As an aside there are some things here that don't make sense.
Principal among those concerns LarryO's original aversion to dumping Imagetwist as it would lessen "traffic" on this forum. Since most of that traffic in the pictures section is the social media vomitorium (which moderators then clear because most of it is rule and guideline breaching crap)it's difficult to see what real difference dumping Imagetwist would make UNLESS the traffic is the amount of postings and not what we keep.
If that's the case then it's in admin's best interest to maintain the status quo in which case all that really matters to us who have to deal with this is that ads are not aggressive (and believe me what they claim and what actually happens are very different things) and contain no scripts, code or redirects.
What everyone is forgetting whether by accident or design is that removing Imagetwist would not mean no paid hosts, since LarryO has already made it clear in another thread that IT would have to be replaced by another paid host in order to keep traffic levels up. If that happens then we will in all probability see absolutely no reduction in flood posting of crap and would likely have to deal with a whole new set of aggressive ad policies all over again.
So, since we know no paid hosts is not an option, the real question is do we stick with the devil we know in a circumstance where this forum now has an element of control or do with go with the entire unknown? At this point, as I see it, removing Imagetwist is less about solving problems than it is dumping a host we've all come to despise for different reasons. It doesn't get rid of the ugly rashof cash-whore posters. It just shifts it to another limb.
Not my pitch, not my ball, and likely my last tuppence. Do as you will.
BOC
