Is the Professional Look Really Better?

J

Jim Cheshire \(JIMCO\)

SmakDaddy said:
I'm a believer in that if you propose to be an educator, or a
supplier to those who need assistance/guidance, that you should at
least have your basic crap together, that you should have, at least,
you're own crap together.

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.jimcoaddins.com

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.google.com
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.asp.net
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.yahoo.com
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.zdnet.com

Looks like you've got a lot of work to do! These are just the ones that I
thought of right off.

FYI, I think you'll find that almost no one cares about this kind of thing
anymore.

--
Jim Cheshire
JIMCO
http://www.jimcoaddins.com

Now offering templates ranging from
affordable standard templates to
powerful e-commerce applications!
 
J

Jim Cheshire \(JIMCO\)

Windsun said:
Right - but they also won't see the email address.

Whew! We finally have a part of this thread that doesn't include all the
pompous blow hards in alt.*. :)

JIMCO will be releasing a new add-in soon that will mask e-mail addresses.
Keep an eye out!

--
Jim Cheshire
JIMCO
http://www.jimcoaddins.com

Now offering templates ranging from
affordable standard templates to
powerful e-commerce applications!
 
K

Kathleen Anderson

I used this one: http://www.healyourchurchwebsite.com/obfuscator/ but was
told it didn't work for SBC/Yahoo users who read their email using SBC's
"browser."


--
~ Kathleen Anderson
Microsoft MVP - FrontPage
Spider Web Woman Designs
web: http://www.spiderwebwoman.com/resources/
blog: http://msmvps.com/spiderwebwoman/category/321.aspx


Windsun said:
I use this one, which semi-encrypts it. Have not seen an email bot yet that
can figure it out, but it does stop anyone with Javas turned off from
seeing it. http://automaticlabs.com/cgi-bin/index.cgi

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
G

Greywyvern

I resell them. I get 20% of that which means $6.00 if someone buys a
$30.
Most templates are $15 at most, and 99% of people don't come to my site
for
templates. You seem to be stuck on that page yourself, but it's a very
small part of my site.

I wonder how many other people never manage to make it to the rest of your
site because a) they aren't using IE, or b) they have disabled Javascript.
Well, at the sake of making you look like an ignorant ass, in order to
download a product from me, you have to enter your name and e-mail
address.
At that point, a cookie is sent in the response so that you don't have to
enter the information twice. I am counting a unique downloader as one
person downloading one or more add-ins once. I don't count anyone twice.

Allow me to correct your faulty line of implied reasoning. Above, you say
that you can tell each unique person who downloads from you; which you
follow up by explaining you obtain a name and email address from each
downloader. In the sections of OP you conveniently snip from your reply,
you go on to mention you get 10,000 unique visitors a week.

You're not seriously telling me you get 10,000 names and emails in your
inbox every week, are you? If you did, I'd say your were full of shite.
No, of course. I must've understood you wrong. So tell me, of those
10,000 unique visitors you get each week, what's your rate of turnover?
eg. how many unique downloaders do you get. You *said* you counted them.
Considering the fact that you've proven yourself to be pretty ignorant in
such areas, no.

I'm only a messenger. You called me a liar; I then proved that this
accusation was false; to which you replied that you didn't care one way or
the other to begin with.

You see, that's the fundamental difference between you and me. I *know*
I'm ignorant. I know a few things for certain, but I know there is far
more that I *don't* know than that I do. It is painfully obvious to me
that the collective knowledge of the human race dwarfs any level of
learning I can hope to attain.

You, on the other hand, are quite content to wallow in your ignorance,
certain you know everything you need to know, and suddenly I'm of a mind
to just let you continue.

Goodbye, Jim, and good luck with your site.

Grey
 
G

Greywyvern

[referring to web standards]
FYI, I think you'll find that almost no one cares about this kind of
thing anymore.

Isn't that why you need FrontPage as a crutch?

The purpose of the web is interoperability, and without stadards that goal
is unreachable. For too long, the varying goals of different browser
manufacturers meant that broken code reached the widest audience of visual
browser users. From the validation examples you posted, it's obvious this
mind-set still prevails.

However, let's hear you sing that tune in five years. The push for
validation, especially in newly opening web design occupations, is
growing. You'll likely deny that though.

It is only within *your* communities: the FrontPage users, the hobby
coders, the template makers; for which the apathy to validate is growing.

Grey
 
S

SmakDaddy

Jim Cheshire (JIMCO) said:
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.google.com
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.asp.net
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.yahoo.com
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.zdnet.com

Looks like you've got a lot of work to do! These are just the ones that I
thought of right off.

FYI, I think you'll find that almost no one cares about this kind of thing
anymore.

--
Jim Cheshire
JIMCO
http://www.jimcoaddins.com

Now offering templates ranging from
affordable standard templates to
powerful e-commerce applications!

You may be right.
With a template, a WYSIWYG editor and some webspace, nearly anyone can be an
authority on web standards.

I'm not saying the Validator is an endall, it's a tool to check your work.
The Goo and Yhoo, like many sites won't ever completely validate, it's
impossible to do so, especially with bespoke code, etc.

It is a tool though, and a valuable one.
To offhandly discount standards and basics really just shows -----

Well, never mind. It's probably a lost cause anyway ;)

Hey, good luck with your site and your 10's of thousands of customers and
contacts you have ;)
 
T

Toby Inkster

Jim said:
Wrong guess, but this is a great example of what I'm talking about!

Well IP address guessing seemed the most obvious route for a lamer like
yourself to take.

So you go down the Cookie path instead. Go to my browser, hit F12. Cookies
disabled.
Maybe you need to be a programmer to really understand how to look beyond
the basics.

http://tobyinkster.co.uk/Software/linux/steg/steg-encode.pl
http://tobyinkster.co.uk/Software/linux/steg/steg-decode.pl
http://tobyinkster.co.uk/password-scripts
 
J

Jim Cheshire \(JIMCO\)

Rob said:
Sheesh, when are we gonna Plonk the alt.oids?

This was interesting about 60 msgs ago, now it's the same old boring
crap.

You'd think they're webs were fantastic by their posts but they
arent..although Grey's site does look kinda nice...the others I've
looked at look like they were designed for Lynx.

Plonktime for the alt.oids imo.

Yeah, I've plonked them. It was fun for a while, but now they've abandoned
all logic so it's just annoying. :)

--
Jim Cheshire
JIMCO
http://www.jimcoaddins.com

Now offering templates ranging from
affordable standard templates to
powerful e-commerce applications!
 
W

William Tasso

That's just so laughable to me...
Humility would suit ...
others who are flaming ...
do you have a personalized ...

There it is again. Is there really any need to make a technical
discussion about web sites into a bum sniffing contest?

Is it too much to hope that this attitude is not characteristic of all the
folk crossing the divide from but
rather is merely a lone voice.
 
W

Windsun

Speaking of lamers...

I think we have seen enough of this:

"> Well IP address guessing seemed the most obvious route for a lamer like
yourself to take."

If you cannot express yourself without name calling, then please go troll
elsewhere.
 
C

CarolW.

Are you sure you're not just trying to get the last word? ;)

Nah, my # of posts in this thread are far lower in number than can be
said of the ones indeed trying to get "the last word". Above I was
simply responding to someone's complaint and the faulty logic shared
in their complaint.

But by all means, please continue - I find this thread humorous.
*settles back in seat with my cup of coffee* Last I recall you were up
to sending out of cookies, being new in templates, and having 10,000
hits a week - right? :)

Carol
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top