Yahoo is locking people out of their email if they use ad blockers

A well-known product or service seems to require some "large" number of consumers to become so popular, and also to stay relevant. The question is, do all of the people in that "large" audience need to be paying customers? What percentage of free users is a safe percentage?

The problem I see is that organizations assume 100% of users must act exactly the same way, and some very user-hostile things are done to ensure that. Each hostile act alienates some percentage of the audience. Sometimes, it's accidental: one day, it's improperly implemented copy-protections that accuse paying customers of being thieves; and here, maybe someone's family member installs an ad-blocker that screws another family member out of E-mail access because the 2nd person doesn't know how to turn off the "ad-blocker" that he's being accused of using.

At some point, enough users of a product are alienated that the remainder is no longer the magic "large" number that is required to keep the product popular, and the product itself starts to fade into obscurity. Businesses have to stop this 100%-our-way-or-the-highway nonsense and just focus on making something really good that people want to use.

I don't like this at all. As makecheck said, not all users are the same. Me for example, I am 100% willing to disable my ad blocker for two reasons:

1) if support the website

2) if the ads that I see do not interfere with using the site.

There are way too mane websites that allow (or don't disallow) ads with fake download buttons, or banner videos, popups, and other content that slows down the site and makes it incredibly difficult to use.

Don't block content because of ad blocks, how about improving ads instead?