Consider not asking people to whitelist your site.
Per the Oath terms of service, section 8a, linked to at the bottom of your site, "you" takes zero responsibility for the hosting of harmful advertisements on your site and any and all damages harmful ads may cause your site users, including but not limited to compromised site-related data and local infections on personal computers resulting in loss of data security or even damage to hardware.
I understand that money needs to be made to keep the power going, and I likewise understand that asking that people whitelist your site is much more tolerable than sites like Forbes trying to force viewers outright to disable ad blocking software. At the same time I question the morality of saying, "Hey, we need money so you shouldn't use protection, but you can't hold us responsible if you catch something either" when 100% of the PC infections I've dealt with in the last 15 years have come from compromised ads on otherwise reputable websites.
Thanks for the feedback. I understand your point. Our intent of the ad blocker detection and the messaging was, as you mentioned, designed to let our readers know that ads help us keep the lights on and we wanted to be very transparent in that messaging. We also wanted to give users a choice in the matter. I can understand your concerns about viruses and would encourage you to do what you feel is prudent. In any case, we appreciate your readership and hope you continue to visit even with ad blocking on. Thanks.