whyfirefoxisblocked.com [fixed]

[Dave]

This site does not host any advertisements, therefore it should not be blocked by an ad blocker.

I do not agree with the site's message, but censoring opposing viewpoints is a dangerous step to take.

[chewey]

I have to agree here - this is beyond the scope of an adblocking subscription.

[rick752]

@ "Dave"?
Why? Do any of you want to see that page? Why should that be the only page on that site available for your viewing? Do you want to be told that what you are using is wrong because people aren't clicking his ads?

He doesn't want people to see his site except for that one page which I feel is an insult to both Firefox and ABP users, which ironically are the only ones who can see it. The message (after his initial removal of the original "thief" page) was to just inform visitors that he was blocking ABP/Firefox because he wanted his advertising to be seen .... and I was ok with that. But THEN it changed into a soapbox crusade page to try to undermine Firefox, ABP, and Mozilla. It also was laden with 2 "What others are saying" articles from over 2 years ago when the first Adblock was still a fledgling ... ABP didn't even exist then. I'm sure that besides his own ranting here and there, they were the only negative articles he could find that didn't include actual advertisers. The two articles were from the beginning of 2005 ... and one was a school article written by a student. Although he tried to use the second article to make a point, the user comments below it were mostly 'pro-blocking'. Also, the the addition of the "How to block Firefox" link on it really gets my dander up. It is VERY stupid though because only Firefox users can see it (really dumb).

That whyfirefoxisblocked page is a slanderous piece of self-righteous garbage mixed with a couple of shovelfuls of pure greed extract and sprinkled with false Christianity! He wants no one to be able to see anything on that site except THAT propaganda page, which I feel really crosses a line in my eyes. Hell, I'm only helping him to not be seen by us ... that WAS what he wanted all the time wasn't it?

@ Chewey:
If you actually think that I should remove that from the list ... I will. I realize that it crosses a line of going beyond adblocking. But don't you think that blocking a browser simply because is it capable of running our program crosses a line too?
Your call. I will accept your decision.

[IceDogg]

I have to disagree with chewey here. He's a smarter guy/gal (sorry I don't know) then I, but this isn't a censorship issue IMHO. If it was Rick would be blocking all kinds of sites that talk about how adblocking is wrong. We've seen and talked about plenty and they have yet to be blocked afaik. While this may not be about blocking an ad server it is still about blocking ads. He's not redirecting to another site with an opposing view, or misleading anyone. He's just blocking sites he thinks should be block. Which is what his whole filter is about.. making judgments. I support this discussion Rick. Just my 2 cents.

Edit: PS. If you should decide to remove the block Rich, I think at the VERY least it fits in with the tracking filter list.. as it's kind of tracking which browser we are using and targeting us accordingly. Don't you?

[Guest]

The hell it's not censorship. It doesn't matter if most of us would agree with the thought behind it.

The simple fact is we installed AdBlock and used EasyList to block advertisements not to have Firefox/Adblock politics - and that's exactly what that particular filter is - forced upon us.

Here's the filter:

! Firefox/ABP slander filter
whyfirefoxisblocked.com#body

Would this filter tend to piss you off if a filterset competitor added it to their list and didn't warn users before they used it?

! richsterling.com filter
richsterling.com#body

[Dave]

I agree totally that the site is complete rubbish.

But it is not an advertisement. You say your list blocks advertisements. You do not say or imply that it blocks essays from people that you disagree with on the subject of advertisements.

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. - Voltaire

You are misleading users who do not realise your list blocks things other than ads. If you start blocking other things, you need to disclose this.

this isn't a censorship issue IMHO. If it was Rick would be blocking all kinds of sites that talk about how adblocking is wrong . . .

Your argument is specious. Silence one dissenting voice or silence them all, we still use the same word to describe what you are doing. The fact that doing it once is not quite as bad as doing it many times is irrelevant.

[rick752]

Oh .. now I am getting double-teamed by 'guests' ... I wonder who.

No one forces the EasyList on anyone. It is NOT part of Mozilla, Firefox or ABP! ... it is used with them.

And if I tried to be a crusading suicide bomber on the internet against another filter maintainer or the products he supported and interfaced with ... and I took action against him and he blocked me? ... I would say "yeah, I guess I deserved that!"

But some don't see it that way through their blind greed and the fact that the internet "owes them money". For someone who says revenues have gone up and traffic is the same ... and ABP is such a small factor, YOU certainly are making quite a fuss.

[Guest]

Don't invent a conspiracy where one doesn't exist Rick. I came here from http://reddit.com/info/2fw3h/comments to tell you what I thought of that particular filter.

That said I should apologize for not letting you know that the work on EasyList - other than that filter - is greatly appreciated. We do NOT want you to quit, just to be clear before anything of the sort comes up in this thread. We just want EasyList to stick to advertisements.

[rick752]

Ok .... sorry.
I left enough hints for the owner of that site to find me here. I thought he finally did.

I really hate what this has evolved into. Just for the record, I'm not out for some kind of p*ssing contest here with him. All I want to do is block & go. But he just won't let it go. I left him alone eventually when he was calling people "thieves" to watch him self-destruct .. but then he change it. Then again, I left him alone when he simply said he was blocking users because he wanted his ad revenue (he could have simply asked them to whitelist .. most dedicated users of someone's site would gladly do that). But he then evolved into this soapbox crusade where everyone had to block ABP and Mozilla and it became ridiculous.

We have a right to protect ourselves and our users from slander ("thieves"), don't you think? And I don't think it is right for him to blame either Firefox or ABP users for this.

I'll probably remove that though. I just wanted to make a point to him.

[rick752]

Removed for now (but I reserve the right to reinstate). I wish he would just tone it down from "crusade" to "explanation" and remove the "block Firefox" thing.

OK Chewey .. you win
Sorry Dogg .... I have too agree here. I'm taking the high road.


Just for the record. I do not EVER want to censor a site ... but I will protect our product.

[IceDogg]

I agree totally that the site is complete rubbish.

But it is not an advertisement. You say your list blocks advertisements. You do not say or imply that it blocks essays from people that you disagree with on the subject of advertisements.

That's not all his list blocks and it's been stated before.. it's annoyances it blocks. Read around the forums.

You are misleading users who do not realise your list blocks things other than ads. If you start blocking other things, you need to disclose this.

Read above ^ PS.. for someone that makes sites for a living (blogging even?) you misspelled realize. Now I know that's kind of petty, put I don't make a living at this and get upset because some don't think my content is good enough to view my ads. ;)

this isn't a censorship issue IMHO. If it was Rick would be blocking all kinds of sites that talk about how adblocking is wrong . . .

Your argument is specious. Silence one dissenting voice or silence them all, we still use the same word to describe what you are doing. The fact that doing it once is not quite as bad as doing it many times is irrelevant.

Look up censorship! It doesn't mean what you think, evidently. Yea, I just looked it up and the definition doesn't fit.

[IceDogg]

Sorry Dogg .... I have too agree here. I'm taking the high road.
Just for the record. I do not EVER want to censor a site ... but I will protect our product.

ok, it's your call it's your list. But what about my suggestion to add it to the tracking list.. that has nothing to do with ads and I think it fits there fine?

[Guest]

No argument, he's a complete tool. His little site is trash and that's being generous.

The thing about using EasyList to make a point to him is he wouldn't ever know it. The blocking isn't reported to the web server, it's just not displayed in the users browsers. If you want to do a number on him, or more to the point his goofy little crusade of pretend martyrdom, write up a blog entry about what he's doing and post it on reddit.com.

[rick752]

But what about my suggestion to add it to the tracking list.. that has nothing to do with ads and I think it fits there fine?

I'll have to see what chewey thinks about that (he is a co-contributor)

[rick752]

The thing about using EasyList to make a point to him is he wouldn't ever know it. The blocking isn't reported to the web server, it's just not displayed in the users browsers. If you want to do a number on him, or more to the point his goofy little crusade of pretend martyrdom, write up a blog entry about what he's doing and post it on reddit.com.

I think people already know what he is doing:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefo ... ionID=3060

99 comments? That HAS to be an AMO record for a single topic!
It starts civil enough (party in question is the OP), but after a page or so it turns into one of the biggest azz-kickings that I've even seen.

[Guest]

I think people already know what he is doing:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefo ... ionID=3060

99 comments. That HAS to be an AMO record!

Probably. I can't recall seeing one with that many! But then how many people read the comments often? Most people install an extension and don't go back to that page unless they need to reinstall it for some reason. People use reddit day in and day out. Trust me, you want him to look like a donkey's nether regions it'll need exposure a little wider than AMO or even MozillaZine.

[mind]

Thank you for the great work! There are many times that I -forget- about all of the advertising on the web, and someone will be describing a page to me (where to click or something), and they'll mention an ad, and I'll go 'oh. wow. i had forgot you'd be seeing that. install firefox and adblock!'. I remember back before filtersets that you'd have to right click on crap you didn't want to see, deduce the pattern, and block it. It was nice, but certainly took a lot of effort, as you were swimming against the stream. The filter sets have certainly brought ad blocking into the set it and forget it territory, and for this I am greatful.

I will say that I made it here from reddit.com also. I would like it if you removed whyfirefoxisblocked.com from the filter. It threw me for a loop going there (it made the top link on reddit), getting a blank page, viewing source, and seeing the text. I figured he must have had a site design that wasn't compatible with firefox. The page itself was hilarious, and I'm glad I read it for the laughter it added to my life. Only upon reading the reddit comments did I realize that I couldn't see anything on the page because easylist was filtering it! I had totally not expected this.

The true test of an idea is if it can stand up to other ideas in an open comparison. I would hope most people reaching that site would go 'man, this is funny. this guy is crazy'. Then change the user agent to IE (if they still wanted to see the site. i've got no idea what the original site is actually for ). Only by people being exposed to the idea that blocking ads is somehow stealing, can those people go on and form the (proper) opinion that a website is merely data, and how you choose to display that data is up to you. By specifying what end-users can see, you are actually engaging in the same sort of philosophy of the people who say that you must see ads, because it's their site. I'd say let that guy get up on his soap box and rant away, maybe get some more exposure for adblock ;). (if someone can't view the site because they're using firefox, but they aren't using adblock, maybe they'll install it)

Ultimately, it is of course up to you what you want in the list. I will keep using it no matter what, but I will probably have to keep in the back of my mind that if something isn't displaying, perhaps it isn't a technical error, but adblock might be taking away material based on it's content. Okay, so I see your response saying you will remove the site, so I thank you for that.

But more importantly, I'll thank you once again for maintaining the list that you do. Your work makes it easy for me to install firefox+adblock for random people and have things just work and look a lot cleaner, without them having to tinker or ever think about ads.

[Guest]

I would like it if you removed whyfirefoxisblocked.com from the filter

He already did remove it but thanks for the backup!

[rick752]

Thanx guys:

I was just over to reddit reading. Didn't realize that there was a big "to-do" about it over there. It was interesting reading all the opinions on the "You've reached this page" topic. Wow!

[Alan Baxter]

Rick, I agree with Chewey on this issue. Thank you for removing the block. I'd rather you didn't add it to the ABP Tracking Filter either. I appreciate the discussion this issue has raised here and on reddit.

[IceDogg]

hmm, Nice post mind. I also have changed my mind. Sometimes when you fight against something you can find yourself taking up their ways in order to fight them. I can see now this isn't the way to go. I think I just got caught up in it, because this guy is such a jerk. It's cool Rick. I'll never and have never visited this guys sites anyway, except one time.

mind, do you write a blog somewhere? You have writing talent!

[chewey]

IceDogg:
It's guy - note the cute whiskers...
BTW, you'll see me "misspell" realise too occasionally. That's the british spelling, the one I learnt at school...


rick:
It wasn't about winning at all (well, I guess you know that). But I really think removing this filter
was a wise decision and the right one to make. Of course this guy is stupid and obnoxious, but
hey, that page is completely ad free, so why block it? Let him commit webicide in plain sight...


PS: OMG, he made it on slashdot:
http://slashdot.org/articles/07/08/17/1359206.shtml

Well, at least, he's getting lots and lots of visitors right now...

[Kadin2048]

Hi, all.

I just wanted to toss my two cents in on the issue. I'm a very happy ABP+EasyList user, have been for a while now. It's a great piece of software and EasyList is a great service to the community.

And whyfirefoxisblocked is a complete piece of tripe. I don't think there's any question there; it's crap, and whoever is behind it is an asshole.

That said, I think blocking it via EasyList isn't really appropriate, and I'm glad that it's been removed from the blocklist (that's my understanding from reading the thread so far). Although I can understand the reason for wanting to block it, it's definitely beyond what I expect an ad blocker to do.

Actually I spent more time than I'd like to admit looking at the source of their page, trying to figure out how they had fixed it so that it wouldn't load on Firefox but would on IE, even though I could see the source ... it NEVER occurred to me that ABP or EasyList would be blocking the page. I figured there had to be some IE quirks-based trickery going on. (Yeah, I was giving them way too much credit.) I never really expected an ad filter to stop me from seeing a site, no matter how offensive/stupid its content might be.

I think it's important that sites -- and offensive ideas in general -- like whyfirefoxisblocked are argued down based on their merits (or lack thereof), and not blocked based on the offensiveness of their content. Or alternately, that "slander sites" be put in a separate block list, and not incorporated into the main advertisement-blocking list, because it's a very different function.

Anyway, I'd like to thank Rich for all his work in maintaining the block list, and I hope to continue to be a happy user in the future.

[Guest]

Actually, I did want to read whyisfirefoxblocked, and was most annoyed that you'd added it to your list.

Totally inappropriate. I hope you've learned your lesson from all this criticism.

[punissuer]

Look up censorship! It doesn't mean what you think, evidently. Yea, I just looked it up and the definition doesn't fit.

Actually, I just looked it up at http://www.webster.com/dictionary/censoring, and the definition fits:

to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable <censor the news>; also : to suppress or delete as objectionable <censor out indecent passages>

I agree with Kadin2048 that a separate list would be more appropriate for slander sites. Since EasyList is the first list named in ABP's initial configuration dialog, EasyList should conform to ABP's stated purpose, to block "ads and banners". Anything else erodes my trust in EasyList.

[rick752]

No problem guys ... that string is removed now.

This became became a very personal conflict and I should have never let that happen. Points well taken all around. Thanx for the input.

EasyList should conform to ABP's stated purpose, to block "ads and banners". Anything else erodes my trust in EasyList.

Unlike some others on the internet (like the author of that site), I always listen to both kudos AND criticism and weigh those two against each other. The best point made here about this topic wasn't because people couldn't see that page for unknown reasons ... or even that I hid it because I felt the need to protect these products. It was the point that others need to trust me to do the right thing in my subscriptions and keep my personal feelings out of it. You're right! THAT point makes the most sense to me.

[IceDogg]

IceDogg:
It's guy - note the cute whiskers...
BTW, you'll see me "misspell" realise too occasionally. That's the british spelling, the one I learnt at school...

Thanks.. I did not know about the British spelling, and sorry if the guy/gal thing offended you any. It wasn't my intentions at all. Much respect for you. But your comment gave me a chuckle.. hope it was intended.

Look up censorship! It doesn't mean what you think, evidently. Yea, I just looked it up and the definition doesn't fit.

Actually, I just looked it up at http://www.webster.com/dictionary/censoring, and the definition fits:

to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable <censor the news>; also : to suppress or delete as objectionable <censor out indecent passages>

Even with that definition blocking ads fits censoring more then the blocking of that one site does. I stand by my statement. The way I understand it it's about suppressing or deleting anything objectionable.. meaning all of the said objectionable thing. Like the F word.. but if it gets block on one site only is it still censoring? For example if you censor a book from using that word but you only removed the word one time and the book was full of those words you could easily remove them all but you don't. Is that censoring still? I think that might be called more editing. LOL I know I'm splitting hairs here so whatever it's not worth really going on.. but I still stand by my statement. I'll not argue further though. Fact I could be wrong I guess you can censor one person and not another. Anyway. Sorry bout the rambling. ;)

[chewey]

sorry if the guy/gal thing offended you any. It wasn't my intentions at all. Much respect for you. But your comment gave me a chuckle.. hope it was intended.

No offence (brit speak again ) taken at all. And yes, this was entirely intentional .

[Tony]

Just wanted to say, I love this list, I often end up forgetting how many ads are blocked until I use IE or use a work machine to browse the net. Being able to install it then forget about it is great

Also, I agree with the majority of people's posts on here, the guy is a jerk for trying to block Fx, but jerks will be jerks. Took me a couple of minuites to realise it was ABP making the site blank, though I couldnt care less if sites like that were kept blocked or not.

Keep up the good work

[rick752]

Thanx Tony