Opened on 10/16/2014 at 09:00:37 AM

Closed on 10/22/2014 at 03:23:22 PM

#1480 closed change (fixed)

Acceptable Ads page should be updated with new proposal timeframe

Reported by: arthur Assignee: greiner
Priority: P1 Milestone:
Module: Websites Keywords:
Cc: greiner Blocked By:
Blocking: Platform: Unknown
Ready: yes Confidential: no
Tester: Verified working: no
Review URL(s):

Description (last modified by arthur)


Currently on it says

  1. We submit the whitelisting proposal in the forum. Subsquently, the community has a period of approximately one week in order to declare concerns if and when the candidate does not meet the requirements.
  2. If there are no valid concerns, we will add the ads to our whitelist. The ads will then be shown to Adblock Plus users with default settings.

What to change

Since whitelists will now be added directly and users are able to give feedback in the proposal topic at any time, it should be changed.


  1. We submit the whitelisting proposal in the forum and the ads are whitelisted at the same time. The topic will stay open in order for the community to declare concerns if and when the candidate does not meet the requirements.

There is a typo in "Subsequently".

Attachments (0)

Change History (6)

comment:1 Changed on 10/16/2014 at 09:41:38 AM by greiner

  • Cc greiner added

It might be considered out of scope for this issue but I think we should also explain what happens if there are valid concerns. Elaborating on what is considered a valid concern might also help since this has been misunderstood in the past.

comment:2 Changed on 10/16/2014 at 09:48:22 AM by arthur

  • Description modified (diff)

comment:3 Changed on 10/22/2014 at 12:24:24 PM by greiner

As mentioned in my previous comment I'd suggest the following addition:

"5. If there are valid concerns within the first 30 days we will take the ads immediately off the whitelist. For valid concerns raised after those 30 days we will work together with the website operators to eliminate existing issues or take them off the whitelist if this fails."

I'd be willing to work on that as soon as I got feedback on my suggestion.

comment:4 Changed on 10/22/2014 at 12:33:54 PM by till

@greiner: I like it. However, those are separate issues and we probably need to get legal involved here. For example we a) may need to adjust our contracts accordingly, and b) we may be required to remove violations faster once we are aware of them to guarantee treating everyone the same. I'm not sure, but I would be surprised if our antitrust lawyers won't have any comments.

So lets fix this ticket now and work on your addendum afterwards.

comment:5 Changed on 10/22/2014 at 12:48:33 PM by greiner

  • Owner set to greiner
  • Review URL(s) modified (diff)

comment:6 Changed on 10/22/2014 at 03:23:22 PM by greiner

  • Resolution set to fixed
  • Status changed from new to closed

Add Comment

Modify Ticket

Change Properties
as closed .
The resolution will be deleted. Next status will be 'reopened'.
to The owner will be changed from greiner.
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.