Using Firefox 52, UBlock Origin
Code: Select all
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk
Code: Select all
http://www.aol.co.uk
Code: Select all
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk
Code: Select all
http://www.aol.co.uk
Code: Select all
&abp=*&referrer=
Code: Select all
/get_site_js?*&referrer=
Code: Select all
/sourcepoint.*&referrer=
Code: Select all
||sourcepoint.huffingtonpost.co.uk^
||sourcepoint.aol.co.uk^
So you're basically saying its another Anti-adblock. And it shouldn't be treated any differently?geirsp wrote: ↑Mon Mar 20, 2017 4:32 pm Hi,
I'm the CTO of Sourcepoint, a company that helps publishers with monetization and communication (and as part of that, help them deal with their adblocker problems).
These rules will affect many sites in many countries in an adverse way, including sites that don't use the tech in a way specific to adblockers.
Seems like the right thing to do is make them domain specific.
geir
No - what I'm saying is that I think it's sloppy and dangerous engineering to put rules like that w/o understanding the full scope of impact. And borderline negligent when you have been told that it would have adverse impact on sites you aren't even aware of.fanboy wrote: ↑Tue Mar 21, 2017 7:43 am So you're basically saying its another Anti-adblock. And it shouldn't be treated any differently?
As part of your communication, maybe you should ease off the restrictions and stop treating Adblock users differently. This might help: https://easylist.to/2013/05/10/anti-adb ... dmins.html follow some guidelines, so we can both work together.
To their credit, the list maintainers normally do a good job of being specific - that when they want to interfere with a site's operation, they constrain the rules in a site-specific way to avoid affecting other sites. Clearly there are exceptions - like when there are technologies like pure-play adservers like DFP - but as I said, generally a good job.gotitbro wrote: ↑Tue Mar 21, 2017 1:24 pm @geirsp Why put the onus on the list authors when your technology is being used and all they are doing is protecting users from nonconforming sites which are in clear violation of the ruleset set by the larger community.
If you want to protect your customers who are not part of the anti adblock campaign from these rules you should have segregated them. We want to protect users privacy and aren't going to hunt down every website you're powering.
PS: This is my opinion do let this reflect the stance of the authors.
Code: Select all
/sourcepoint.$domain=~brigitte.de
/sourcepoint/*$domain=~brigitte.de
No it does not. That's none of users concern as the website works, end of story and speaking of that, I thought you were here to put your two cents in, but now you're going overboard and going off-topic from the core issue to the so called effects which have nothing to do with Easylist.
Code: Select all
aol.co.uk##script:inject(abort-on-property-write.js, _sp_)
Code: Select all
||huffingtonpost.co.uk/include/geopromo.php
Code: Select all
||blogsmithmedia.com/www.aol.co.uk/assets/js/mmblkr/caol-uk.js
Code: Select all
aol.co.uk##.ebay-dynamic-banner
Code: Select all
/msg?*&mid=*&cid=$image
||decenthat.com^$third-party
Code: Select all
/AdsInventory.
/AdStickyBTF.
/ResponsiveAds.
Code: Select all
||aol-uk.aol.co.uk^
||huffingtonpost-uk.huffingtonpost.co.uk^
Code: Select all
||aol.co.uk/|$script
||huffingtonpost.co.uk/|$script