I dropped my subscription to the NYT a bit more than a year ago due to just this kind of blocking silliness. I like to be able to share articles I read with others, and if I have to get an archive.is/ph link anyway to do so, why should I be paying to read it first myself? If the value of eyeballs on articles is mainly to serve ads, and adblocking is an issue, then I'd say charging a subscription to try to make up for it (which it doesn't according to their own numbers) is kind of going in the wrong direction.
I gather that the NYT itself thinks that "News" as a product is a dying market and is why they are putting most of their time/effort/money into building up the Games and Recipes subscriptions. I wonder if that isn't a fatal case of mission creep.