I am seeing Lag for all the Ads to Finish

[sfx2000]

For the the forums, and many on this thread have a lot of pull/credibility...

We should perhaps gently discourage the following threads...

http://www.snbforums.com/threads/pixelserv-a-better-one-pixel-webserver-for-adblock.26114/

http://www.snbforums.com/threads/adblocking-with-combined-hosts-file.15309/page-18#post-209833

While the intent perhaps is honest on the OP's part, this takes revenue away from the site at a router level, so it's a blacklist without any recourse...

Keeping in mind that this site isn't paid on unicorn farts, fairy dust, or nice pics of rainbows...

Ads keep the lights on here...

 

[sfx2000]

We should perhaps gently discourage the following threads...

http://www.snbforums.com/threads/pixelserv-a-better-one-pixel-webserver-for-adblock.26114/

http://www.snbforums.com/threads/adblocking-with-combined-hosts-file.15309/page-18#post-209833

While the intent perhaps is honest on the OP's part, this takes revenue away from the site at a router level, so it's a blacklist without any recourse...

And yes, @RMerlin, most of these threads involve your contribution to the ASUS firmware, so depending on your point of view, you have a great way to sway opinions one way or the other...

 

[RMerlin]

And yes, @RMerlin, most of these threads involve your contribution to the ASUS firmware, so depending on your point of view, you have a great way to sway opinions one way or the other...

They're not doing anything illegal. So all I can do is not get myself involved into those efforts, and refuse to provide any direct support to these projects. But it's not my place to tell them not to do it. I stated my opinion in the past as to why I wouldn't implement any of these in the firmware itself, and that's as far as I'm going to go there.

 

[sfx2000]

It's not a legality thing, nothing illegal about blocking sites - it's more about ethics and being a good neighbor...

Having folks on a public forum finding/discussing ways to remove revenue from the host...

That's just wrong, IMHO...

 

[charlie2alpha]

I don't think any of us should become the moral police around here. It's a double edged sword after all since ad companies themselves aren't careful enough with the quality of their ads.

I believe for this current thread we should focus on how or why ads influence the browsing experience of snbforums.com. I have to admit, they slow down the experience too much. Comparing with other sites I visit I do notice one difference in behavior; the main contents of the page do not appear until the ads load. On most other sites the main content appears regardless of the ads that can be loaded in a delayed manner. I suppose this has to do with the structure of the page itself and I am not sure if it can be modified as it may be part of the forum software itself but if it could it would make the perceived loading experience much faster.

 

[System Error Message]

If Thiggins ran out of funds theres still the internet archive to keep the remains of this site available but i really think we need more active users not just visitors and i think we need to publish and discuss more too. Hopefully my 10Gb/s NICs should arrive in 2 weeks so that i can start benchmarking and testing the higher end stuff which should give us an edge since you wouldnt find any website that has properly benchmarked various x86 CPUs for routing or even the mikrotik CCRs.

I've havent seen many new threads which is what we need and perhaps we should add the software and firmware part for networking to include using a standard x86 OS for networking and also for building your own firmware.

 

[thiggins]

Guys,
I appreciate the discussion and concern. But SNB is a business and this is my problem to solve.

I have no intention of taking countermeasures against adblockers or jumping through hoops to have ads stay in view for the 1 second that it seems everyone, including Google, is now requiring to get paid for an ad.

I'll continue to try to make ads as inobtrusive and relevant as possible. But there is only so much I can do. I am not setting out the "tip cup" because I think it's unprofessional for a commercial site.

 

[thelonelycoder]

For the the forums, and many on this thread have a lot of pull/credibility...

We should perhaps gently discourage the following threads...

http://www.snbforums.com/threads/pixelserv-a-better-one-pixel-webserver-for-adblock.26114/

http://www.snbforums.com/threads/adblocking-with-combined-hosts-file.15309/page-18#post-209833

While the intent perhaps is honest on the OP's part, this takes revenue away from the site at a router level, so it's a blacklist without any recourse...

Keeping in mind that this site isn't paid on unicorn farts, fairy dust, or nice pics of rainbows...

Ads keep the lights on here...

@sfx2000 Now I understand why you suddenly post in my adblocking thread...
I understand @thiggins financial concerns but in a broader view I will always use an adblock solution locally to have the web experience that I much prefer. Even my Mailbox outside has a sticker on it which is honored in Switzerland. Having said that, I never click any ads anywhere on a website. I may not understand it fully, but how would then my scripts affect ad revenue for this site.
I am asking to better understand it and maybe find a way to exempt this site in a acceptable way for the users of my blocking script.

 

[thelonelycoder]

Guys,
I appreciate the discussion and concern. But SNB is a business and this is my problem to solve.

I hope solving the problem does not mean taking the site offline. I am open for a discussion for measures you want to implement to keep this site online.

 

[charlie2alpha]

Guys,
I appreciate the discussion and concern. But SNB is a business and this is my problem to solve.

I have no intention of taking countermeasures against adblockers or jumping through hoops to have ads stay in view for the 1 second that it seems everyone, including Google, is now requiring to get paid for an ad.

I'll continue to try to make ads as inobtrusive and relevant as possible. But there is only so much I can do. I am not setting out the "tip cup" because I think it's unprofessional for a commercial site.

Fair enough. My intention was to focus on the technical aspect of the issue and that's what I tried with my last post, describing what I see when the forums load. But since you're the one who sets up the software in the first place you'll know better if it can be improved.

Sent from my Nexus 9 using Tapatalk

 

[thiggins]

I may not understand it fully, but how would then my scripts affect ad revenue for this site.

It's simple. When ads are blocked, I don't get paid.

Background:

The ad industry has rapidly moved from pay-per-impression (paid when ads are served) to pay-per-click (paid only when ads are clicked) to now pay-per-view.

The "viewability" model charges advertisers only when an ad is viewed. "Viewed" definition differs, but generally requires the ad be visible in the browser's viewpost for at least one second. So no ad viewed, no advertiser charged and no ad partner (me) paid.

Viewability requirements have until recently been demanded only by larger advertisers or ad networks. But with Google's recent announcement that it will only charge advertisers when ads are 100% viewable, the game is rapidly escalating.

 

[RMerlin]

Comparing with other sites I visit I do notice one difference in behavior; the main contents of the page do not appear until the ads load. On most other sites the main content appears regardless of the ads that can be loaded in a delayed manner. I suppose this has to do with the structure of the page itself and I am not sure if it can be modified as it may be part of the forum software itself but if it could it would make the perceived loading experience much faster.

As the trend with websites is to move to more responsive designs that can dynamically adapt to any screen size (even a browser window resize will trigger a relayout), I fear that this is going to become increasingly the case with various websites. The browser will need to be able to get everything involved in hand before it can decide how to properly generate the whole layout. So if ads providers cannot provide their data in a timely manner, it will cause delays in layouts.

Makes you miss the good old days of static 800px-wide webpages...

 

[charlie2alpha]

As the trend with websites is to move to more responsive designs that can dynamically adapt to any screen size (even a browser window resize will trigger a relayout), I fear that this is going to become increasingly the case with various websites. The browser will need to be able to get everything involved in hand before it can decide how to properly generate the whole layout. So if ads providers cannot provide their data in a timely manner, it will cause delays in layouts.

Makes you miss the good old days of static 800px-wide webpages...

Oh yes, I remember those! Slower connections at the time but less bloat.

 

[thelonelycoder]

It's not a legality thing, nothing illegal about blocking sites - it's more about ethics and being a good neighbor...
Having folks on a public forum finding/discussing ways to remove revenue from the host...
That's just wrong, IMHO...

Don't be a white knight here, you yourself use Ghostery and maybe other adblocking in your browser. These topics are discussed at length elsewhere and are nothing new. I'd rather have a constructive discussion of how we can help this site stay alive. I am going to start a new thread in the Asuswrt-Merlin forum. This is where this discussion belongs. The Merlin firmware allows us to do the things we do with our routers.

 

[sfx2000]

Yep, I use ghostery, but I don't block ads on sites that I frequent often...

What's useful there is that if there is a problematic ad-partner (who knows, they may be having network issues of their own), I can selectively block just that one... and then I can PM the site owner/webmaster as needed.

So it's not an all 0r nothing deal - and can totally whitelist a site on an on-demand basis, unlike a DNS based solution.

 

[sfx2000]

The ad industry has rapidly moved from pay-per-impression (paid when ads are served) to pay-per-click (paid only when ads are clicked) to now pay-per-view.

The "viewability" model charges advertisers only when an ad is viewed. "Viewed" definition differs, but generally requires the ad be visible in the browser's viewpost for at least one second. So no ad viewed, no advertiser charged and no ad partner (me) paid.

Viewability requirements have until recently been demanded only by larger advertisers or ad networks. But with Google's recent announcement that it will only charge advertisers when ads are 100% viewable, the game is rapidly escalating.

Uggh... said it before, and I'll say it again - very ugly business...

The scary thing here is that there are some very big players out there that have the power to "change the game" with their end-to-end platforms - so far, I haven't personally seen where this has happened, but "do no evil" is just three words - and one would never see it on their applications or platforms - and inside their free browser, intercept those ads from Moat.com and substitute with their own ads - scary... and the web site owner wouldn't get paid.

Makes one think about why the shinybooks are so low cost compared to WinBooks/MacBooks..

There's been a number of reported incidents where ad-interception has occurred - and that's just as insidious if not more, than ad-blocking on the browser level... and this crosses lines from major broadband providers to equipment OEM's to hospitality/hot spot operater/owners..

Ugly business indeed - and it's one where the site operators and users see the most impact...

 

[L&LD]

I am honestly interested in how much it costs to keep a site like SNB running. Absolute dollars and time investment too. A range is perfectly fine (I am not asking specifically for cost of this site).

From a users perspective; an ad free web is like adding 10 hours to my day. Similar to TV where ads not only break up the content, but actually change the meaning in subtle ways, ads on the net are just wasting my time because similar to thelonelycoder, I never (ever) click on an ad and rarely wait to see an ad load even if I'm ready to buy with cash / cc in my hand.

The other side of that coin has been presented here very effectively and I too would not want this (and many other) site(s) to shut down because of the issues presented here.

On the other hand, I feel like I make a contribution here too though. Nowhere close to the level other regulars are at, of course, but I do take my personal time and best efforts to help where I think I can. I do not think I have seen this discussed so far?

While the main site can remain ad supported for the reasons stated above (many times), I think that having the forums the same is a detriment to the continued growth of the site in general.

As Tim said, it is up to him to decide how to best manage and balance all these diverse needs. But I would like to see the typical hard costs of a typical website like SNB before I can see the relevance of pursuing any one path to keeping the costs covered.

I guess in a way, I am seeing this as a public intranet of sorts. No business would put up with third party ads on their intranet knowingly slowing down their employees productivity.

I have learned a lot from SNB in the past few years and am sure I will continue to learn indefinitely. But I also feel that I have paid back as much as I can too in the form of support, participation and useful and timely replies to many varied forum questions.

Tim himself states that he doesn't read all the forum posts. I don't know about others, but I have read everything posted since before I've joined over two years ago. Even if I don't understand every nuance being discussed in certain posts.

I don't think this is a one sided issue (keep the lights on) at all. There are many aspects to consider and discussing it openly will help all involved today and also future members too.

 

[stevech]

Has something changed recently. I am seeing a lot of lag associated with the Ads painting. It takes 2 or 3 seconds to paint the Ads and then the site responds.

Last Three (3) days here, the SNB forums have a consistent 10-30 second delay from clicking on anything to a page display on my PC.

I don't think it's ad servers slowness. Even clicking on EDIT a post has the same long delay.
And watching the browser status bar, it usually says it's waiting on a response from SNB, not an ad provider.

Feels to me like something terribly wrong with the web host for the forum.

Too slow to be practical.

 

[RMerlin]

Last Three (3) days here, the SNB forums have a consistent 10-30 second delay from clicking on anything to a page display on my PC.

I don't think it's ad servers slowness. Even clicking on EDIT a post has the same long delay.
And watching the browser status bar, it usually says it's waiting on a response from SNB, not an ad provider.

Feels to me like something terribly wrong with the web host for the forum.

Too slow to be practical.

Could it be a DNS issue on your end? If you look at your browser's timeline, can you see where it's getting stuck specifically?

If it's on a specific ad link, that info might be useful to Tim.

If it were a web host issue, then we would all experience it (I don't). Could also be a Cloudflare issue that might only affect visitors hitting a specific node on their network.

 

[stevech]

Very slow response (10-30 seconds on anything I do) from SNB forum has persisted for days now.
Apparently, it's me only. Indeed: I just tried snbforums.com using my Android phone and Verizon LTE.
Given the results, below, I'll reboot this win 7 PC and hope for a hail mary success. Never seen this selective domain sort of problem before.
===========

DNS - No, nslookup was fast. ping snbforums.com is normal, fast...
DNSes I use 4.2.2.2 and backup is 8.8.8.8 (not my ISP's DNS).
DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 4.2.2.2
8.8.8.8

Ping is normal
Pinging snbforums.com [216.14.118.136] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 216.14.118.136: bytes=32 time=68ms TTL=51
Reply from 216.14.118.136: bytes=32 time=67ms TTL=51
Reply from 216.14.118.136: bytes=32 time=67ms TTL=51
Reply from 216.14.118.136: bytes=32 time=68ms TTL=51

speedtest.net test to best server nearby: 62/5Mbps

All my other web activities are normal.
No network/computer changes made here recently. My public IP address hasn't changed (time warner cable modem 60/5Mbps).
tracert seems OK, as follows

Tracing route to snbforums.com [216.14.118.136]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.1.1
2 8 ms 9 ms 8 ms cpe-76-167-224-1.san.res.rr.com [76.167.224.1]
3 30 ms 21 ms 21 ms tge7-2.sndgcaxt02h.socal.rr.com [76.166.9.149]
4 10 ms 11 ms 12 ms agg20.sndhcaax02r.socal.rr.com [72.129.1.88]
5 21 ms 15 ms 23 ms agg22.tustcaft01r.socal.rr.com [72.129.1.2]
6 15 ms 23 ms 15 ms bu-ether16.tustca4200w-bcr00.tbone.rr.com [66.109.6.64]
7 17 ms 15 ms 15 ms 0.ae3.pr1.lax10.tbone.rr.com [107.14.19.56]
8 15 ms 15 ms 16 ms 216.156.65.225.ptr.us.xo.net [216.156.65.225]
9 68 ms 67 ms 67 ms 207.88.13.82.ptr.us.xo.net [207.88.13.82]
10 71 ms 71 ms 67 ms te0-5-4-0.rar3.denver-co.us.xo.net [207.88.12.85]
11 70 ms 75 ms 67 ms te-4-1-0.rar3.chicago-il.us.xo.net [207.88.12.21]
12 67 ms 67 ms 66 ms ae0d0.mcr1.chicago-il.us.xo.net [216.156.0.162]
13 67 ms 67 ms 66 ms 209.117.27.78
14 67 ms 77 ms 67 ms roobidoo.pudai.com [216.14.118.136]

Trace complete.