<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Blocking Ads is NOT Censorship</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.slolane.org/2007/08/20/blocking-ads-is-not-censorship/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.slolane.org/2007/08/20/blocking-ads-is-not-censorship/</link>
	<description>Blog of central CA coast twin mom</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 11 Oct 2008 12:09:40 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Lori</title>
		<link>http://www.slolane.org/2007/08/20/blocking-ads-is-not-censorship/#comment-741</link>
		<dc:creator>Lori</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Aug 2007 17:28:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://builtbymom.com/slolane/?p=302#comment-741</guid>
		<description>Using Ad Block Plus is no different than using the TiVo remote. The only reason he *thinks* it's stealing is that he's following the pay per view/pay per click model that's so common on the web. If it were like television, outdoor, or magazine advertising and advertisers had to pay up front for the privilege of pasting ads on your site, whether or anyone actually saw those ads or not wouldn't matter much to the site owner. It'd be incumbent upon the advertiser to produce an ad that was worth watching, worth clicking on -- worth the price of the space.

Mom-101 made a much more coherent argument on this score than I am right now: &lt;a href="http://mom-101.blogspot.com/2007/07/lookin-out-for-mah-peeps-thats-you.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://mom-101.blogspot.com/2007/07/lookin-out-for-mah-peeps-thats-you.html&lt;/a&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Using Ad Block Plus is no different than using the TiVo remote. The only reason he *thinks* it&#8217;s stealing is that he&#8217;s following the pay per view/pay per click model that&#8217;s so common on the web. If it were like television, outdoor, or magazine advertising and advertisers had to pay up front for the privilege of pasting ads on your site, whether or anyone actually saw those ads or not wouldn&#8217;t matter much to the site owner. It&#8217;d be incumbent upon the advertiser to produce an ad that was worth watching, worth clicking on &#8212; worth the price of the space.</p>
<p>Mom-101 made a much more coherent argument on this score than I am right now: <a href="http://mom-101.blogspot.com/2007/07/lookin-out-for-mah-peeps-thats-you.html" rel="nofollow">http://mom-101.blogspot.com/2007/07/lookin-out-for-mah-peeps-thats-you.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jon deal</title>
		<link>http://www.slolane.org/2007/08/20/blocking-ads-is-not-censorship/#comment-740</link>
		<dc:creator>jon deal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Aug 2007 12:45:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://builtbymom.com/slolane/?p=302#comment-740</guid>
		<description>I have one lone set of Google Ads on my site, that even I have come to loathe. I just re-designed and thought seriously about nuking the ads altogether, but I want my last $48.13 from the mighty Google. :-]

But ads don't bother me that much. I even commit "click fraud" on occasion on sites whose content I happen to enjoy. But I think I tend to tune the ads out completely unless they are truly obnoxious.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have one lone set of Google Ads on my site, that even I have come to loathe. I just re-designed and thought seriously about nuking the ads altogether, but I want my last $48.13 from the mighty Google. :-]</p>
<p>But ads don&#8217;t bother me that much. I even commit &#8220;click fraud&#8221; on occasion on sites whose content I happen to enjoy. But I think I tend to tune the ads out completely unless they are truly obnoxious.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
