriptions, ABP, and our users' rights.
My goal with my subscriptions is to bring the best 'balance' of allowances vs blocking to give users a seamless use of the web without any problems while still blocking the 'most possible' unwanted info ... that is the MAIN goal. Users shouldn't have to deal with problems .. the internet should just work!
Which brings me to this part:Whitelisting:
This has been the 'hot bed' of discussion at times. Some skeptics and trolls want to know "who's paying me' to add some of those 'undesirable' whitelisting strings? The simple answer is "No one".
Unfortunately these are a necessary evil for some (mostly video) sites. Many videos these days are served THROUGH known blocked advertisers. Without these allowances balanced against the bigger blocking strings ... there is no video, folks! Remember that I said "the internet should just work"? The 'targeted' whitelisting that I do can be a painstaking task at times but I do it to pinpoint the exact string(s) that allows something to work while still doing its job on the rest of the page and/or site ... but it MUST be done to allow things to work correctly! Again, I want it to be seamless for the user. So if you don't go to sites with those strings, you have no problem because you probably won't activate any of those whitelistings. But if you DO go to one of those sites, you just want it to work, right? If it didn't, most users would just TOTALLY disable the filtering or ABP .... OR create a pagewide or sitewide whitelisting to see the content (which would be much worse than just using my 'targeted ' whitelistings)
Now on to my favorite part of this called "Advertiser Hypocrisy":
As there have been a few heated topics and attacks lately caused by a certain individual (on both AMO Discussions and on the ABP forum), I thought that I would share a little bit of info that many advertisers tried to keep very quiet at Adsense once they found out the truth. You may or may not have heard this .. if you haven't, you are going to hear about it now.
It seems that in July I mistakenly added a filter string to the EasyList that started a domino affect between Mozilla, Google and Adsense advertisers last month. The reason for the domino effect was that the EasyList update (with that string in it) coincided with the release of the latest Firefox. It seems that it broke Adsense's login page.
Thinking it was a problem with the Firefox update, thousands of Adsense advertisers bombarded Google and Mozilla with complaints for a few days .... only to find that it was because of the EasyList update in ABP that the page was screwed up for them. Once realizing this, EVERYONE involved in that advertising circle completely shut up all over the web. There was instant silence!
It seems that the hypocrisy is with the advertisers who want to serve you ads and complain when you block them ... but they have no problems blocking EVERYONE ELSE'S ads
Most were all caught in the act ... how embarrassing. Talk about hypocrites! "Do as I say .. not as I do" 
See here:
http://adsense.blogspot.com/2007/07/can ... refox.html
ps: Even Google lied about it:
Since when does ABP get installed with Firefox? And I'm sure that updating Firefox also randomly installs the EasyList too, right?After a little digging and some testing, we've found that Adblock Plus, an add-on that sometimes gets installed with Firefox, can prevent you from accessing your account on the AdSense homepage.
