tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16359680173091099532011-07-28T08:06:35.812-07:00This is the mostly random blog of a Geek, Scott "Geekster" Leonard.Scott "Geekster" Leonardnoreply@blogger.comBlogger11100tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635968017309109953.post-87003331612733745282008-04-10T06:01:00.000-07:002008-04-10T06:29:49.113-07:00<span style="font-size:180%;">C</span>oders should all take the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippocratic_oath">Hippocratic oath</a>, and do no harm.<br /><br />I'm finding that many take a different oath, that makes no sense to me. I think it goes something like, <span style="font-style: italic;">"I will do whatever I want, to make sure immediate people around me are happy, for now, regardless of how much harm I cause the client's image, the Internet and the public."</span><br /><br />Today I surfed into a site that closed its doors to me, because I was running <a href="http://noscript.net/">No-Script</a>. Why do I use No-Script? It's just <a href="http://noscript.net/features">safer</a>, so I think it's really <span style="font-weight: bold;">mandatory</span> today.<br /><br />Here is the first glimpse of the <a href="http://morningsentinel.mainetoday.com/news/local/4952592.html">website</a> before their site disables access:<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_qslFag4iADs/R_4Q_9r0YcI/AAAAAAAAAAM/pbun-1vDJrA/s1600-h/quickpeek.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_qslFag4iADs/R_4Q_9r0YcI/AAAAAAAAAAM/pbun-1vDJrA/s320/quickpeek.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5187602511853543874" border="0" /></a><br />And a split second later, users without Javascript enabled get <a href="http://www.mainetoday.com/membercenter/nojscookie.html">this</a>, and the back button is disabled in Firefox:<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_qslFag4iADs/R_4RQtr0YdI/AAAAAAAAAAU/NzrvoNH5Q1A/s1600-h/js.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 321px; height: 85px;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_qslFag4iADs/R_4RQtr0YdI/AAAAAAAAAAU/NzrvoNH5Q1A/s320/js.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5187602799616352722" border="0" /></a>Further inspection indicates that no source data exists unless JS is enabled.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Why would a site do this?</span><br />Sites do this to ensure ads are being viewed, and tracking cookies are being enabled. <span style="font-weight: bold;"></span>Surfers like me will either find a way around it and become annoyed with the website and skip the article altogether. We may even blacklist the domain, thinking it's just annoying, and we may even avoid it in the future.<br /><br />You would be surprised to know how petty and vindictive the general public is when it comes to websites that are broken.<br /><br />You need to get your message out.<br /><br />Bottom line is that if you are designing a website that is going to use Javascript, don't make it mandatory to do so -- come up with another solution if the customer can't use it.<br /><br />Your website can't make money if nobody goes there anymore. Benefit exists from even just showing the page with the ads displayed in a simple format. Brand recognition is a big factor, and it does make sense.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Convincing a customer to click a banner ad sometimes takes a few months of them seeing it! They are not going to see it if you make your audience angry!</span><br /><br />Websites exist to serve the public information. When they refuse to do so, or place stupid conditions on doing so, they are no longer websites -- they are just part of the black hole network.<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1635968017309109953-8700333161273374528?l=phpgeekster.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Scott "Geekster" Leonardnoreply@blogger.com0