Never see a YouTube commercial again

Computers do not access websites, computers access data. Furthermore, your website is not built as one file like PDF-s are. It's you who offer your visitors a bundle of files, all separate. Your web server is there to serv visitors who send in queries: send me this html file, then this css design file, then this and that jpg files. It's totally up to the visitor what files he demands to be sent.

Selective download was there long before advertising counquered the Internet. Browsers in the nineties had special "Image" button. If you sat on slow dial-up (like most people did at the time), you could set the program to NOT download any time consuming images, and only when you thought you need the images, you'd click on the beforementioned button, and the images started to appear. This is why we still have the image ALT tag - it dates back to the time when images were not always downloaded, and people just read the text that stood at the places where the images were meant to stand. The same reason why html lets you enter the dimensions of an image. If the image gets downloaded, these are not necessary at all. But, if not, you'd run into layout problems.

Blocking something from being downloaded to and displayed upon your computer does not equal modifying someone's website. Your website exists just the same. The owner of the computer gets to decide what is displayed. It's very simple.

Just like I can block any traffic I choose with my router. I can block any kind of images from loading in several different ways. I can block any and all scripts from running.

Blocking images, scripts, etc is basic functionality in any web browser.

I can go into my Hosts file and block the addresses of all the Ad Networks with just a text editor. That's pretty old school and doesn't require any add-ons.

I don't eat them all, I just ignore the ones that I won't eat. Just like the way I ignore most of the ads I see on web pages. I don't try to install something on the plate that will make those vegetables disappear.

You are kidding right? Not even going to attempt a comeback at that one. Just a silly comment through and through.

Exactly, so change the channel. Go to another website if you don't like what you are seeing but don't sit there and happily consume their content and at the same time block their very income that is allowing them to make the content for you. It's you wanting to have your cake and eat it too.

I really don't know what sort of Internet you guys are running but I have never once had an issue with advertising affecting the speed of websites showing for me. If anything you guys need to upgrade your Internet if ads and cookies are really causing you such big issues. Sounds like the days of the 56K modem here. We are in 2013 right? My Internet zips along -- I thought the US were supposed to be ahead of us?

I never said you can't do it, but I am saying you are VERY hypocritical in what you are doing. You are sitting here posting on a daily basis with some intention to get eyeballs on your signature. If the signature was not there a lot of people would not be posting anywhere near as often as they do. You can argue that all day long but we both know the truth to that.

So you are providing content in return for getting eyeballs on your signature but at the same time you do not think others have the right to do so and you block their ads. I only hope someone comes up with a Warrior Forum signature blocker we can all use and then see how you guys like that. Would be a bit different with the shoe on the other foot, wouldn't it?

Let's take newspapers as an example. A newspaper might cost $1 and they rely heavily on the proceeds made by advertising in their paper. If that advertising became less effective then all of sudden they would need to do other things to make up for that loss. The paper that you used to pay $1 for is now $3 instead. Great move?

You forget that your actions have bigger implications and this is where the hypocrisy comes in. You think it's fine for you to go and block all ads yet if everyone else did the exact same thing, big changes would happen in the world that would result in the cost of goods and services going up and you would then start to complain about that.

I'm surprised by you especially. Someone who is always selling blog packages in their signature. How do suppose most bloggers make their income? In fact just looking at the blogs you are selling they have advertisements all over them. Once again, only use advertising when it suits your need or cause, right?

It's not just websites that rely on ad income. As I said above, even their signature ads in this forum are classified as advertising and I would love to see how they reacted if they were blocked by all users to the forum. I think they would be singing a VERY different tune.

The fact is you guys can say and do whatever you want, it won't change my mind. I know the negative implications your actions would have if everyone did as you are doing so it's not a question I am asking you. And the fact you all have signatures in this forum just goes to show how hypocritical your argument really is.

"No, don't show me advertisments, I don't want to see them. Oh, but please look at my one."

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Exactly this. If websites weren't misbehaving so badly, adblockers wouldn't be in demand. I would barely be able to use the Internet without one, and I do not give permission and permission isn't being requested to track my activities.

As for the ads and income... I don't buy stuff from random ads placed on sites. I buy because I want or need something and know where to get it when I'm ready to buy. I wouldn't be clicking on those ads. I never do. But if someone writes up an in depth and impartial review of something I am interested in and has an affiliate link to the product, that is not blocked and I will click on it. Again ... it's because I am searching for the product and info on the product and am near ready to buy.