Quote:
Also, everyone please note that the rules have been recently updated:
http://www.zam.com/wiki/Forum_Rules#Amendment_6._Adblock_discussions
Yeah, that'll work well. XD
Way too many sites out there feature ads with malicious code, or even just plain annoying code (the kind that takes over your browser and makes you click on stuff to get rid of it, for instance) and oftentimes the administrators of the site won't even know about it until it's too late and users' security gets compromised. As a result, it falls to the users to protect themselves from it, because the people running the site can't (or won't) do it for us. Yeah, it sucks for those hoping to maximize their ad revenue, but the advertisers only have themselves to blame for this problem by gradually making their ads more and more intrusive, NOT the users for trying to safeguard themselves. See also: telemarketing, and the do-not-call registries that resulted from it becoming too widespread.
Especially given the fact that
this site itself doesn't have a perfectly clean track record when it comes to undetected malicious code running in the ads (I distinctly remember a public apology having to be made on the frontpage at some point when a problem was finally detected after it had already done some damage), trying to enact a rule stating that users that they are unable to discuss viable methods of protecting themselves is simply not going to fly, and in all likelihood, will be completely ignored. If anything, move such discussions to the troubleshooting forum or whatever instead of outright outlawing them.