[qrio2]

This is an interesting argument. I own my computer and network, should I not be allowed to control what content is or is not allowed in my network? I guess the corollary that would follow from MY argument is that they should be permitted to block me from accessing their site if they see I'm not permitting ads

[eipi10_hn]

Exactly, users are the ones who should allow and block what contents to be served to their devices, NOT the websites.

> 2.12 People should be able to render web content as they want

> People must be able to change web pages according to their needs. For example, people should be able to install style sheets, assistive browser extensions, and blockers of unwanted content or scripts or auto-played videos. We will build features and write specifications that respect peoples' agency, and will create user agents to represent those preferences on the web user's behalf.

https://www.w3.org/TR/ethical-web-principles/#render

Don't fall for what ads companies/corporations are trying to shape users' thoughts.

[johnnyanmac]

>I guess the corollary that would follow from MY argument is that they should be permitted to block me from accessing their site if they see I'm not permitting ads

That's pretty much what Medium and many general news sites are doing. I haven't paid for one yet, but I can respect the move if it means they don't need to rely on clickbait to build a customer base.

[mcfedr]

Judging by all the titles on medium, click bait is still an important part of revenue, it's just not driving ads consumption but subscriptions