anyone having trouble posting, quoting, etc due to aggressive ads?

[Mordred]

Ad block works for my laptop using chrome for my android I use ad Block with Samsung internet Explorer. 

 

[Eise]

On my Android tablet, I use the browser 'Via'. I've never seen a single advertisement there.

[iu360]

Hi

"You're not alone! Many users experience issues with posting and quoting, especially when sites have intrusive ads that disrupt functionality. Try using an ad blocker or accessing the site in incognito mode; it might improve the experience by minimizing ad interference."

 

[swansont]

1 hour ago, iu360 said:

Hi

"You're not alone! Many users experience issues with posting and quoting, especially when sites have intrusive ads that disrupt functionality. Try using an ad blocker or accessing the site in incognito mode; it might improve the experience by minimizing ad interference."

!

Moderator Note

Quotation marks imply you are quoting someone. You need to disclose the source.

You’ve been asked elsewhere 

 

[TheVat]

New wrinkle in the full page ad blitzkrieg (still on a browser sometimes where I cannot activate an ad blocker):  I am composing a post, switch to another open tab to verify something or grab a citation or whatever, when I return to this tab my editing window is gone, there's a fullpage ad blocking the thread, and I have to scroll down, reopen the editing window, and hope my content is still there.

This is not a good vibe for anyone thinking about regularly visiting SFN and participating in chats.  Not everyone has admin control over the device they are using (especially at work or a library) that would allow ad blocks, so I think this trend needs to be addressed by the owner/admin.  

[Markus Hanke]

I’m finding that Opera Browser (which has built-in adblocker and VPN functionality) works pretty well for SFN; for incompatible sites, these functions can be deactivated with a single click. 

[TheVat]

21 hours ago, TheVat said:

(still on a browser sometimes where I cannot activate an ad blocker):

 Like many users at work or a library, when I am on a shared/public or institutional device, I lack the option of changing browsers or adding blocker apps.  I think my previous post made clear why this situation could be off-putting for some users, especially when it BOOTS USERS OUT OF A POSTING BOX MIDWAY THROUGH WRITING TEXT IF THEY CLICK ON ANOTHER TAB EVEN FOR A MOMENT.  This latter development is crossing a line from rude ads to hostile ads.  It actually punishes users for doing what SFN encourages: going and obtaining citations and/or researching further before posting.  

[studiot]

Just now, TheVat said:

 Like many users at work or a library, when I am on a shared/public or institutional device, I lack the option of changing browsers or adding blocker apps.  I think my previous post made clear why this situation could be off-putting for some users, especially when it BOOTS USERS OUT OF A POSTING BOX MIDWAY THROUGH WRITING TEXT IF THEY CLICK ON ANOTHER TAB EVEN FOR A MOMENT.  This latter development is crossing a line from rude ads to hostile ads.  It actually punishes users for doing what SFN encourages: going and obtaining citations and/or researching further before posting.  

A someone who suffers more than most from what you describe because I tend to write longer posts than most one liners, I fully sympathise. +1

Yes I have yet to find a proper answers and have posted pictures of what I see here.

 

Nor can I tell how any of this is benefitting anyone, since the last thing I would ever do would be to buy something that pops up and interferes with something I am currently engaged in.
And, of course, those with suitable ad blockers who thing everything in the garden is rosy so they will never see and therefore buy as a result of these adverts either.

I would certainly hate loosing someone of your calibre over this.

Edited December 6 by studiot

[iNow]

6 hours ago, studiot said:

Nor can I tell how any of this is benefitting anyone, since the last thing I would ever do would be to buy something that pops up and interferes with something I am currently engaged in.

Caveat: It’s unrelated to the page here or to the volunteer staff moderating SFN, but…

The ads payout based on total number of clicks. Their aggressiveness and tendency to filibuster the entire screen results in lots and lots of accidental clicks from people annoyed and trying to close them quickly.

More clicks, whether accidental or intentional, result in bigger paychecks when the compensation is structured based on click rate. 

[StringJunky]

I use uBlock Origin in Brave browser and it's clean as a whistle.

[iNow]

Device used matters here too

[exchemist]

15 hours ago, TheVat said:

 Like many users at work or a library, when I am on a shared/public or institutional device, I lack the option of changing browsers or adding blocker apps.  I think my previous post made clear why this situation could be off-putting for some users, especially when it BOOTS USERS OUT OF A POSTING BOX MIDWAY THROUGH WRITING TEXT IF THEY CLICK ON ANOTHER TAB EVEN FOR A MOMENT.  This latter development is crossing a line from rude ads to hostile ads.  It actually punishes users for doing what SFN encourages: going and obtaining citations and/or researching further before posting.  

I'm with you on this. I do feel the only way to put a stop to this march of enshittification is if websites start resisting the more intrusive type of advertising gimmick, when it really impacts the use of the site.  

I found this from Google, https://support.google.com/adsense/answer/13992041?hl=en , which suggests the frequency  - and indeed whether or not these sodding vignette things are enabled at all - may be at the website owner's discretion. This link : https://www.webnots.com/how-to-increase-adsense-revenue-with-vignette-ads/ also suggests it is up to the website what ad formats it enables. If that is true, then I think we should definitely suggest to the owner of this site that they militate against use of the website and will diminish site traffic in the long run.

I note that earlier this year we did ask for vignette ads to be stopped -  and they were stopped, for a while. But then, mysteriously, they came back. It  starts to look as if the site owners have decided to inflict them on users after all, in spite of our request to get rid of them. 

I also found this rather amusing, pope-discovered-to-be-Catholic-shock-horror piece from an ad agency on the topic: https://www.adsbyana.com/blog/ad-fatigue-vs-ad-blockers-are-consumers-fighting-back. Basically, for all their mealy-mouthed platitudes about user "engagement" and tailoring to supposed "preferences" (which I suppose means avoiding triggering the most violent of users' Pavlovian avoidance reflexes), users hate ads and will do everything in their power to shut them out.

What is interesting is they seem to think the upsurge in use of adblockers is partly what has led to the increase in frequency and deployment of more intrusive and disruptive ways to present ads, as the advertisers desperately try to keep up the ad-eyeball interaction count, in spite of users' best efforts to stop them.  The article tries - to my mind somewhat unconvincingly -  to suggest ways to break out of this vicious circle. 

 

Edited December 7 by exchemist

[iNow]

I don’t believe blike owns the site and tend to think of the arrangement more like renting / leasing (aka disallowed from changing any of the plumbing)

[exchemist]

9 minutes ago, iNow said:

I don’t believe blike owns the site and tend to think of the arrangement more like renting / leasing (aka disallowed from changing any of the plumbing)

Could be.

But it was my personal experience of vignette ads, on this and other sites, (plus the terrible, jumping ads on the Independent newspaper site) that finally convinced me to install an ad blocker. So vignette ads have ended up greatly decreasing the number of ads I see. I will be just one of millions, forced by the increasing intrusiveness of ads into taking countermeasures. So it is indeed a vicious circle.   

[TheVat]

This sort of arms race between user and advertizer does seem to be whats going on.  If, as @iNow says, Blike doesn't own SFN and is at the mercy of the web hosting service, then as the opening of Waiting for Godot has it, nothing to be done.

Can't help wonder, as @studiot does, how any company can conceive that the full page block format would actually help sell their crap.  

People loathe ads, Pope discovered to be Catholic, indeed.

[studiot]

Back in the day in common with many students of technical subjects, I couldn't afford HiFi so I set about building my own.

This led me to have a long term hobby interest in electronics.

I used to buy technical magazines and had long loosing battle with them over the placement of advertisements.

My view was (and still is)  that I love and want advertisements.

But in the right place.

I used the articles and the advertisements in entirely dissimilar ways.

The advertisements I went carefully through in case they offered something I wanted to buy, which I frequently did.

But, unlike the articles, the advertisements went quickly out of date and I tore them out and threw them away to reduce paper storage.

The articles I kept (and still have) as useful in the long term.

 

So I tried to persuade publishers to separate articles and advertisements on separate pages as far as possible.