Ad Blockers (1 Viewer)

Matty_T_98

Casual Observer
Mar 6, 2017
98
1
181
Liverpool
Ok so this may irritate a majority of members of a higher up status but... This ad blocker thing is a bad idea. Whilst I fully understand that this site is a non-profit and needs ad rev to stay online, but actively forcing people to disable their blockers is not the smartest of moves. A lot of people, myself included, have ad blockers installed for privacy & security reasons. Disabling the use of downloads because someone uses an ad blocker is just going to push people away from using this site. The best thing to do would be to ask people to whitelist the site or ask them to make a donation rather than force them fully disable their ad blocker in order to use the download feature. It doesn't give off the most friendly of vibes. I'd suggest taking a look at this Google article for better ways of dealing with ad blockers and why people choose to use them. Engaging with people who use ad blockers - Think with Google
Untitled.jpg
 

ThompsonXfe

A coach driver
Jan 30, 2019
318
1,159
Durham
Gotta echo the sentiment, it's the same with news sites that spam you with 30 ads a page, just from browsing FF not too actively I've blocked 18 thousand ads in the past 2 weeks, given they've gotta keep the sites etc running can't be too cheap.

It drives content creators away to, if there's drops in downloads and no one's downloading here, we'll upload our stuff elsewhere. That slippery slope eh
 
  • Like
Reactions: LT586 and owen6116

Advertisement

I see why adblockers do pose an issue for smaller sites that rely on advertisements to survive, especially sites that get relatively little financial support from elsewhere.

I think its best to consider whitelisting some of your favourite sites though - support them while you can ¯\(ツ)

That being said, I can also see why people use adblockers, when websites and forums are piled high with adverts, some of which could be deemed unnecessary or inappropriate.

TLDR; Some ads are annoying, but white list the sites you trust and love, such as Fellowsfilm :)
 

TAC

Wants a Royale with cheese
FF Council
Dec 10, 2015
267
1
216
versob.it
Ask people to whitelist the site
Whitelisting is absolutely fine, if you'd rather not disable your adblocker entirely. We'll update the notice so this is a little clearer, however, as mentioned in the article you linked, a lot of users may not even be aware they are using an adblocker (for instance if they're using a browser such as Brave which has one included as default).

We did initially try the more moderate approach of only showing a notice to users detected to be using an adblocker, however this didn't see any real reduction in the number of users using them.

The article essentially suggests a 'soft wall', which is the approach we've taken. We haven't entirely blocked access to the site, just the downloads section, which is the most resource intensive area of the site and makes up a large proportion of our running costs.

We considered this thoroughly before putting it into place, as it was absolutely crucial for us to maintain a solid amount of ad revenue for us to keep going, whilst minimising the disruption to users. There's only so much money we ourselves can invest.

It's the same with news sites that spam you with 30 ads a page
I don't think we fit into the category of 'annoying news site'. We've worked equally hard on ensuring ads aren't intrusive and don't effect the user experience, and are more than open to suggestions on how we can improve on this.
 

0118999

Street cleaner
Forum Moderator
FF Council
UKDT
Premium Subscriber
Oct 24, 2016
658
8
1,177
Given that many seem to have Adblockers enabled, how would they know if our ads are intrusive? ;) We are not your local newspaper asking you fill in a survey and watch two videos!

The admins have paid for FF out of our own pockets to cover repeated ad revenue shortfalls, we asked people nicely to view a few adverts and were either ignored or met by a wave of self-entitlement - that's why we've had to put the soft wall up. Whilst I don't expect users to know what our running costs are, it is in the thousands per year, of which providing large downloads at decent speeds is the biggest cost.

Undoubtedly we will lose a few members by disabling downloads for adblockers, but a handful of freeloaders are not worth jeopardising the whole financial future of this site for, because the alternative is turning the lights off. Any surplus revenue can be used to reduce the number of adverts or invest in new website feature, some of which are already live.
 

iiBus

Edinburgh bus enthusiast & Downloads moderator
Downloads Moderator
Outreach
Mar 8, 2020
1,040
31
1,179
Scotland, United Kingdom
Pronouns
He/Him
I had ad-blocker enable until I learnt I can't upload/download anything until I disable it and that makes no sense to me. I have this website whitelisted now but its just annoying. We have this for a reason and it just makes no sense to be told not to use it for stuff that we can do for free, plus its rare people will click on those adds.
 

FirstEnviro

Developer of the Studio Polygon [Redacted]
Studio Polygon
Nov 1, 2016
1,012
14
4,140
United Kingdom
Disabling downloads is the best approach I can think of.
There are many websites out there who literally prohibit you from accessing any of the website if you have a trace of adblocking installed.

Fellowsfilms ads are by no means perfect (FF actually ranks highly on the number of ads blocked out of all my sites visited) but when you have a website the size of this with all the server space needed, and not exactly the highest ranking in traffic numbers, you can see where these ads start to become justified.

The ads here are placed with some thought. The one at the top is literally filling empty space that was never used, so this isn't getting in the way of anything. The one to the side only moves recent posts down a 1/4 of the page, and is still perfectly visible. The only ad I say which does get in the way a bit is the banner ad above the start of every thread and below the menu bar, but it's not that bad.

Trust me, if FF wanted to capitalise the best they can with ads, you'd be getting full page ads, background ads and even ads to stop you using the website. The way it's implemented now isn't that bad.
 

Advertisement

0118999

Street cleaner
Forum Moderator
FF Council
UKDT
Premium Subscriber
Oct 24, 2016
658
8
1,177
@Alex Davies No one has been banned for using an adblocker; access to downloads is simply restricted until you allow us to show you some in-line adverts (NOT popups), otherwise you retain full access to everything we offer.

@iiBus Again, we don't expect the average person to understand the intricacies of our cashflow, but who said anything about clicks? Sites get revenue for impressions too. We appreciate adverts are annoying and we'd prefer not to show them because we like FF slick and pretty, but we have to pay costs somehow. Nothing is free, someone always pays somewhere, so whilst you can get some of what we provide elsewhere without having to view ads, if enough folks do so those places will quickly slow to a crawl and then need to spend the kind of money we have. Here's a few examples:
  • a Hong Kong map was recently put on free GDrive and people are still struggling to get it days after release because it keeps hitting Google's download limit and being blocked, and that's when it's already been broken up into to 6+ files and posted on multiple accounts.
  • A famous train sim focused UK website often made you wait over 30 minutes for a file and then sharply capped your download speeds (perhaps it still does?)
  • A popular social networking site shows a LOT of adverts on videos viewed through it which aren't easily blocked. It also sells your personal data to third parties. And they've a much bigger userbase that isn't downloading 3 gigabyte files!
We don't take pleasure from restricting access, we have been forced down this route after exhausting all other measures. If less people were blocking ads to start with, we could show less of them; effectively everyone not blocking ads has been involuntarily subsidising those who do, which doesn't seem very fair.
 
Oct 24, 2016
255
2
61
I have looked up how to disable it for certain sites but this requires adding certain lines of scripting to configuration files which need to be exported then re imported to the software, the issue with this is it requires the ability to code. I have tried to get into courses but they have been strict on demographics of applicants so it has been impossible for me to get on any as I only attended a public (non-tuition) school and left before coding was available to all. How can I sort this without knowing how to code?
 

LH275

????????????
Dec 9, 2016
357
18
195
London
Given that many seem to have Adblockers enabled, how would they know if our ads are intrusive? ;) We are not your local newspaper asking you fill in a survey and watch two videos!

The admins have paid for FF out of our own pockets to cover repeated ad revenue shortfalls, we asked people nicely to view a few adverts and were either ignored or met by a wave of self-entitlement - that's why we've had to put the soft wall up. Whilst I don't expect users to know what our running costs are, it is in the thousands per year, of which providing large downloads at decent speeds is the biggest cost.

Undoubtedly we will lose a few members by disabling downloads for adblockers, but a handful of freeloaders are not worth jeopardising the whole financial future of this site for, because the alternative is turning the lights off. Any surplus revenue can be used to reduce the number of adverts or invest in new website feature, some of which are already live.
After reading this thread, I have had a change of heart on this situation. Although I did disable my Adblock....after a considerable amount of time huffing and puffing, I did feel quite taken aback by the sudden walls put in place by you guys. While I do disagree with forcing people to disable the software, I understand that you have got bills to pay and there is literally no other sustainable way to get the funds for it, I would hate to see this site go so hats off to you for shoving it out there and I'm glad I can help keep it going in a small way!
 

Advertisement

Bones

im a cowdoy
Administrator
FF Council
Sep 19, 2016
377
3
529
Canada
fellowsfilm.com
Pronouns
He/Him
It's the one that comes with Chrome, I have tried editing the exemption file but it has not made a difference

Google Chrome does not ship with an AdBlocker, Would you be willing to show us what Extensions you've got installed?

You can do this by going to: chrome://system

Find the extensions option, and click "Expand...", it will output a list, copy paste it here or DM it to me, And hopefully this can help us guide you a bit better :)

1587512912273.png
 

Bones

im a cowdoy
Administrator
FF Council
Sep 19, 2016
377
3
529
Canada
fellowsfilm.com
Pronouns
He/Him
Does anybody know of a way to whitelist Fellowsfilm only with Bromite's inbuilt Ad Blocker?
There should be an option in the settings for per-site whitelisting, according to their github, the feature was added back in September of 2019. I personally have never heard of Bromite, so my experience here will be limited.
 

Advertisement

This thread is more than 3 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

Users who are viewing this thread