Comments on: Norton Internet Security Blocked HTML List (Updated 2004-09-10) http://www.adblock.org/2004/09/nis_block_list/ Just another WordPress weblog Thu, 21 Aug 2008 01:54:31 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.1 by: Jake http://www.adblock.org/2004/09/nis_block_list/#comment-2460 Fri, 14 Jul 2006 05:27:50 +0000 http://www.adblock.org/2004/09/nis_block_list/#comment-2460 Quoting Gol: > Never going to happen. Who would regulate this? Where is money going? Individual webmasters? Laughable. If you put up a website with the intent to make money, have a business plan. If your business plan is advertisements, and you are in the red, you are failing. Take it as a sign. Gol >> err...I think what H was trying to say was that website owners would make their sites off-limits to unsubscribers. To view the site, one would have to pay a registration fee to the webmaster. H never suggested a regulating body would collect tolls. Quoting Gol:
>

Never going to happen. Who would regulate this? Where is money going? Individual webmasters? Laughable.

If you put up a website with the intent to make money, have a business plan. If your business plan is advertisements, and you are in the red, you are failing. Take it as a sign.

Gol

>>

err…I think what H was trying to say was that website owners would make their sites off-limits to unsubscribers. To view the site, one would have to pay a registration fee to the webmaster. H never suggested a regulating body would collect tolls.

]]> by: tlc http://www.adblock.org/2004/09/nis_block_list/#comment-1018 Wed, 14 Jun 2006 20:01:30 +0000 http://www.adblock.org/2004/09/nis_block_list/#comment-1018 thank God for Norton Internet Security....I love it! Now I can enjoy the net...ad free. I hate those sites that bombard us with advertisements/popups. I can care less if these companies go out of business...who needs them thank God for Norton Internet Security….I love it! Now I can enjoy the net…ad free. I hate those sites that bombard us with advertisements/popups. I can care less if these companies go out of business…who needs them

]]> by: H http://www.adblock.org/2004/09/nis_block_list/#comment-3 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.adblock.org/2004/09/nis_block_list/#comment-3 Gee, Let's block all ads and start paying for the content we see ... get real! Gee, Let’s block all ads and start paying for the content we see … get real!

]]> by: A.Netuser http://www.adblock.org/2004/09/nis_block_list/#comment-4 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.adblock.org/2004/09/nis_block_list/#comment-4 Default blocking of legitimate ads that support a site without a conscious user decision seems just as nefarious as the malware out there. Default blocking of legitimate ads that support a site without a conscious user decision seems just as nefarious as the malware out there.

]]> by: Gjenvick-Gjønvik http://www.adblock.org/2004/09/nis_block_list/#comment-5 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.adblock.org/2004/09/nis_block_list/#comment-5 As "H" suggested -- Imagine a web with no advertising and surfers would pay a "toll" to view a site. It would be costly to surf. How much would you be willing to pay to view the sites that you like today? Visiting Google without ads - I mean how much could it possibly cost Google to index the web anyway? I'm sure we all would chip in a buck or two each time we visited just to be ad free. And every web site we visited would also charge a fee to view. Could you imagine how nice it would be if our daily newspaper went without advertising support? How many of us would be willing to pay four or five times the current cover price? We would all want the WSJ to be completely void of advertising and we don't want to pay any more than a buck a copy. Would we receive better news since there would be no ad copy? Would we miss out on special events because we wouldn't want any form of advertising to appear? I think the majority of internet users would voluntarily accept advertising in order to continue enjoying the Internet. Unfortunately, Norton has made the decision for us to make non-exempt websites ad free by default. It's like looking at a newspaper with a blank white space where the ads used to be. But we like USA Today so they can have ads - and lots of them but they are on our special list whre WSJ is not. Will it be a battle of the titans when Google, Yahoo and others start loosing serious advertsing dollars to Norton's default settings? I'm not against Norton providing settings that can block or overwrite ads - as long as the user chooses it and it's not arbitrarily applied with favored advertisers receiving special treatment from Norton. It would be like a traffic cop that would arrest everyone not on a special list. Those on the list would be exempt from speeding tickets. I sure we would all trust Norton in any decistions they make regarding advertisers allowed on their special list. There would never be attempts to corrupt the overseerers at Norton ... Ya right! As “H” suggested — Imagine a web with no advertising and surfers would pay a “toll” to view a site. It would be costly to surf. How much would you be willing to pay to view the sites that you like today? Visiting Google without ads - I mean how much could it possibly cost Google to index the web anyway? I’m sure we all would chip in a buck or two each time we visited just to be ad free. And every web site we visited would also charge a fee to view.

Could you imagine how nice it would be if our daily newspaper went without advertising support? How many of us would be willing to pay four or five times the current cover price? We would all want the WSJ to be completely void of advertising and we don’t want to pay any more than a buck a copy. Would we receive better news since there would be no ad copy? Would we miss out on special events because we wouldn’t want any form of advertising to appear?

I think the majority of internet users would voluntarily accept advertising in order to continue enjoying the Internet.

Unfortunately, Norton has made the decision for us to make non-exempt websites ad free by default. It’s like looking at a newspaper with a blank white space where the ads used to be. But we like USA Today so they can have ads - and lots of them but they are on our special list whre WSJ is not.

Will it be a battle of the titans when Google, Yahoo and others start loosing serious advertsing dollars to Norton’s default settings?

I’m not against Norton providing settings that can block or overwrite ads - as long as the user chooses it and it’s not arbitrarily applied with favored advertisers receiving special treatment from Norton. It would be like a traffic cop that would arrest everyone not on a special list. Those on the list would be exempt from speeding tickets. I sure we would all trust Norton in any decistions they make regarding advertisers allowed on their special list. There would never be attempts to corrupt the overseerers at Norton … Ya right!

]]> by: Ros http://www.adblock.org/2004/09/nis_block_list/#comment-21 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.adblock.org/2004/09/nis_block_list/#comment-21 I wonder how many of the sites on the exception list are places where Norton regularly advertises? I notice some of the url strings are ones that might not be used for ads. For example, /banner/ could be where someone puts the entire heading graphic, and /ad/ could mean anno domini as opposed to BC. There's plenty of scope for false positives. I wonder how many of the sites on the exception list are places where Norton regularly advertises?

I notice some of the url strings are ones that might not be used for ads. For example, /banner/ could be where someone puts the entire heading graphic, and /ad/ could mean anno domini as opposed to BC. There’s plenty of scope for false positives.

]]> by: Anonymous http://www.adblock.org/2004/09/nis_block_list/#comment-30 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.adblock.org/2004/09/nis_block_list/#comment-30 Any help on what other rules are used? The page I'm looking at http://www.laithwaites.co.uk/index.pasp had blocked images that don't appear to be using any of the words on the list. Are there rules round image size and things? Thanks Charlie xxx Any help on what other rules are used? The page I’m looking at http://www.laithwaites.co.uk/index.pasp had blocked images that don’t appear to be using any of the words on the list. Are there rules round image size and things?

Thanks
Charlie xxx

]]> by: AdBlock http://www.adblock.org/2004/09/nis_block_list/#comment-32 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.adblock.org/2004/09/nis_block_list/#comment-32 There are definitely rules around image size. width and height are attributes of an img tag that tells the browser what size the image is so it knows how much space to allocate before actually downloading the image. This was important when the world was connected over 14.4kbps and 18.8kbps modems but not so much any more. These width and height attributes also tell software like Norton Internet Security what type of image it is. Common advertising graphic sizes like 468x60 are blocked. This can be resolved by removing those width and height attributes from your image tags that are getting blocked. There are definitely rules around image size. width and height are attributes of an img tag that tells the browser what size the image is so it knows how much space to allocate before actually downloading the image. This was important when the world was connected over 14.4kbps and 18.8kbps modems but not so much any more.

These width and height attributes also tell software like Norton Internet Security what type of image it is. Common advertising graphic sizes like 468×60 are blocked.

This can be resolved by removing those width and height attributes from your image tags that are getting blocked.

]]> by: Loren D. Shufeldt http://www.adblock.org/2004/09/nis_block_list/#comment-39 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.adblock.org/2004/09/nis_block_list/#comment-39 I have no advertising on my site. Yet NIS is still blocking 120X90 jpg's from displaying. Works fine with NIS disabled. Good grief lots of my client base have NIS enabled and probably don't know what the site really looks like, heck they may even quit coming because it doesn't appeal to them. How can one find out all the size images that NIS seems to be blocking and is it a particular set of sizes or is it proportional sizes. I have no advertising on my site. Yet NIS is still blocking 120X90 jpg’s from displaying. Works fine with NIS disabled. Good grief lots of my client base have NIS enabled and probably don’t know what the site really looks like, heck they may even quit coming because it doesn’t appeal to them. How can one find out all the size images that NIS seems to be blocking and is it a particular set of sizes or is it proportional sizes.

]]> by: AdBlock http://www.adblock.org/2004/09/nis_block_list/#comment-40 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.adblock.org/2004/09/nis_block_list/#comment-40 Loren, This really shouldn't be necessary as the graphics aren't even ads, but one thing that you can try is to remove the width and height attributes from your images. That should prevent NIS from blocking them. I've documented the common ad unit sizes in the link below, according to the IAB. Loren,

This really shouldn’t be necessary as the graphics aren’t even ads, but one thing that you can try is to remove the width and height attributes from your images. That should prevent NIS from blocking them.

I’ve documented the common ad unit sizes in the link below, according to the IAB.

]]>