Re: A stupid question
"In most jurisdictions that's considered fraud."
Then why aren't the ad-slingers being charged with fraud? They're taking good money from their clients. They can show the positive responses they get for the ads they sling and claim that as a benefit they're delivering. But do they make any effort to measure the negative response and show their clients the net balance?
What was being proposed actually benefits the client. Anyone running an adblocker is liable to respond negatively to the ad so if the advertiser gets a zero reaction for his money it's a good deal better than a negative one.