so the new site ads keep popping the thread to the top of the screen which is very annoying when you're trying to type a post. Can anyone recommend a good adblocker that won't stop the site, but would get rid of them, AND could someone else say why using them is wrong so we can debate it?
LMAO!!!! I have been using different browsers and that seems to work. Chrome and FireFox both pop to the damn ad but Explorer seems to behave. For now. And I wish I could install an ad blocker but we aren't allowed to install anything. And screw anyone that thinks it's wrong. It's messing with my sanity, so if I could do it I WOULDN'T LOSE ANY SLEEP.
I've been using Firefox because Explore hangs up so often, but I've got to say, this is VERY annoying, and might make me go back if IE actually works.
Chrome and Firefox both work with AdBlock Plus. I don't pop up to the ads because the ads aren't there. That's not to say that none of the bugs caused by the ads affect me, because some of them do.
I have adblock plus. I looked at my settings and I had the "allow non-intrusive ads" on trying to allow sites to get revenue, but THESE ads are definitely intrusive, so I turned that setting off and... no more ads! Thanks!!!
that's what I use too, and I don't have the ad problems. @Morgotha wants to know why it's wrong to use them... I have a theory that we are probably diagnosing the content of ads from afar without ever seeing them. And the problem with labeling the ads as things we don't want to see, is that we aren't experts, and we should leave the decision as to weather we see those ads or not in the hands of those experts that are qualified to tell us what we should see. There, is that something we can argue debate about?
I agree with Zmom! Diagnosing ads from afar is a violation of Sub-Section 24-B of the United States Internet Marketing Statute of America from 1778. The Founding Fathers wanted the internet ads to boost commerce in this young and fledgling nation. Diagnosing these ads and declaring them as "annoying" means that the ads will be taken away. Which means no money. Which means no jobs!!! I demand that these "Experts" prove how these ads are annoying? Maybe the site's servers are not able to handle the bandwidth? We cannot blame these innocent ads until we, the people, know the truth. DEBATE RAGE!!!!!!!
I disagree. As an non-expert, I believe I am perfectly capable of telling when an ad is annoying, and blocking the ****er. And the experts know these ads are annoying, they designed them that way!! *furious*
There should be rules on how to make a non-annoying ad. Like only ads with pretty nude people or yummy food, or pretty nude people holding yummy food in unusual places... that might not be annoying. But I'm not sure what they'd be advertising.
All this time they were looking for an expert. When all along they just needed you , a Sexpert. Sent from my iPad using little or no insight
I have to agree with your POV! I'm not an ad exec, and don't know much about ads or their content. The people who are the Experts and who are most knowledgeable about the ads we see are the companies that make them, so we should listen to them and do what they tell us to. That would be a much easier position to take if I didn't see the ad for the clear plastic jeans yesterday.... that one is really going to test my faith.
So we should watch the ads, BUT, the ads shouldn't slow down our viewing of the site. There seems like a simple solution to this: the site should place an app of some type on our computers to keep loading ads whether or not we are looking at the site or even using the internet. Then they could be assured of their revenue, and we wouldn't miss out on the ads that our good for us and tell us how to live our lives.
As an aside to the current "debate", I really do dislike ads that try and show someone sexily eating something. Those *never* work for me and just look *so* stupid.
You should see the way I eat a Tim Tam. It would make Donald Trump erect. Sent from my iPad using little or no insight
O... k... my eyes have been opened in so many ways. Now I know why when Trump was asked about Kim Jung Un he said he "looked so soft and cuddly". I'd never heard of a "Tim Tam" before though, is that a Canadian thing?
As another aside, I really hesitate giving out "informative" emojis because now I think I'm giving out cervices. Thanks a lot @zombiemom62.