Ars Technica editor-in-chief Ken Fisher, following up on a failed experiment in blocking users of ad-blocking software from the site:

As ad revenues go down, many sites are lured into running advertising of a truly questionable nature. We've all seen it happen. I am very proud of the fact that we routinely talk to you guys in our feedback forum about the quality of our ads. I have proven over 12 years that we will fight on the behalf of readers whenever we can. Does that mean that there are the occasional intrusive ads, expanding this way and that? Yes, sometimes we have to accept those ads. But any of you reading this site for any significant period of time know that these are few and far between. We turn down offers every month for advertising like that out of respect for you guys. We simply ask that you return the favor and not block ads.

I work for a web site that like Ars is part of an old-media conglomerate, that depends on ad revenue to survive, and this is a real thing. It doesn't matter if you think web sites should or shouldn't be ad supported. It doesn't matter if you think we're idiots who need to be forced to find a better, more sustainable business model. When you block ads, you are costing people money they can't afford to lose.

And I should also say, about those annoying expandable ads Fisher refers to, that when Ars turns those down they are leaving a lot of money on the table in order to ensure a quality product. That's really awesome.