gimpusers.com [user]

[BlinkTag]

Go to this site:

http://www.gimpusers.com/

It has some ad frames. Their content is correctly blocked by ABP/EasyList. BUT the authors of the site added some javascript code which will fill the ad frames with BLINKING text telling you to turn off the ad blocker. This is completely unacceptable. The following rules block the ad frames; it'd be great if they could be added to the next release of EasyList.

gimpusers.com#div(ads_title)
gimpusers.com#div(ads_tutchan)
gimpusers.com#div(ads_mailmsg)
gimpusers.com#div(ads_rightchan)

Maybe they can be condensed into a single rule; I'm no AdBlock expert.

[rick752]

Blocking the code should work:

Code: Select all

http://www.gimpusers.com/js/common.js

(I don't normally block anti-adblocking measures ... but I will post them if users want them)

[rhi]

Go to this site:

http://www.gimpusers.com/

It has some ad frames. Their content is correctly blocked by ABP/EasyList. BUT the authors of the site added some javascript code which will fill the ad frames with BLINKING text telling you to turn off the ad blocker. This is completely unacceptable. The following rules block the ad frames; it'd be great if they could be added to the next release of EasyList.

As gimpusers.com/.de developer and maintainer I just wanted to note that according to our poll and other monitoring instruments, more than 75% of our users who mainly come from the open-source scene use ad-blockers. Yes, the GIMP sites are a hobby and we (we are 2, one developer and one for the graphics/content) can't rely on an income from this. BUT: we spend many hours and hours for FREE and without GoogleAds (and a very small part from amazon affiliate) we don't even receive anything. This is what I call "completely unacceptable".

[rick752]

I hope you're not complaining to me? I have no intention of adding those to the filtering.

I will answer the post with a solution ... but I will NOT directly block those. That is what I meant by:

(I don't normally block anti-adblocking measures ... but I will post them if users want them)

In other words, I'm just leaving this post here ... nothing more.

[The Masked Marauder]

I've never visited gimpusers.com, but I went there to see what the fuss is about.

End result: I added that block to my personal list out of principle.

[rhi]

I've never visited gimpusers.com, but I went there to see what the fuss is about.

End result: I added that block to my personal list out of principle.

Which method did you use? If you block the whole .js, some functionality may not work (at the moment, it's only the browser warning, but there are several AJAX things planned). If you only block the given DIV IDs, it may not work very long because if this rule is added to AdBlock, I'll have to use random DIV IDs (the only "problem" in this case is that the CSS also has to be generated by PHP and needs to have the same DIV IDs for each session).

By the way, maybe you want to contribute to gimpusers by writing a tutorial or something like that, just "out of principle" (open-source principle).

[eighty5cacao]

I'm not sure how necessary/effective the element filters mentioned above are, given that the EasyElement string #div(class=ad) seems to hide the contents of the ads anyway. I have personally whitelisted the site out of the "goodness of my heart," even though what I just said makes the whitelisting ineffective. (I haven't tried looking at the site without the whitelisting, so I can't comment about the flashing text.)

[rick752]

I have personally whitelisted the site out of the "goodness of my heart," even though what I just said makes the whitelisting ineffective.

You can simply disable the:

Code: Select all

#div(class=ad)

string by clicking the green bullet next to it.

[BlinkTag]

I started this thread. While I understand that the gimpusers.com people want to make some money off ads (and I appreciate their work), I wrote the necessary rules *just* because they made the adblocker countermeasures blink. If they hadn't made them blink, I would not have written these rules, and maybe I'd even disable adblock on their site. But blinking is just too much, I'll block any blinking stuff as a matter of principle.

Maybe I'm the only one thinking like that, but I doubt that. I believe that gimpusers.com would probably make more money off ads in the long run by removing the blinking code. Just my 2 cents.

[rhi]

I started this thread. While I understand that the gimpusers.com people want to make some money off ads (and I appreciate their work), I wrote the necessary rules *just* because they made the adblocker countermeasures blink. If they hadn't made them blink, I would not have written these rules, and maybe I'd even disable adblock on their site. But blinking is just too much, I'll block any blinking stuff as a matter of principle.

Maybe I'm the only one thinking like that, but I doubt that. I believe that gimpusers.com would probably make more money off ads in the long run by removing the blinking code. Just my 2 cents.

Thanks for your suggestion, we will consider that.

[The Masked Marauder]

The whole idea behind the creation of Adblock Plus was to remove the annoying "features" from web sites. Blinking text, lots of animation, pop-up ads, more ads than content, etc. do nothing but detract from a visitor's experience. In the same vein, I don't watch television to see the commercials. When they come on, I press the mute button (or if it's a recorded program, I fast-forward through the commercials). The only difference here is that a web site can find out if I'm skipping their ads, but the television station can not.

I'm sorry that excessive advertising by some ends up painting all web sites with the same broad brush. A few obnoxious jerks end up ruining web advertising for the rest of them. But if you up the ante by displaying anti-blocking ads, then I will see your bet and raise it. When I grow tired of the silly little games, I'll stop visiting the site completely. Either way, you end up getting no advertising revenue from me.

[rhi]

I'm sorry that excessive advertising by some ends up painting all web sites with the same broad brush. A few obnoxious jerks end up ruining web advertising for the rest of them. But if you up the ante by displaying anti-blocking ads, then I will see your bet and raise it. When I grow tired of the silly little games, I'll stop visiting the site completely. Either way, you end up getting no advertising revenue from me.

With the difference that you don't get free content which took many hours to create in the second case.

[Ares2]

My opinion on that is the same as Dirk posted here. (german)

Lieber spende ich mal 20 Euro, als mich durch irgendwelche beworbenen Seiten zu klicken, [...] nur um einen Lead auszulösen, damit es ein par Cent gibt.

Annoying users with blinking text can't be more profitable than a well placed donation button. For me personally it's not a sign for the open source-mind if you have to use 3rd-party advertisement (which is not wanted by the majority of your visitors, otherwise they would not use adblock plus) instead of asking the community for help.
(hope the english is good enough to show what I mean, but as you are from Austria too, you will understand)

Ares

[rhi]

For me personally it's not a sign for the open source-mind if you have to use 3rd-party advertisement

Please have a look at sourceforge.net (without Adblock ;)) and tell me if it's a fundament of open-source practise or not and whether they fill up their page with ads or not.

(which is not wanted by the majority of your visitors, otherwise they would not use adblock plus) instead of asking the community for help.

Well we ask - by asking the users if they can disable their ad blockers for our page. Arguments against donations:
1) Many of our users are very young and don't have either much money nor a credit card or PayPal account or something like that. So they can't donate even if they wanted to help. But everyone can display ads.
2) I don't like to be dependent on somebody's benevolence. I like to share, but I want to get my reward on a more or less (Adblock!) secure way. If AdSense don't work anymore, OK then I'll try to make money with affiliate links and other content which is displayed directly in the page and can't be filtered that easy.
3) For me personally, I don't like when I'm being asked for donations, not in the subway and not on Web pages.

Of course I don't want to attack anyone who adds whatever site to his/her ad blocker or writes rules for this purpuse. I just don't share your opinion about ads and donations, and because it's my site I decide how it's going.

[Ares2]

I just don't share your opinion about ads and donations

I agree, we really have different opinions on that.

I like to share, but I want to get my reward on a more or less (Adblock!) secure way.

And obviously also here. I think it's good to ask for donations to get the money for all your expenses (Webspace, Domain etc.) and in the best case enough to have something left for yourself as a reward. But I don't think (again) that it is very open-source-minded to "demand payment" for your work (reward on a secure way). That's more like a job and not a hobby you are doing for free.

Ares

[LanikSJ]

rhi,

I have to take the side of my users on this one. Nothing is more annoying then scrolling/blinking ads.

This site/forum is NOT run on any donations, and it will NEVER have any ads of any kind not as long as I'm hosting it. Everything on this site and the money to host it comes out of MY pocket and the information is free for everyone to share/use. I'm not out to make any profit, nor am I out to force people to see ads just so I can justify my sites existence. Take a look around I spend countless hours working on this site and believe me when I tell you my time doesn't come cheap. Yes I understand what you're saying hosting costs money so does bandwidth and your site may have more traffic then this one. But if you're telling me you can't afford $5 a month to host a site I don't know what to say to be honest with you.

Good day.

[rhi]

Hi, I thought everything was said, but...

I have to take the side of my users on this one. Nothing is more annoying then scrolling/blinking ads.

Basically, I agree to you. That's why I use Adblock for myself. (Heh, in last time, I catch myself more often to disable it because I consider Adwords in the Google search results useful to see what competitors our company has etc. or because I want to "pay" for free services)

This site/forum is NOT run on any donations, and it will NEVER have any ads of any kind not as long as I'm hosting it. Everything on this site and the money to host it comes out of MY pocket and the information is free for everyone to share/use. I'm not out to make any profit, nor am I out to force people to see ads just so I can justify my sites existence. Take a look around I spend countless hours working on this site and believe me when I tell you my time doesn't come cheap.

That's fine! Thank you very much. I like Adblock Plus very much, as well as your subscription list. But in which way is it related to my site?

Yes I understand what you're saying hosting costs money so does bandwidth and your site may have more traffic then this one. But if you're telling me you can't afford $5 a month to host a site I don't know what to say to be honest with you.

It's not that I CAN'T afford, but I don't WANT to! I consider this site as a hobby but I also want to generate a little income from it. I don't see why this shall be incompatible, annoying or whatever. Other people make their ad income out of SEO crap, stolen content and spam. If you don't like the site, my opinions, AdSense or blinking anti-adblock texts - well just don't visit it. Btw, which hosting provider do you have? 5$ per month sounds very interesting.

[LanikSJ]

That's fine! Thank you very much. I like Adblock Plus very much, as well as your subscription list. But in which way is it related to my site?

Its not I'm relaying my experiences.

It's not that I CAN'T afford, but I don't WANT to! I consider this site as a hobby but I also want to generate a little income from it. I don't see why this shall be incompatible, annoying or whatever.

That's a big piece of information you're leaving out. If you're running a business sure you're entitled to make profit just don't expect everyone to turn off their adblockers just so you can make a buck. That all I'm saying, no offense meant.

Btw, which hosting provider do you have? 5$ per month sounds very interesting.

This site is currently hosted with Powweb (they stink) however if you sign up in the next couple of days here: http://www.surpasshosting.com/content/holiday2007/ you'll get a whole years worth of service for $12!! Can't beat that kind of price.

[rhi]

That's a big piece of information you're leaving out. If you're running a business sure you're entitled to make profit just don't expect everyone to turn off their adblockers just so you can make a buck. That all I'm saying, no offense meant.

I don't want to make a "buy a product - pay the dollars" business, but I want to get a little! money from the work I do. If I calculate with hours and what I could earn doing other work instead of this project, i would never make profit - with or without adblockers.

This site is currently hosted with Powweb (they stink) however if you sign up in the next couple of days here: http://www.surpasshosting.com/content/holiday2007/ you'll get a whole years worth of service for $12!! Can't beat that kind of price.

Hm OK dedicated servers cost >55 $ there, and I need a server for other things too (hosting "real customers" for instance).

[LanikSJ]

$5 a month is just shared hosting which works great for the purpose of this site/domain.

[Greg]

I fail to see how subjecting your 'users' to blinking frames is going to make them remain users of your site. Ads are pay-per-click unless they are exceptionally annoying (and having whitelisted your site temporarily, they appear to be standard ads.) People with AdBlock installed aren't going to click your ads anyway, and as such, you are doing NOTHING other than annoying and driving away your users.

I'm glad I don't use GIMP if this is representative of attitudes of the community. If you aren't making money hosting the site, then stop hosting it. Someone else will take over if the content is really in demand. Everything does not need to be monetized.

[rhi]

I'm glad I don't use GIMP if this is representative of attitudes of the community.

That's very clever. "I don't use Photoshop because I don't like the ideas of admin XY of yet-another-photoshop-portal.com."

If you aren't making money hosting the site, then stop hosting it.

Hosting? I talk about programming, writing tutorials (=creating content, takes much time), hosting, adminstrative work (for instance, we have set up a contest and got a learning DVD sponsored that you can win) etc.

Someone else will take over if the content is really in demand. Everything does not need to be monetized.

1) The content is in demand, see our access stats (link on impressum page, don't forget the German page).
2) It's not about foreign content we just host, we are creating this content.
3) What we do with our content and our site is our business. If we decide to monetize it, just accept it or don't use it. Nobody is forced.

[rick752]

Hosting? I talk about programming, writing tutorials (=creating content, takes much time), hosting, ....

Sounds like you and I (us) put in the same type of effort into what we do. This project doesn't create itself either ... but I have ACCEPTED the fact that I am doing this simply for helping other users and am NOT in it expecting profit ... y'know, like the internet USED to be? It was only once people started migrating to the internet did it start attracting commercialism. I HATE what has become of the internet over mostly the last few years. It's not the advertising that bothers me as much as it is the OVER-advertising on the web coupled with the sense of "entitlement" that REALLY bothers me. Many sites have crammed as many ads on their sites that they can find. This goes well beyond the idea of just recovering hosting costs ... it has become downright greed!

The EasyList serves around 2-1/2 million users and it would be wonderful if I simply asked one U.S. dollar for each subscriber ... but I won't. Its just a matter of principle to me. The web was created to be a place to share information, thoughts, & ideas "freely". It was never intended to have a "Home Shopping Network" embedded on every site that tries to get you to buy something everywhere you go while trying to track your every move . Many people turned to the internet originally from other media simply because it was the last frontier away from commercialism. There is hardly anything left that doesn't try to sell you something everywhere you go ... or in anything you do.

Maybe the internet just needs to be divided into 2 categories:
Those who are willing to put effort into something freely ... and those who won't.

This post is not a "right or wrong" statement and is not meant as an argument or an insult to anyone. It is simply one user's opinion by someone who has watched the internet grow ... but at the same time, it has also degraded immensely in its original good-natured "sharing" platform

[IceDogg]

Rick, that was beautifully said! I wholeheartedly agree!

[rick752]

Rick, that was beautifully said!!

Eh ... sometimes I just get lucky