Register - Login
Views: 99848564
Main - Memberlist - Active users - Calendar - Wiki - IRC Chat - Online users
Ranks - Rules/FAQ - Stats - Latest Posts - Color Chart - Smilies
05-04-22 05:12:54 AM
Jul - Computers and Technology - Web design pet peeves New poll - New thread - New reply
Pages: 1 2Next newer thread | Next older thread
paulguy

Green Birdo
Level: 93


Posts: 984/2294
EXP: 8033060
For next: 19750

Since: 09-14-07

From: Buffalo, NY

Since last post: 9.7 years
Last activity: 9.7 years

Posted on 09-22-10 04:58:33 AM Link | Quote
Paulguy's Post configuration
Originally posted by Shadic
White webpages.

*Shadic is racist.*

Basically, HH covered it all. I just dislike that I have to use Stylish to avoid burning out my eyes.


White is OK if it's just the browser default, but not if the stupid page set the background to white, but assumes text is black without setting it.

But yeah, I prefer dark themes with light text, but it doesn't look "professional". Stupid paper analogy to everything. Monitors should be viewed with light text on a dark background. It's how things starte and the way it should've stayed. But I guess it started with making things marketable to businesses or publishing stuff that work with paper documents a lot (xerox), so they just had to make the rest of the UI "appear" as paper. Probably was fine on older color crts that weren't too bright, but on modern LCDs and later CRTs, it's hell.

____________________
Rena
I had one (1) message in Discord deleted and proceeded to make a huge, huge mess about how it was a violation of free speech and how moderators are supposed to be spam janitors and nobody should have the right to tell me not to talk about school shootings
Level: 135


Posts: 3648/5390
EXP: 29078040
For next: 256965

Since: 07-22-07

Pronouns: he/him/whatever
From: RSP Segment 6

Since last post: 343 days
Last activity: 343 days

Posted on 09-22-10 05:00:04 AM Link | Quote
09-22-10 12:00:04 AM
Post #3648
Originally posted by Metal_Man88
Hordes of "Tweet this" "Facebook this" "Digg this" buttons. Not only do we not need all those buttons, but some of us prefer to use old-fashioned word of mouth.
I never use those. Not only is it generally easier to copy the URL into IRC or Twitter, they like to use some lame message that looks like an ad and/or doesn't let me explain what is interesting about the page, and who knows what they're doing with the reference info.

Harassing users with REGISTERED USER ONLY CONTENT, if it's a site which has no business doing this. One of the worst offenders was DetStar.com , which closed down shortly afterwards, since nobody's payin' a fistful of dollars to see lame SSB:M cheat codes.
I always laugh at the idea of paying for registration on a website. I've yet to see one worth paying for. Maybe some porn sites if you really surf a lot of porn, but then, if you surf that much you've probably found plenty for free.

And yes the whole requiring registration to view links/download attachments/view profiles/view anything just fails. If I can't find the content elsewhere or a working BugMeNot account I'll generally make up a fake account, use it once for whatever I need, submit to BMN. Unfortunately that service also is pretty broken with allowing just anyone to look up all the accounts without even a CAPTCHA, and with allowing sites to be removed just by request, so it's become significantly less useful. (You think they might get the hint when they're going through blocking all these accounts and new ones keep popping up... )

The ones that let you view a few pages before (usually with no warning) springing it on you are almost always cookie-based, though.

Originally posted by Supakitsune
I can agree with you for the most part, but...
Originally posted by Rena
[...]multiple Flash files (each having to be loaded in series) where one should have been. (I'm looking at you, MSPA.)
...Um. What? Are you saying that you want all the Flash animations to be in one gigantic SWF file? Yeah, good luck not exploding every MSPA reader's computer. Including Andrew Hussie himself, I'm sure.
A properly-designed system should be able to easily avoid this problem by dynamically loading content and unloading it when you move to the next (but "properly designed web content" and "MSPA" are practically opposites), but specifically I'm referring to at least one case where you load a Flash animation, watch it, click Next, and.... load another Flash animation. And a few where you have to try to watch the animation and read the text below at the same time. (Hope you've got a tall screen.) Multiple sequential animations and corresponding text should be easily combined into one, with a play button, so we can just let it load and go get a snack instead of having to pause halfway through to load the next.

Also: Every "file hosting/sharing" site ever made is designed to annoy, and some do it pretty well. Extension: every site that uses CAPTCHAs to annoy instead of to actually separate bots from people.

____________________



[loading witty comment...]
Leroy
Member
Level: 19


Posts: 57/60
EXP: 30501
For next: 5276

Since: 07-18-10


Since last post: 11.6 years
Last activity: 11.1 years

Posted on 09-22-10 05:36:29 PM Link | Quote
Originally posted by Xkeeper
Originally posted by Leroy
Originally posted by paulguy
Forums that require registration just to view links in posts, evennif they link to an external domain.

Originally posted by Terra
I never understood why so many board systems require you to log in to view user profiles.

It's a certain kind of privacy. I for one don't like board profiles and such popping up in search results on Google because I once registered at the place. Even though I don't visit any 'weird' websites, I don't want people to be able to see where ever I go. Of course, restricting the whole profile / board to registered and logged in users is a little drastic. Using something as simple as a robots.txt file is already sufficient to prevent the majority of crawlers / spyders from indexing specific parts of your website.

Except people can tell from your posts, unless you want to have those hidden, too.

The idea is plainly retarded either way. Use a robots.txt file if you don't want people searching your forum's profiles, or (for the users) just leave your profile with stuff people can't trace back to you.

Human readers can tell whether it's you or not, reading the posts. The thing is, people need to end up at the forum in the first place to do so. Profile pages tend to mention 'real names', causing crawlers and spyders to index the concerning page, in the end making the real name actually search-able for the whole Internet.

____________________
Leroy and Dunja are going down under! =)
Aerakin
Ye Olde Layout
Level: 98


Posts: 2128/2550
EXP: 9476704
For next: 177649

Since: 07-06-07

From: From the future

Since last post: 8.0 years
Last activity: 1.2 years

Posted on 09-23-10 08:45:39 PM Link | Quote
- Javascript to load FUCKING COMMENTS.
WHY THE HELL WOULD YOU DO THAT. Yeah, I enjoy trying to find out which domain to enable because your website has stuff from 7 other websites and the damn comments need javascript
Rena
I had one (1) message in Discord deleted and proceeded to make a huge, huge mess about how it was a violation of free speech and how moderators are supposed to be spam janitors and nobody should have the right to tell me not to talk about school shootings
Level: 135


Posts: 3662/5390
EXP: 29078040
For next: 256965

Since: 07-22-07

Pronouns: he/him/whatever
From: RSP Segment 6

Since last post: 343 days
Last activity: 343 days

Posted on 09-24-10 10:25:47 PM Link | Quote
09-24-10 05:25:47 PM
Post #3662
Originally posted by Leroy
Human readers can tell whether it's you or not, reading the posts. The thing is, people need to end up at the forum in the first place to do so. Profile pages tend to mention 'real names', causing crawlers and spyders to index the concerning page, in the end making the real name actually search-able for the whole Internet.
Which is why the bots are told not to index the page and you don't put your real name there if you don't want people to know.

____________________



[loading witty comment...]
paulguy

Green Birdo
Level: 93


Posts: 994/2294
EXP: 8033060
For next: 19750

Since: 09-14-07

From: Buffalo, NY

Since last post: 9.7 years
Last activity: 9.7 years

Posted on 09-25-10 03:59:15 AM Link | Quote
Paulguy's Post configuration
Yeah, when you put your name on something that's publicly available, even if it requires registration, it's pretty much public record. You shouldn't rely on something like registration to help hide your identity.

____________________
Leroy
Member
Level: 19


Posts: 58/60
EXP: 30501
For next: 5276

Since: 07-18-10


Since last post: 11.6 years
Last activity: 11.1 years

Posted on 09-25-10 12:16:56 PM (last edited by Leroy at 09-25-10 09:17 AM) Link | Quote
Originally posted by Rena
Originally posted by Leroy
Human readers can tell whether it's you or not, reading the posts. The thing is, people need to end up at the forum in the first place to do so. Profile pages tend to mention 'real names', causing crawlers and spyders to index the concerning page, in the end making the real name actually search-able for the whole Internet.
Which is why the bots are told not to index the page and you don't put your real name there if you don't want people to know.

That's why I mentioned the usage of a robots.txt file in my earlier post. There's META tags to point crawlers / bots whether they may index / follow the page, too.

____________________
Leroy and Dunja are going down under! =)
Aerakin
Ye Olde Layout
Level: 98


Posts: 2135/2550
EXP: 9476704
For next: 177649

Since: 07-06-07

From: From the future

Since last post: 8.0 years
Last activity: 1.2 years

Posted on 09-25-10 09:37:51 PM Link | Quote
Not that robots.txt is failsafe. Crawlers that want your info won't care about it at all.
Leroy
Member
Level: 19


Posts: 59/60
EXP: 30501
For next: 5276

Since: 07-18-10


Since last post: 11.6 years
Last activity: 11.1 years

Posted on 09-26-10 09:01:49 AM (last edited by Leroy at 09-26-10 06:03 AM) Link | Quote
Originally posted by Aerakin
Not that robots.txt is failsafe. Crawlers that want your info won't care about it at all.
True, but all the majors earch engines respect the robot.txt and META rules. I don't care about any unknown crawler / spyder indexing these kinds of pages; most people will just use Google, Bing and Yahoo (or other known search engines) for their searches and won't come across any exotic / unknown search engine easily.

Of course, if you just don't want to be found by your real name, don't use it anywhere. I'm always very careful about where I go and what information I put up. I once went to a financial forum where another user quoted a post from my blog (where I used my real name). In no time, my full name was searchable on Google and everyone that'd search my full name, ended up at that forum. Took me weeks to get rid of that.

____________________
Leroy and Dunja are going down under! =)
krutomisi
2480
Level: 94


Posts: 924/2481
EXP: 8266328
For next: 90329

Since: 02-01-10


Since last post: 242 days
Last activity: 182 days

Posted on 09-26-10 07:13:18 PM Link | Quote


http://www.bensonpackaging.com/


I'm just going to leave that as an example of every pet peeve I have

____________________

924 / 61 / 237
Peardian

  
Magikoopa

16/3/1: KvSG #479 is up!

Level: 157


Posts: 3902/7597
EXP: 48607079
For next: 972154

Since: 08-02-07

From: Isle Delfino

Since last post: 11 days
Last activity: 6 hours

Posted on 09-26-10 07:28:56 PM Link | Quote
Originally posted by krutomisi
http://www.bensonpackaging.com/


I'm just going to leave that as an example of every pet peeve I have

Haha, wow. First I thought it was just going to be an annoying flash splash. Then I thought it was a silly gimmicky site that would at least be acceptible in a kiosk or something. And then I clicked "Commercial". XD

____________________
-Peardian-

"Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see." -Mark Twain


kellykel
Member
Level: 25


Posts: 66/118
EXP: 84377
For next: 5243

Since: 06-22-10

From: My room. Mostly in front of computer.

Since last post: 10.7 years
Last activity: 7.9 years

Posted on 09-27-10 06:09:26 PM Link | Quote
-Blocking right click.
-Talking ads.
-Forums that require signup to view posts.

There are more but those are just the big ones.

____________________
Maxwell

Level: 47


Posts: 51/500
EXP: 727514
For next: 38689

Since: 09-30-10


Since last post: 11.2 years
Last activity: 11.1 years

Posted on 10-03-10 03:42:32 PM (last edited by Maxwell at 10-03-10 12:42 PM) Link | Quote
Originally posted by Metal_Man88
  • Hordes of "Tweet this" "Facebook this" "Digg this" buttons. Not only do we not need all those buttons, but some of us prefer to use old-fashioned word of mouth.


  • I absolutely hate those too. If people really need to tweet, status, bigg, ect. they could just do it manually from twitter, facebook, digg.com. Seriously, with things like this it seems like people are just getting lazier and lazier.

    ____________________
    CAKE - A SMW Hack.
    Transforming cats into robots since 1989!
    Posted on 10-03-10 10:06:51 PM Link | Quote
     
    As someone who has made his career to be web development and design, this is really good information for me to have.

    (Not that I would do any of those things like those stupid rollover ads or images for text...)

    The share links on the other hand... there's gotta be a better way to do it than that "universal share icon" button thinger.

    Oh, and I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned this.

    Using Facebook or Twitter to sign in to comment on something. Absolutely silly. Although if I comment on something, more than likely I would want to share it anyway. Unless I am one of those people who like to keep everything private.

    ____________________
    Rena
    I had one (1) message in Discord deleted and proceeded to make a huge, huge mess about how it was a violation of free speech and how moderators are supposed to be spam janitors and nobody should have the right to tell me not to talk about school shootings
    Level: 135


    Posts: 3699/5390
    EXP: 29078040
    For next: 256965

    Since: 07-22-07

    Pronouns: he/him/whatever
    From: RSP Segment 6

    Since last post: 343 days
    Last activity: 343 days

    Posted on 10-03-10 10:32:51 PM Link | Quote
    10-03-10 05:32:51 PM
    Post #3699
    It's great when the only way to comment is through Facebook. The climax of the "register to comment" annoyance. Not only do you have to register, but you have to go through a lengthy and very invasive registration process at a completely different site that has shown a total lack of concern for privacy.

    Even if you do already have an account, sometimes you'd rather not have your real life associated with some random post on the interblag, and who knows what information you're giving this random site access to when you use this...

    ____________________



    [loading witty comment...]
    Maxwell

    Level: 47


    Posts: 60/500
    EXP: 727514
    For next: 38689

    Since: 09-30-10


    Since last post: 11.2 years
    Last activity: 11.1 years

    Posted on 10-03-10 10:38:59 PM Link | Quote
    Originally posted by Rena
    It's great when the only way to comment is through Facebook. The climax of the "register to comment" annoyance. Not only do you have to register, but you have to go through a lengthy and very invasive registration process at a completely different site that has shown a total lack of concern for privacy.

    Even if you do already have an account, sometimes you'd rather not have your real life associated with some random post on the interblag, and who knows what information you're giving this random site access to when you use this...

    I agree completely. I thought the reason people wanted you to register to comment on things on their site is to get more users on it. When you comment from Facebook, it seems unsafe and it would make more sense if they just let you comment without registering.

    In other words it makes more sense to not have to register to comment than to have to log in with Facebook to comment.

    ____________________
    CAKE - A SMW Hack.
    Xkeeper

    Level: 263


    Posts: 17833/25353
    EXP: 297166353
    For next: 1794100

    Since: 07-03-07

    Pronouns: they/them/????????

    Since last post: 4 days
    Last activity: 3 hours

    Posted on 10-03-10 10:45:06 PM Link | Quote
    Originally posted by Rena
    It's great when the only way to comment is through Facebook. The climax of the "register to comment" annoyance. Not only do you have to register, but you have to go through a lengthy and very invasive registration process at a completely different site that has shown a total lack of concern for privacy.

    Even if you do already have an account, sometimes you'd rather not have your real life associated with some random post on the interblag, and who knows what information you're giving this random site access to when you use this...

    Facebook doesn't exactly verify anything, so feel free to enter crap.

    Doesn't make it any less BS of a policy, but there you go.

    ____________________
    Friendbot2000
    Member
    Level: 51


    Posts: 445/577
    EXP: 950528
    For next: 63410

    Since: 06-17-09


    Since last post: 10.5 years
    Last activity: 10.5 years

    Posted on 10-04-10 12:31:14 AM Link | Quote
    Originally posted by Lain
    As someone who has made his career to be web development and design, this is really good information for me to have.


    I second this. I also am looking into starting a career in web development and design so this is really helpful. I have also found this to be really helpful. It is a list of standards for web developers to keep in mind when programming. The site also has a couple of nifty tools too.
    Pages: 1 2Next newer thread | Next older thread
    Jul - Computers and Technology - Web design pet peeves New poll - New thread - New reply


    Rusted Logic

    Acmlmboard - commit 47be4dc [2021-08-23]
    ©2000-2022 Acmlm, Xkeeper, Kaito Sinclaire, et al.

    31 database queries, 3 query cache hits.
    Query execution time: 0.098604 seconds
    Script execution time: 0.039870 seconds
    Total render time: 0.138474 seconds