I'm sure Michael gets it. No one likes ads but lets be realistic here.
Ars Technica, one of the most popular tech sites ever, tried a purely "premium subscriber"-based approach. Even with a large amount of content and huge reader ship they barely managed to get over 1000 subscribers. They were forced to revert, people simply don't value such content enough to warrant this type of model. See the massively declining newspaper business for another example.
It would be incredibly arrogant to suggest he should change his entire business model on a whim. I'm sure he has already looked at all the options. We are not going to give him an epiphany suggesting something else. Looking at previous attempts of these "other business models" for this type of site it would be (imo) very likely to fail.
It seems far more reasonable (and productive) approach might be to voice concern over the types of ads that make us block them and what would make people reconsider adding Phoronix to your exempt list.
So here are my suggestions:
1) As stated before intelliTXT is essentially my most hated type of ad. It makes copying a passage of text and linking someone a pain and annoyance. Meaning less views for you. Removing them for logged-in forum members is great imo and I appreciate it. However, as someone previously suggested, would it be possible to have a site account linked to your forum account? This way we would not have to log into the forums before viewing an article to remove it? Other ads would still be displayed, obviously.
2) The other thing that (mainly) bothers me is the large ad in the article text which often pushes the content I want out of the way.I just think having an ad here is bad practice, it is usually flashing (and animated) and quite distracting. There are already ads at the top bottom and both sides and combined those do not nearly irritate me as much as this one ad does.
3) Flash. This one is an issue I see other people mentioned also. The animated flash ads that run are both highly distracting and more importantly absolutely destroy battery life. On Linux this issue is worse than anywhere else. I realise this is no fault of your own but it is a big issue for the very people your site targets.
4) Topless ads. Although not a concern for me, this seems to really bother some people. It is clear it would be in your interest to remove anything that risks offending users. Some people have mentioned that they stopped visiting your site at work because of this. I am sure they are not alone. This issue is harming your ad revenue.
My least-hated types of ads:
1) Text (Google ads for example)
2) Static Images
3) If absolutely unavoidable simple, non-flashing animated ads. A static background colour is a must. This alone makes them 1000x more acceptable.
I realise some of these pay revenue on a per click basis and you likely require ads on a per-view basis, but would it not be possible to have more relevant adverts? Technology, games, whatever. This would at least eliminate a large number of adverts people seem to really dislike.
To conclude I'd like to make clear that if i gave the impression I was complaining for the sake of complaining I appologise. I honestly do believe, however, that some of the ads displayed will (and do) put people off using the site. Either in general or in public and it is in both of our interests to have adverts that are both less irritating to the reader (higher chance of returning / viewing the site at work / in public) and provide you with more views (and thus revenue).