Go to Page... |
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
04-16-09, 06:57 PM | #541 | |
Point 4, the most important one, is due to the nature of how things were setup. I don't why people wanted to opt-out of WM's list. It's how I found and installed add-ons. If WM didn't have it, I request "support" for it, and generally didn't install it. Heck, I've actually intentionally removed add-ons WM didn't "support" in favor of ones they did. For opting out, this is two sided. One side on WM, naturally. They should have had a way, through their contact form, to opt-out of support. Did you try that route? Did it go on deaf ears with WoWI's attempt to contact them? Issue 2 and 3 are related. I'll grasp them together; modifying add-ons to change content is bad, with the exception of *user initiated* requests. The only TOC update I knew WM did was "update all my add-ons." This is user initiated request. This isn't WM's fault. Maybe their fault for buggy code, but in those cases you can easily just blame WM for improperly editing your files. The best part of this here; You can completely drop support yourself! The moment you find a bug that is definite WM related, you could immediately pass the buck, "Sorry, WM edited those files. I can't fix it or support it." Pass the buck. I do it all the time at work. ^_^ |
||
04-16-09, 07:00 PM | #542 | |
Simply put, if they had shown they were interested in providing a wonderful tool to the community as a whole, the community would have embraced it. Instead they proved that they would pursue any means possible to get content for their program, regardless of what the people providing that content had to say about it.
__________________
I have reached enlightment. Thank you bacon! |
||
04-16-09, 07:01 PM | #543 | |
I've seen these arguments over and over again. The end result has always been the technology side winning. You can't block people. You can't force them to pay. The only thing you have control over are your own files/sites. |
||
04-16-09, 07:04 PM | #544 | |
Now, lets take your example. It sounds good. At first, I completely agreed with it, but then realized now you're sending even MORE issues out, in the way of Blizzard! Now the box gets auto-checked, and the user's will start complaining to blizzard for broken game UI (which they do already -- they'll be doing even more so now when the box gets checked without them physically doing it with their own mouse). Problems both ways. I know. Only real solution is not having the option at all in WM. But, again, this is a convenience thing. Doesn't the Curse Client have this option, too? |
||
04-16-09, 07:05 PM | #545 | |
* I renamed my addon folder because I didn't want WM to **** with my code. * I copied a few select addons over to the addons folder to see how it would handle them * Launch WM, see that it cannot download the updates * Every single addon in the OTHER folder had it's TOC number updated BAD BAD BAD! Big flashing red lights! You *don't* do that **** automatically. As I said above, you shouldn't be do it at all. Those numbers have a meaning, wiping them out makes them completely pointless. If you want to load the addons, turn on the option in the game... which can be done by WM with a siple edit of a text file for the user.
__________________
I have reached enlightment. Thank you bacon! |
||
04-16-09, 07:07 PM | #546 | |
The problem might seem the same so long as the user is using WM, but what heppens when they remove it? If WM was checking the box, nothing really. You uncheck the box and things are how they would have been without WM. WM edits TOCs? Well it just blew away all that information and made the value entirely pointless. The game may as well just stop checking the number, because changing it without ensuring the addon works with that version makes the value meaningless. It's something only the author should do.
__________________
I have reached enlightment. Thank you bacon! Last edited by Tekkub : 04-16-09 at 07:10 PM. |
||
04-16-09, 07:13 PM | #547 | |
|
||
04-16-09, 07:23 PM | #548 | ||||
Edit #3: After reading the article you linked, your point is taken a little better. The article points more to the fact the newspapers won't be missed/needed, though, which is not the point -I- took from your wording. Also, in my "maybe they should" above, to be more specific, I mean -all- newspapers, internet driven as well as paper.
Edit#2: They didn't take the site down, if they did, we wouldn't be having this conversation, here.
That is exactly what they did, protect their site/files that people entrusted them to protect. You are looking at this website as just that... a run of the mill website. I can assure you from my personal experience it is much more than that. If you hang around long enough, you'll see this. As will any of the other WM proponents, if they choose to participate and not just bring unfounded opinions or attacks. BTW, I've had two posts deleted in this very thread, so they are stopping both sides from the attacks, not just those that oppose them. I'm sorry I made them have to delete my posts, by myself bringing in personal attacks, even if they were general in direction. I like you, you make me think, but that doesn't mean I have to agree with you . Edit: I said "If you hang around long enough", to someone with a 2005 join date. This isn't meant to be insulting, but I'm really surprised that you think of this site in such a generic manner. Last edited by Yhor : 04-16-09 at 09:20 PM. Reason: Clarification x3 |
|||||
04-16-09, 07:26 PM | #549 | |
Good example: TBC. Blizzard changed the behavior of the load outdated here a tiny bit, due to the major changes. Addons with TOCs that were too old were marked as "incompatible" instead of "out of date". They did that for a very good reason. Mass TOC updating breaks that, and loads old untested addons that were very likely to break in spectacular ways. Don't apologize though, you actually got me thinking about things here. I have found a simple way to stop it from happening with my addons for the most part. Going to update my packaging script before my next release batch. Sure, it can be worked around just as easily as I can set it, but I just tested and it at least stops WM from screwing with my addon's TOC files
__________________
I have reached enlightment. Thank you bacon! Last edited by Tekkub : 04-16-09 at 07:30 PM. |
||
04-16-09, 07:34 PM | #550 | |
WM just "did it". No questions asked, no revenue to the host, no credit to the author. Nothing. It's not the same thing, not even remotely. And if newspapers want to keep google out, they can. It's easy, it's something they can put on the page HTML to keep the spiders off. Did you ever wonder why didn't they use that option? Because google brings them visitors. It's that simple. And with hits, they can profit... profit is good. |
||
04-16-09, 07:35 PM | #551 | |
But I see your point there. |
||
04-16-09, 07:42 PM | #552 | |
And considering you put forth that effort, you're much more likely to track down the author and report any errors that you do get.
__________________
I have reached enlightment. Thank you bacon! |
||
04-16-09, 09:00 PM | #553 | ||
I'll also point out that if you browse around the forums here, there are (now defunct) posts about authors contacting WoWM asking that their work be removed, and WoWM ignoring them or refusing. It seems however, we are in agreement that there should at least have been an opt-out option. I do feel, at least for the non-OSI compatible addons they should have asked first, or at the very least sent a notification the author's way saying it had been added, with instructions on how to opt-out, but an opt-out by itself would have been acceptable (to me).
|
|||
04-16-09, 11:07 PM | #554 | |
Check it out yourself, ask your ad network manager to look into it for you. |
||
04-16-09, 11:17 PM | #555 | |
What you describe makes sense for any generic ad provider. It can be shown that WoWI has special consideration given the obvious non-generic ads floating around the site, such as the occasional screen-wide ad on the front page (I don't know the real term for it). Those aren't provided by generic services.
__________________
たしかにひとつのじだいがおわるのお ぼくはこのめでみたよ だけどつぎがじぶんおばんだってことわ しりたくなかったんだ It's my turn next. Shakespeare liked regexes too! /(bb|[^b]{2})/ |
||
04-17-09, 02:41 AM | #556 | |
__________________
|
||
04-17-09, 06:06 AM | #557 |
I wish people would put themselves into WoWi and Curse's shoes.
They have spent years setting up sites for addons FREE for the community. The ad revenue they do get goes toward paying for their bandwidth. Not everyone uses ad blockers and they have a few premium members who help pay the cost. They have put many hours into their sites for the community. Say it was your sites and WM was using your bandwidth with no way for you to get compensated for the use so you have the extra cost with no compensation. Wouldn't you do something to stop their access? I know I would. I have been using WoWi for many years and have gotten to know a few of them over here. I have seen them bend over backwards for people and yet when they blocked WM they got slammed. They provide a FREE service to the community. Just because WM had something nice does not mean they were supposed to have something. I cannot imagine the cost of the bill for the bandwidth. Their bandwidth usage went down 50% after they blocked WM. They were up more than down vs last patch when you could never connect to the site for 3 days, yet this time there were only small outages. They provide the service to people yet get slammed when they try to protect their sites from going bankrupt. Sorry but that is just wrong.
__________________
Bouvi WoWi Member since June 2005 and darn proud of it! |
|
04-17-09, 07:13 AM | #558 |
Prior to reading much of this I had no knowledge of the issues with wowmatrix. That said, I used them because I run a mac and the other ways of downloading adds did not work for me. I do believe in supporting addons that work well for me and have done so for my favorite. I just wish there was a better way to update and install adds that would actually work under Leopard.
|
|
04-17-09, 11:10 AM | #559 |
I'm slightly amazed at both the hate for and against WM.
Personally, I'm in agreement with Tek. The alteration of files is a big no-no for a mass distribution center such as WM was trying to be. I, however, am guilty of downloading mods and uploading them to my UniAdmin page, so I can get my addons from any machine I'm at. But I am not guilty for the stated deep-linking that WM is charged with. I, like many others, manually download addons, and when the servers are hit hard, I feel it just as bad. While I dislike the Curse website (general statement of design and navigation, not a dislike of Curse as a whole), I agree that everyone should be on the same page when it comes to stopping malicious behavior. Bandwidth should be given to the individual who comes to the website, not some script that gets initiated by the push of a button. |
|
04-17-09, 06:08 PM | #560 | |
In the end, I'm siding with Google here. But it is indeed a detailed backstory. I've read and followed TechDirt for several years. So, naturally, my mindset is a slanted in favor of what TechDirt thinks. What can I say? Since day one, I've agreed with them. I couldn't help but follow and agree with a good 95% of what they said (I, personally, have had very few disagreements, but there have been a few). Everything I've mentioned here, the thought process and mind set, has been in result of what I've learned from TechDirt. "Morality" arguments have been all expunged. I now look at things in the mind set of "logical business decision" than "legally (or morally) right." As we've seen to be beating a dead horse, I, like many others have seen, will be laying this to rest. I hope to see new ideas and new process in the coming months from WoWI. In the mean time, I may need to install Proxomitron to get around the WM block. *grin* *Or not. I can't believe it.; You've implemented CAPTCHA. Now that is quite the extreme route. I kinda hinted that above. A reason for implementing captcha - insure you're human. But captcha is also a massive turn-off for anonymous downloads (it falls in line of requiring registration). I didn't think you'd take that route. Interesting measures. I have to say, the more I dissect WM, the more I dislike it. It seems a connection to their server, speednoc.com, is absolutely necessary. WM says "Offline" even though its clearly getting data from the server from my requests. It's like it's ignoring the returns it gets back from *my* requests and relying on their wdb.gz files for its information, even though it's clearly making an HTTP request call for each of my add-ons. /sigh, and I thought I was going to be able to out-smart the blocks. The potential is definitely there, but the design of WM makes it improvable. Last edited by guice : 04-17-09 at 07:20 PM. |
||
WoWInterface » Site Forums » News » WoWInterface and Curse working together to help protect authors and other site-users |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode |
Switch to Hybrid Mode |
Switch to Threaded Mode |
|
|