Link to the FFXI topic on this where it was brought up.
While I understand that ads are a main source of income for this website and pretty much every other website on the net, the prohibiting of talking about Adblock fore the Firefox browser is uncalled for. While ZAM may screen their ads to filter out gil selling/rmt adds or ads containing malicious code, not everyone does that.
Malicious codes in Ads are/or are becoming the number one way of infecting computers with viruses. It is very easy to make adds and slip them in fast before people can catch it. By not letting us communicate that there are ways or protecting your system from this kind of attack, you are opening up not just the FFXI community but every other community to malicious attack.
The FFXI community has had many run ins with this type of behavior and many people have lost game accounts/money because of it. I would ask that this policy be looked at again for the safety of your users.
·Theme
- Forums
- Cross Site
- Site and Forum Feedback
- Revision of the Adblock rule
Revision of the Adblock ruleFollow
I do wish you luck in your crusade, however it's obviously apparent that the new ownership doesn't care about the community more than the almighty dollar.
People don't like to be meddled with. We tell them what to do, what to think, don't run, don't walk. We're in their homes and in their heads and we haven't the right. We're meddlesome. ~River Tam
Sedao
Sedao
Kastigir wrote:
I do wish you luck in your crusade, however it's obviously apparent that the new ownership doesn't care about the community more than the almighty dollar.
This.
As I did in the =10 forum, I'll throw my support in for a revision to this rule.
Some people may not have enough time to warm an admin about a specific, infected ad before someone becomes a victim.
Some people may not have enough time to warm an admin about a specific, infected ad before someone becomes a victim.
Zam is responsible for what people do on other sites? Why not just put some money in a jar every week, and splurge on some decent anti virus/firewall software at some point?
If Zam had everyone who uses it on adblock, Zam would have no revenue. There would be no Zam.
If Zam had everyone who uses it on adblock, Zam would have no revenue. There would be no Zam.
Lubriderm the Hand wrote:
Zam is responsible for what people do on other sites? Why not just put some money in a jar every week, and splurge on some decent anti virus/firewall software at some point?
If Zam had everyone who uses it on adblock, Zam would have no revenue. There would be no Zam.
If Zam had everyone who uses it on adblock, Zam would have no revenue. There would be no Zam.
You know nothing of how AV works it seems. AV software is a cause and effect type program. It can only handle things that it knows about. It can not defend your computer from things that are brand new. ADblock and Noscript can by not allowing anything.
Once again this isnt about the ads on the site, this about being able to talk about something that can save someones account.
Lubriderm the Hand wrote:
Zam is responsible for what people do on other sites? Why not just put some money in a jar every week, and splurge on some decent anti virus/firewall software at some point?
If Zam had everyone who uses it on adblock, Zam would have no revenue. There would be no Zam.
If Zam had everyone who uses it on adblock, Zam would have no revenue. There would be no Zam.
So it's a good thing that Zam decides to censor it's customers, drive business away, and make people so miserable they don't want to pay for premium.
Interesting business model.
Personally, I would like to go on record as saying that I am more and more disenchanted with this website, but I do not want any of the administrators to see that as an insult on them. I understand that you have a job, and you have to do what you are asked. I apologize if I have been snippy or rude when voicing my opinions on the new directions that this site has taken.
Lubriderm the Hand wrote:
Zam is responsible for what people do on other sites? Why not just put some money in a jar every week, and splurge on some decent anti virus/firewall software at some point?
If Zam had everyone who uses it on adblock, Zam would have no revenue. There would be no Zam.
If Zam had everyone who uses it on adblock, Zam would have no revenue. There would be no Zam.
First of all, I believe premium memberships are a revenue for them. Of which is surely to drop if you don't treat your community right. Secondly, the amount of people "converted" to using Adblock via forum discussion here is minimal. You still have a significant percentage of the people browsing without it.
By banning talk of Adblock, you create a firestorm of bad publicity (not to mention lots of discussion of -you guessed it- Adblock!), and the solid image you had is headed the wrong way.
If I were ZAM, I'd get rid of this censorship outright, and state something to the effect of "...While Allakhazam doesn't promote any method designed to circumvent the intended purpose of an advertisement, we realize that user protection from potential malicious code is an important issue to the community."
Edited, May 21st 2010 10:58pm by Carrilei
Corsair75
Pandemonium Asura...
ffxiah
ffxiah
If I were an admin on zam, I'd follow the rules about telling people not to promote adblock, but allow us to discuss adblock, and the pros and cons that adblock will have for the user and the site.
We have discussed this extensivly on the admin channels, and at this time the result of those discussions is that the rule remains in effect unaltered.
I understand your frustration with this rule, however I can assure you that the fullest extents of it will only be instituted in cases where repeated warnings are first issued, and ignored multiple times by an individual. Discussion of that specific program is not allowed per management, however there is no rule preventing you from stating "site X has a banner ad with a virus, etc". Be very, very certain of your information before posting such a warning we often and repeatedly see people warning of infected sites only to later find that they actually had an infected computer from another source and were making false accusations about a site that was in actuality clean due to the behavior of spyware infections. This has happened numerous times in the 10 years I have been involved with this site, and occasionally this site is the target of such accusations.
We also have not instituted any policies that would prevent people from talking about various spyware treatment and prevention tools, such as malwarebytes, antivirus programs, or other similar security measures.
if anyone has any further questions or requests for clarification regarding that particular rule, please feel free to PM me.
Administrator Kaolian
I understand your frustration with this rule, however I can assure you that the fullest extents of it will only be instituted in cases where repeated warnings are first issued, and ignored multiple times by an individual. Discussion of that specific program is not allowed per management, however there is no rule preventing you from stating "site X has a banner ad with a virus, etc". Be very, very certain of your information before posting such a warning we often and repeatedly see people warning of infected sites only to later find that they actually had an infected computer from another source and were making false accusations about a site that was in actuality clean due to the behavior of spyware infections. This has happened numerous times in the 10 years I have been involved with this site, and occasionally this site is the target of such accusations.
We also have not instituted any policies that would prevent people from talking about various spyware treatment and prevention tools, such as malwarebytes, antivirus programs, or other similar security measures.
if anyone has any further questions or requests for clarification regarding that particular rule, please feel free to PM me.
Administrator Kaolian
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
At the risk of being seen as a pawn of the Allak Overlords:
Buy premium and avoid the issue.
I work part time for **** wages and I ******* buy premium primarly to skip the goddam ads. You guys seriously can't pay 10 cents a day for this?
Gorram cheapskates.
Buy premium and avoid the issue.
I work part time for **** wages and I ******* buy premium primarly to skip the goddam ads. You guys seriously can't pay 10 cents a day for this?
Gorram cheapskates.
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.
Quote:
Why not just put some money in a jar every week, and splurge on some decent anti virus/firewall software at some point?
Lol, wow.
Quote:
First of all, I believe premium memberships are a revenue for them. Of which is surely to drop if you don't treat your community right. Secondly, the amount of people "converted" to using Adblock via forum discussion here is minimal. You still have a significant percentage of the people browsing without it.
By banning talk of Adblock, you create a firestorm of bad publicity (not to mention lots of discussion of -you guessed it- Adblock!), and the solid image you had is headed the wrong way.
If I were ZAM, I'd get rid of this censorship outright, and state something to the effect of "...While Allakhazam doesn't promote any method designed to circumvent the intended purpose of an advertisement, we realize that user protection from potential malicious code is an important issue to the community."
By banning talk of Adblock, you create a firestorm of bad publicity (not to mention lots of discussion of -you guessed it- Adblock!), and the solid image you had is headed the wrong way.
If I were ZAM, I'd get rid of this censorship outright, and state something to the effect of "...While Allakhazam doesn't promote any method designed to circumvent the intended purpose of an advertisement, we realize that user protection from potential malicious code is an important issue to the community."
This, so much.
I'm a very occasional poster, and don't normally get involved in the site politics or this area of the forums in general, but reading all this makes me feel a bit....patronized.
Ars Technica (tech blog) ran an experiment a couple months ago where they managed to block content to only those who were running Ad Block. Financially it was a success, however the commenters were angry, and rightly so. There was no warning, no attempt through other means to reach a compromise with those running Ad Block, nothing. One of the main themes that came up in the comments was, "Why didn't you just ask first?" . So, they turned their software off, and asked. A large chunk of people whitelisted the site, and they didn't have to block their content. Wins all around.
I guess what my meandering post is trying to say is, why didn't you just ask first instead of leaping to the censorship of all things Adblock? I'm fully willing to whitelist the site (and have, as of reading this post), I just feel like the censorship is a bit much. Adblock is a major player in keeping my computer virus free, and I suggest it to all my family members. I whitelist the sites I support (provided they have given assurances that the ads aren't going to virus me), and block the rest.
...Pretty sure that's the longest post I've ever posted. The end. :)
Ars Technica (tech blog) ran an experiment a couple months ago where they managed to block content to only those who were running Ad Block. Financially it was a success, however the commenters were angry, and rightly so. There was no warning, no attempt through other means to reach a compromise with those running Ad Block, nothing. One of the main themes that came up in the comments was, "Why didn't you just ask first?" . So, they turned their software off, and asked. A large chunk of people whitelisted the site, and they didn't have to block their content. Wins all around.
I guess what my meandering post is trying to say is, why didn't you just ask first instead of leaping to the censorship of all things Adblock? I'm fully willing to whitelist the site (and have, as of reading this post), I just feel like the censorship is a bit much. Adblock is a major player in keeping my computer virus free, and I suggest it to all my family members. I whitelist the sites I support (provided they have given assurances that the ads aren't going to virus me), and block the rest.
...Pretty sure that's the longest post I've ever posted. The end. :)
Quote:
If I were ZAM, I'd get rid of this censorship outright, and state something to the effect of "...While Allakhazam doesn't promote any method designed to circumvent the intended purpose of an advertisement, we realize that user protection from potential malicious code is an important issue to the community."
Except this wouldn't do anything to stop people from using it. It's quite clear that given the choice between an increased chance in safety and this site being able to profit and run, they'd pick the former.
Friar Bijou wrote:
Buy premium and avoid the issue.
Eh, I used to have premium. I dropped it after ~10 years because the Powers That Be decided to ***** with the site format. Which is their right, but I don't have to pay for it.
Ironically, it looks as though they screwed with the format in part to cram in more ads which won't be seen by those parties who dropped premium and decided to just run third party content blocking utilities instead. I'm sure it's working for them at the macro level but at the micro level it's kind of funny.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
I'm just waiting until an ad makes it through the screening process and facerapes some poor non-premium guy. Imagine if it was discovered that someone had their account hacked due to a banner ad on this site; a banner ad they could've blocked, but didn't, because promoting internet safety is verboten.
At least Allakhazam isn't using the PartyPoker.com pop-under like Wowhead and Thottbot have gone over to. Unless they do. In which case, once my premium runs out, I'll be out. There's only one thing more annoying than pop-ups and that's pop-unders.
Too much gaming. Add != ad
Edited, May 22nd 2010 10:54pm by Mazra
At least Allakhazam isn't using the PartyPoker.com pop-under like Wowhead and Thottbot have gone over to. Unless they do. In which case, once my premium runs out, I'll be out. There's only one thing more annoying than pop-ups and that's pop-unders.
Too much gaming. Add != ad
Edited, May 22nd 2010 10:54pm by Mazra
Please "talk up" if your comprehension white-shifts. I will use simple-happy language-words to help you understand.
What Jophiel said.
Dear people I don't like: 凸(â—´―｀â—)凸
Mazra wrote:
At least Allakhazam isn't using the PartyPoker.com pop-under like Wowhead and Thottbot have gone over to. Unless they do.
They did for a long while but I haven't seen it recently, now it appears to be this thing instead.
Onion Party on Youtube - Blind run Lets Plays in FFXIV
Jophiel wrote:
[quote=Friar Bijou]Buy premium and avoid the issue.
Premium and Ads have NOTHING to do with my decision to use AdBlock.
I would use AdBlock whether or not I have premium, either way.
While ZAM does its best to remove malicious ads, other websites may not be so... quick and scrutinizing of their ad servers. Browsing the internet without AdBlock is like having sex with a perfect stranger without a condom; it just isn't worth it.
As others in the thread have stated, Ads are the #1 culprit of virus infections. Expecting us NOT to advise people use such technology is just plain stupid, especially on a major MMO gaming website, where hackers are everywhere and are constantly looking for ways to infect peoples' computers to steal their stuff.
This has nothing to do with ZAM.com's premium membership, or the ads ZAM.com serves. AdBlock is very, VERY important for anyone's personal safety while they browse the internet (on ANY website!). Without it, you're leaving yourself wide open to virus/trojan/malware/adware attacks.
If ZAM wants to generate more revenue, perhaps they should give people more reason to sign up for premium instead of hoping, and praying, that fewer people use AdBlock, along with trying to prevent newbies from learning about such a potent security measure.
Edited, May 22nd 2010 9:55pm by Lyrailis
Is this where we can talk about adblock without being banned for it?
...
On a more serious note...
Guys, seriously, a site about MMOs, which are a huge target for people scamming accounts and infecting users to steal logins, banning talking about a program that can stop that from happening? Do I need to be the voice of the past here and remind you that your site was inadvertently the source for hundreds of thousands of users being infected due to an ad from your ad server? I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous, and one more reason not to bother renewing my premium this year. I see no point in showing support for a website that is actually going to stop its users from advising one another how to prevent their accounts from getting hacked.
Whether or not your corporate (most likely non-MMO-playing) ownership is aware or not, there are, in fact, other websites out there that provide the same information as yours does, as well as countless other websites that your users visit. Due to the overwhelming presence of possible infection sources, no one in their right mind would browse the internet without some form of protection.
...
On a more serious note...
Guys, seriously, a site about MMOs, which are a huge target for people scamming accounts and infecting users to steal logins, banning talking about a program that can stop that from happening? Do I need to be the voice of the past here and remind you that your site was inadvertently the source for hundreds of thousands of users being infected due to an ad from your ad server? I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous, and one more reason not to bother renewing my premium this year. I see no point in showing support for a website that is actually going to stop its users from advising one another how to prevent their accounts from getting hacked.
Whether or not your corporate (most likely non-MMO-playing) ownership is aware or not, there are, in fact, other websites out there that provide the same information as yours does, as well as countless other websites that your users visit. Due to the overwhelming presence of possible infection sources, no one in their right mind would browse the internet without some form of protection.
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/pawkeshup
YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/pawkeshup
Twitch: http://www.twitch.tv/pawkeshup
Blog: http://pawkeshup.blogspot.com
YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/pawkeshup
Twitch: http://www.twitch.tv/pawkeshup
Blog: http://pawkeshup.blogspot.com
Olorinus the Ludicrous wrote:
The idea of old school is way more interesting than the reality
I don't care one way or another about adblock per se.
While I'm no fan of seeing adds, we all know the real reason I keep premium is so's I can keep creeping everyone out with the DingartTM.
While I'm no fan of seeing adds, we all know the real reason I keep premium is so's I can keep creeping everyone out with the DingartTM.
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.
Oh...I just use AVG Free and Spybot and rarely get infected with anything. And Allak doesn't care if they are running.
Not to argue; I don't have a horse in the adblock race.
Carry on; nothing to see here.
Not to argue; I don't have a horse in the adblock race.
Carry on; nothing to see here.
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.
on the offchance that someone reads this thread and doesn't know (maybe they access it from their "previous posts" page), the adblock rule was removed rather promptly after outcry from the community started.
Recent Visitors: 124
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (124)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- Site and Forum Feedback
- Revision of the Adblock rule
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC