Overall, Jim, I certainly applaud your reasonable rationale, which makes me want to support your work and ensure that you are compensated for it. The problem seems to be a technical one, and one with the culture of the ad-supported web. The problem is that the ad-world has become so odious that there isn't simply an easy way to disable ad-block specifically for your content, be shown a very reasonable sort of advertising and not have to worry about tracking objects and other sorts of privacy-invasion, and go about my merry way.
Unfortunately, this doesn't seem to be possible. I am a strong believer in personal privacy, and I take offense that advertising on the Internet has evolved into something truly horrible - a data mining, privacy-invading, all-encompassing tracking machine designed to leech every real and supposed metric about the viewer to be correlated and sold off to what seems like the least sort of ethical process imaginable.
The ads being blocked aren't simple banners that proffer a product any longer, and that's it! Google is the best example here in many ways - they have some excellent content and tools, and if it was like the early days of Gmail, when you saw a single banner of AdWords (pulled from keywords in that particular email, without trying to profile you etc..) in exchange for best-in-class email, I'd have no problem "paying" in this way. However, we are in a world (or at least, some countries, such as the USA) where what you browse and what these entities learn of you if tracked, might be sold to anyone from targeted advertisers to health insurers who want to find out if you're frequenting cancer survivor or chronic illness websites. Aggregate data of certain groups can be harmful in this regard as well.
I highly suggest that everyone who is at least somewhat of a proficient web-user and wishes to protect their privacy, just to see how deep this rabbit hole goes, use FireFox as their browser (The free and open source web browser designed for the user, not data miners) along with the following addons - AdBlock Plus (or AdBlock Edge), NoScript, Disconnect, Disconnect Search, HTTPS Everywhere, BetterPrivacy, Self Destructing Cookies, and Lightbeam. Lightbeam especially is a good visualization of just how much info and tracking is shared between different sites, and how things you did at one corner of the internet will follow you.
To get back to Jim's request, for someone who has some of these addons, note that The Escapist has just a ton of advertising and tracking scripts. Right now, just right here on this comment page, on NoScript and/or Disconnect I see...
Several Google and Facebook trackers (This includes things like +1/Like buttons that are still tracking you if not blocked)
GoogleAnalytics
Quantcast
Viglink
eXelate
Nielsen
ComScore
DoubleClick
Blockmetrics
ScorecardResearch
SolveMetrics (the capchas that advertise!)
This says nothing for "LSO", otherwise known as "flash supercookies" which are deposited by the vast majority of flash-using videos and are basically hidden and can only be removed with the use of specific tools, like BetterPrivacy.
This is just a sample of what one finds on a site like the escapist, and because I have some scripts and whatnot blocked, that means that there are likely a ton more that would be loaded if their precursors were allowed to load! Many of these networks aren't just about presenting visual advertising, but tracking you. Where I'd happily disable my ad-blocker to see a few seconds of an ad onscreen before the video for Jim to get paid, it just isn't that easy when all these networks abound. It requires significantly more work to "clean up" after you let these invading trackers in (especially if you don't have specialized tools to do so), and if you have a website that you frequent that uses a variety of trackers or ad-networks, you open yourself to the possibilities of dynamic intrusions if you give said website's advertising carte blanche.
It is a sad state of affairs that today's web is infested with this sort of monetization, and it has been allowed to not only become a profitable factor, but often the MOST profitable factor for many sites and operations. Remember what I said before about Google, how I used to "pay" for Gmail during the invite-only days with a single block of ad-words that didn't data mine everything to kingdom come? Hell, today I still like many of Google's applications - and I'd pay an amount per year to have access to the entire suite of Google products and services with the legal promise that in exchange for my subscription fee, Google wouldn't gather any of my personal or usage data and my privacy would be protected. Unfortunately, I don't have this option. Why? Because the monied interests out there who thrive on this pathogenic ad system profit so much, and as we've discovered "Don't Be Evil" only extends as far as the all-mighty dollar, sadly. I'm sure somewhere there's a list of how much revenue per user Google makes on each user (not counting all the tracking done of non-registered users, which is tracked and profitable just as well), and I am pretty sure that it wouldn't be a number that most people would be willing, and many not even able, to pay as a subscription fee.
While I think some issues will only be solved via privacy legislation I think what we all can do for now, content creators and viewers alike, is work together to A) cut out the middle-man when possible and 2) Demand that distributors, site owners, and advertising networks act more ethically. Just in the same way that viewers and creators loudly said no to old-school pop-up ads and BonzaiBuddy, we need to demand that even when there is advertising on the web, that users are informed the exact amount of that "cost", and don't have to worry about metrics, data mining and sales, and other forms of privacy invasions when they choose to view ads and want to support the site. Make the whole situation less offensive to the viewer, and more, especially the privacy conscious, will be willing to take down their blockers. However, as things stand right now, even those that actively consider doing so, most likely won't be able to.