Unfortunately he is in vast minority. Only when you start using NoScript or generally paying more attention to your browser's status bar do you start to realise the scale of the ridiculousness.
If I ever ran a media site, I'd redirect noscript users to this:
"We love that you've come to value the great material we provide, but we make money off of advertizers. If you run noscript, that's great! We totally support noscript options for those who purchase a subscription plan."
Comments
You are in the vast minority. A tremendously small percentage of users will actually care about a non-issue like that.
Unfortunately he is in vast minority. Only when you start using NoScript or generally paying more attention to your browser's status bar do you start to realise the scale of the ridiculousness.
If I ever ran a media site, I'd redirect noscript users to this:
"We love that you've come to value the great material we provide, but we make money off of advertizers. If you run noscript, that's great! We totally support noscript options for those who purchase a subscription plan."
Subscriptions would not support the development costs of that.
Ars Technica seems to be doing fine with it. http://arstechnica.com/subscriptions/#features
Doesn't say anything about being JavaScript free. Ads are not the only use of JS you know.