how about this, adblock and the ad agencys get together to allow blocking.. or at least in a sense
Ad agencys see adblocker they have two choices. don't show ads or show and adblocker blocks
Customer installs ad blocker. Sets it up and says what types of ads can go though without blocking.. (text ads like google,flash,video,pictures)
and when user goes to site and sees adblocker it asks what it can serve and displays what it can.
The user has the right to block all ads.
The site has the right to block access without some kind of ad.
this way the ads are served but in a non offencive way.
Here is an idea for resolving the debate over whether blocking web ads should be allowed, or whether it is immoral.
Just allow ad-blocking, but also allow any web page to detect ad-blocking software and reject visitors using it! They can just put up a simple screen saying that they do not allow ad-blocking software, and that to visit the site, the ad-blocker will have to be disabled or the site "white-listed". The visitor then decides.
Then the free market will decide. Is the content of the site worth putting up with the ads? No "free" content here!
This is even more fair than commercials on TV since either the viewer can just leave the room, or much worse, TIVO them right out! Here at least a content provider can determine whether the "freeloader" will still be able to view their content.
Brilliant, I say!