well i'd rather not since i don't want to be a dick, but this just struck me as a very blatant violation of TOS, and i would've thought someone would've reported it by now. it's not a small dinky site.
actually i am gay so.... yeah whatever. i guess i won't care about it then...it's just weird, i mean surely someone's already reported it
It's pretty lame but how is it against the tos? I must be missing something. All they're doing is stopping people who use ad blockers from getting involved - right?
Happens all the time, even in some big sites. But because they make so much money for Google, Google would never ban them outright. So an email gets sent out, they comply, end of story. /shrug
You're right, same with black hat seo tactics on authority sites. That stuff gets overlooked in many cases.
I always see these types of sites submitted to me, even with no content - just the ads.... What gets me is that the Adsense has (if I'm not mistaken) to see some content?, yet they still show ads..
I reported Amazon.com one time. Those guys are dicks. The girl that handled the email did write back like "you sure are right, those guys are dicks."
I've started a thread about dentists.com doing black hat blatently. That was 1 month ago. They are still doing it. I have also reported it and told Matt Cutts. No answer. My desire is not to get them banned, but rather to get some sort of info on what is acceptable and what isn't.
seriously, i make big bucks with google, so if i did this i'd be ok? i mean why have rules when you apply them loosely depending on which is more lucrative for you (i guess that makes sense though) well whatever.