Well, I object to the analogy between stealing physical objects and viewing content - the harm of theft (and it’s definition in the criminal code) is depriving another person of property; we forget that in favour of a notion of theft that is focused on the rights to wealth rather than harm done. Plus, likening people to thieves (like those old anti-satelite TV “theft” ads) is a spectacularly bad way to get them to cooperate. I feel like the whole conversation needs to be reframed.
I do agree with the basic idea, though. By the time I’ve seen a thing that says, “disable adblock before using our site” and I have chosen not to do it, I’m, clearly going against their wishes and I agree that’s not really the right thing to do. I’m escalating rather than de-escalating an adversarial situation. I probably had a bad choice of words with “very inclined to do so” when I should have said, “very tempted to do so.” It’s something I have done, but I don’t make a habit of it.
But the flip side of that is that I stand with people who actually do do that, if any such people really exist. Most of the time if I went around circumventing people’s modal dialogues instead of just not using their site, I think I would just be a jerk. If someone else is doing it, I can imagine many non-jerk motives on their behalf.
