Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.misc > #17995 > unrolled thread

Another memo to web designers

Back to article view | Back to comp.misc

Contents

  Another memo to web designers Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2019-05-17 22:52 +1000
    Re: Another memo to web designers Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2019-05-17 14:16 +0000
      Re: Another memo to web designers Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2019-05-18 14:20 +1000
    Re: Another memo to web designers Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2019-05-17 15:24 +0000
      Re: Another memo to web designers Robert Munyer <robertm@not-for-mail.invalid> - 2019-06-07 23:02 +0000
        Re: Another memo to web designers Nyssa <Nyssa@LogicalInsight.net> - 2019-06-08 10:49 -0400
          Re: Another memo to web designers kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) - 2019-06-08 12:03 -0400
            Re: Another memo to web designers Nyssa <Nyssa@LogicalInsight.net> - 2019-06-08 16:03 -0400
          Re: Another memo to web designers Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2019-06-08 17:16 -0300
            Re: Another memo to web designers not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2019-06-09 00:56 +0000
              Re: Another memo to web designers Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2019-06-09 02:41 -0300
                Re: Another memo to web designers The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2019-06-09 08:23 -0700
              Re: Another memo to web designers Nyssa <Nyssa@LogicalInsight.net> - 2019-06-09 10:05 -0400
                Re: Another memo to web designers Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2019-06-09 14:35 +0000
    Re: Another memo to web designers Adrian Caspersz <email@here.invalid> - 2019-05-17 16:57 +0100
      Re: Another memo to web designers Adrian Caspersz <email@here.invalid> - 2019-05-17 17:39 +0100
    Re: Another memo to web designers scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us (Scott Alfter) - 2019-05-17 17:11 +0000
      Re: Another memo to web designers The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2019-05-17 10:29 -0700
      Re: Another memo to web designers Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2019-05-17 17:43 +0000
        Re: Another memo to web designers The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2019-05-17 12:14 -0700
          Re: Another memo to web designers Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2019-05-17 20:38 +0000
            Re: Another memo to web designers The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2019-05-17 15:52 -0700
          Re: Another memo to web designers Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2019-05-17 17:45 -0300
            Re: Another memo to web designers The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2019-05-17 15:54 -0700
        Re: Another memo to web designers scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us (Scott Alfter) - 2019-05-20 18:04 +0000
      Re: Another memo to web designers RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2019-05-17 22:10 -0400
        Re: Another memo to web designers Bruce Horrocks <07.013@scorecrow.com> - 2019-05-18 05:42 +0100
          Re: Another memo to web designers RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2019-05-20 17:24 -0400
        Re: Another memo to web designers Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2019-05-18 03:20 -0300
          Re: Another memo to web designers scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us (Scott Alfter) - 2019-05-20 18:16 +0000
        Re: Another memo to web designers Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2019-05-18 19:48 +0000
          Re: Another memo to web designers The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2019-05-18 13:29 -0700
            Re: Another memo to web designers Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2019-05-18 21:46 +0000
    Re: Another memo to web designers not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2019-05-19 00:04 +0000
      Re: Another memo to web designers Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2019-05-19 12:36 +1000
    Re: Another memo to web designers Miss Robot <miss.robot@lozza.ca> - 2019-06-21 11:49 -0400
      Re: Another memo to web designers Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2019-06-21 16:59 +0000
      Re: Another memo to web designers not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2019-06-22 03:03 +0000
        Re: Another memo to web designers The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2019-06-21 23:06 -0700
      Re: Another memo to web designers Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2019-06-22 13:35 +1000
        Re: Another memo to web designers Bruce Horrocks <07.013@scorecrow.com> - 2019-06-23 11:19 +0100

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

#17995 — Another memo to web designers

Don't make visual elements change size in response to the mouse being 
over them. It's really distracting.

Also, could the web designer who makes interactive elements run away 
from the mouse pointer please be fired, along with the designer who 
makes selecting a menu item a trial of hand-eye coordination lest the 
menu disappear.

Sylvia.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#17996

Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote:
> Don't make visual elements change size in response to the mouse being 
> over them.  It's really distracting.

Indeed, but sadly, due to the "ohh... shiny object" effect, you'll 
probably not get them to do this.

The demo to the CTO, who ultimately determines if they get paid, goes a 
lot better if the CTO sees a lot of "shiny object" eye candy.  So, 
sadly, these things are probably always going to be around.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18009

On 18/05/2019 12:16 am, Rich wrote:
> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote:
>> Don't make visual elements change size in response to the mouse being
>> over them.  It's really distracting.
> 
> Indeed, but sadly, due to the "ohh... shiny object" effect, you'll
> probably not get them to do this.
> 
> The demo to the CTO, who ultimately determines if they get paid, goes a
> lot better if the CTO sees a lot of "shiny object" eye candy.  So,
> sadly, these things are probably always going to be around.
> 

Much as I'd like to disagree with you on this, just to have some hope, I 
can't.

:(

Sylvia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17997

On 2019-05-17, Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote:
> Don't make visual elements change size in response to the mouse being 
> over them. It's really distracting.
>
> Also, could the web designer who makes interactive elements run away 
> from the mouse pointer please be fired, along with the designer who 
> makes selecting a menu item a trial of hand-eye coordination lest the 
> menu disappear.

They're all 22 year olds with weird haircuts, designer glasses,
5K screens and precisely no UI/UX training.


-- 
Today is Boomtime, the 64th day of Discord in the YOLD 3185
       Comes in bells, your servant, don't forsake him 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18133

> They're all 22 year olds with weird haircuts, designer glasses,
> 5K screens and precisely no UI/UX training.

It isn't just a lack of training; it's also a lack of common sense.

Simple common sense should tell them that if region B is between
region A and region C, the cursor will often pass over B when the
user wants to go from A to C, therefore you _must_ _not_ expand B
into something that obscures C when the cursor passes over B.

-- 
e-mail: the TLD is COM, the subdomain is my surname,
and the local-part is the product of 86373 and 106472.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18139

Stefan Ram wrote:

> Robert Munyer <robertm@not-for-mail.invalid> writes:
>>Simple common sense should tell them that if region B is
>>between region A and region C, the cursor will often pass
>>over B when the user wants to go from A to C, therefore
>>you _must_ _not_ expand B into something that obscures C
>>when the cursor passes over B.
> 
>   And what if B is an ad they want you to look at?
> 
> 
Or worse, that damn Google Recaptcha puzzle that haunts me
no matter where I go.

Nyssa, who couldn't believe that even LLBean has drunk the
Google Recaptcha Kool-Ade and requires it for just trying to
view products on their website (so I will no longer be a
customer of LLBean)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18140

Nyssa  <Nyssa@LogicalInsight.net> wrote:
>Nyssa, who couldn't believe that even LLBean has drunk the
>Google Recaptcha Kool-Ade and requires it for just trying to
>view products on their website (so I will no longer be a
>customer of LLBean)

I hope you have emailed and told them that.
--scott
-- 
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18144

Scott Dorsey wrote:

> Nyssa  <Nyssa@LogicalInsight.net> wrote:
>>Nyssa, who couldn't believe that even LLBean has drunk the
>>Google Recaptcha Kool-Ade and requires it for just trying
>>to view products on their website (so I will no longer be
>>a customer of LLBean)
> 
> I hope you have emailed and told them that.
> --scott

I intend to. Either that or make an actual phone call to
talk to a live person about the issue.

Either way, I'll let 'em know that the idea is to make it
easy for people to use their site for shopping, not put up
hurdles to be jumped at a third-party site's whim.

My LLBean hiking boots from last century will just have
to make due since they don't seem to want me to find any
newer ones on their website.

Nyssa, who has most of the google slime domains blocked in
her hosts files on top of being on a dialup connection that
can't cope with the bloat of the recaptcha anyway

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18145

Nyssa <Nyssa@LogicalInsight.net> writes:

> Stefan Ram wrote:
> 
>> Robert Munyer <robertm@not-for-mail.invalid> writes:
>>
>>> Simple common sense should tell them that if region B is
>>> between region A and region C, the cursor will often pass
>>> over B when the user wants to go from A to C, therefore
>>> you _must_ _not_ expand B into something that obscures C
>>> when the cursor passes over B.
>> 
>>   And what if B is an ad they want you to look at?

So: it's a matter of whether your browser is *your* tool of *their*
tool.  Web designers and the marketing droids they work for are not
building *your* tools.

> Or worse, that damn Google Recaptcha puzzle that haunts me
> no matter where I go.
> 
> Nyssa, who couldn't believe that even LLBean has drunk the
> Google Recaptcha Kool-Ade and requires it for just trying to
> view products on their website 

Huh.  I haven't encountered that.  Well, maybe I have *encountered* it
but not actually *seen* it and just wrote off the site as another site
with so much self-defeating kewlness that ICBA to make it work.

> (so I will no longer be a customer of LLBean)

Sixty-five years ago, LL Bean was a place way up in Maine to which one
might make an expedition for top-notch outdoor gear.  I never made the
trip.  On a visit to Boston twenty years ago, we decided to get off
the Maine Pike to have a look.  The only stuff I saw that interested
me was in a glassed-in cabinet, their little museum of LL Bean
products that we used to sell to yer granpa.

-- 
Mike Spencer                  Nova Scotia, Canada

My electric toaster is 106 years old and working well.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18146

Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote:
> Nyssa <Nyssa@LogicalInsight.net> writes:
>> 
>> Nyssa, who couldn't believe that even LLBean has drunk the
>> Google Recaptcha Kool-Ade and requires it for just trying to
>> view products on their website 
> 
> Huh.  I haven't encountered that.  Well, maybe I have *encountered* it
> but not actually *seen* it and just wrote off the site as another site
> with so much self-defeating kewlness that ICBA to make it work.

I run into it often when trying to browse commercial websites using
Dillo. In those cases it's because I'm either using a strange
User-Agent header which isn't on their whitelist, or there's some
other tell such as not running their Javascript that clues them in.
Possibly Nyssa's configuration also sets off such websites.

They then go into "are you a human?" mode, and nine times out of
ten this involves one of the Google Capchas which of course won't
work in Dillo either - so I'm blocked. The one where this annoys
me most often is Mouser (electronics distributor), as even though I
don't buy from them, they often pop up in search results when trying
to find specs on a component that I already have or want to buy
elsewhere.

And I haven't sent them a grumpy Email because life's too short
(to spend half an hour finding a suitable address, for starters)
and nothing ever comes of it anyway.

-- 
__          __
#_ < |\| |< _#

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18147

not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) writes:

> Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote:
>
>> Nyssa <Nyssa@LogicalInsight.net> writes:
>>> 
>>> Nyssa, who couldn't believe that even LLBean has drunk the
>>> Google Recaptcha Kool-Ade and requires it for just trying to
>>> view products on their website 
>> 
>> Huh.  I haven't encountered that.  Well, maybe I have *encountered* it
>> but not actually *seen* it and just wrote off the site as another site
>> with so much self-defeating kewlness that ICBA to make it work.
> 
> I run into it often when trying to browse commercial websites using
> Dillo. In those cases it's because I'm either using a strange
> User-Agent header which isn't on their whitelist, or there's some
> other tell such as not running their Javascript that clues them in.
> Possibly Nyssa's configuration also sets off such websites.

I don't run javascript either.  I've assumed that some sites that seem
not to work as expected do so because of that.

> They then go into "are you a human?" mode, and nine times out of
> ten this involves one of the Google Capchas which of course won't
> work in Dillo either - so I'm blocked. The one where this annoys
> me most often is Mouser (electronics distributor), as even though I
> don't buy from them, they often pop up in search results when trying
> to find specs on a component that I already have or want to buy
> elsewhere.
> 
> And I haven't sent them a grumpy Email because life's too short
> (to spend half an hour finding a suitable address, for starters)
> and nothing ever comes of it anyway.

I hate trying to communicate with corporations, try to avoid it.

Only recent try: I'm vexed that Levi Strauss no longer sells black
550-style Levis in Canada.  Tried numerous avenues to get them to no
avail.  But wait!  The executive VP in charge of clothing is James
Curleigh and he's a local boy -- went to university in Halifax and
worked in a sporting good store on Quinpool Rd.  A Real Person, not a
coporation!  So I sent him a personal letter, address to his mother's
home here in Nova Scotia, pointing out that I've been wearing Levis for
70 years, my father wore Levis and my grandfather wore Levis when the
company founder was still alive.

Now I'm wearing house-brand black jeans from Mordor^H^H^H^H^H^H
Walmart.  Fabric is okay, color is okay, fit is not, and they're not,
yew know, Levis. 

Been six months and no reply so I guess that hasn't worked either.
But he's been busy with rescuing Gibson Guitars from Chapter 11
(who knew?) so I may hear back yet.

-- 
Mike Spencer                  Nova Scotia, Canada

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18156

On 06/08/2019 10:41 PM, Mike Spencer wrote:
> not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) writes:
>
>> Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote:
>>
>>> Nyssa <Nyssa@LogicalInsight.net> writes:
>>>>
>>>> Nyssa, who couldn't believe that even LLBean has drunk the
>>>> Google Recaptcha Kool-Ade and requires it for just trying to
>>>> view products on their website
>>>
>>> Huh.  I haven't encountered that.  Well, maybe I have *encountered* it
>>> but not actually *seen* it and just wrote off the site as another site
>>> with so much self-defeating kewlness that ICBA to make it work.
>>
>> I run into it often when trying to browse commercial websites using
>> Dillo. In those cases it's because I'm either using a strange
>> User-Agent header which isn't on their whitelist, or there's some
>> other tell such as not running their Javascript that clues them in.
>> Possibly Nyssa's configuration also sets off such websites.
>
> I don't run javascript either.  I've assumed that some sites that seem
> not to work as expected do so because of that.
>
>> They then go into "are you a human?" mode, and nine times out of
>> ten this involves one of the Google Capchas which of course won't
>> work in Dillo either - so I'm blocked. The one where this annoys
>> me most often is Mouser (electronics distributor), as even though I
>> don't buy from them, they often pop up in search results when trying
>> to find specs on a component that I already have or want to buy
>> elsewhere.
>>
>> And I haven't sent them a grumpy Email because life's too short
>> (to spend half an hour finding a suitable address, for starters)
>> and nothing ever comes of it anyway.
>
> I hate trying to communicate with corporations, try to avoid it.
>
> Only recent try: I'm vexed that Levi Strauss no longer sells black
> 550-style Levis in Canada.  Tried numerous avenues to get them to no
> avail.  But wait!  The executive VP in charge of clothing is James
> Curleigh and he's a local boy -- went to university in Halifax and
> worked in a sporting good store on Quinpool Rd.  A Real Person, not a
> coporation!  So I sent him a personal letter, address to his mother's
> home here in Nova Scotia,

Perhaps she just threw it away.  Perhaps it got lost in the mail.  I 
don't know about NS mail service, but every once in a while a random 
neighbor brings us misdelivered mail and we return the favors.  The 
businesses across the street had rubber stamps -- MISDELIVERED TO BELL & 
HOWELL etc.  The post office has a rubber stamp that says THIS MAILPIECE 
WAS FOUND IN A CONTAINER THOUGHT TO BE EMPTY.

> pointing out that I've been wearing Levis for
> 70 years, my father wore Levis and my grandfather wore Levis when the
> company founder was still alive.
>
> Now I'm wearing house-brand black jeans from Mordor^H^H^H^H^H^H
> Walmart.  Fabric is okay, color is okay, fit is not, and they're not,
> yew know, Levis.

Lycra was the best invention for jeans EVER!  I'm willing to give up a 
lot for the ability to bend my knees easily.

> Been six months and no reply so I guess that hasn't worked either.
> But he's been busy with rescuing Gibson Guitars from Chapter 11
> (who knew?) so I may hear back yet.

Sometimes you get lucky.  I got email back from Marker within a day 
about a ski binding question, but my follow-up question has been ignored 
for over 2 weeks.

-- 
Cheers, Bev
  His men would follow him anywhere, but only out of morbid curiosity.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18152

Computer Nerd Kev wrote:

> Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote:
>> Nyssa <Nyssa@LogicalInsight.net> writes:
>>> 
>>> Nyssa, who couldn't believe that even LLBean has drunk
>>> the Google Recaptcha Kool-Ade and requires it for just
>>> trying to view products on their website
>> 
>> Huh.  I haven't encountered that.  Well, maybe I have
>> *encountered* it but not actually *seen* it and just
>> wrote off the site as another site with so much
>> self-defeating kewlness that ICBA to make it work.
> 
> I run into it often when trying to browse commercial
> websites using Dillo. In those cases it's because I'm
> either using a strange User-Agent header which isn't on
> their whitelist, or there's some other tell such as not
> running their Javascript that clues them in. Possibly
> Nyssa's configuration also sets off such websites.
> 
> They then go into "are you a human?" mode, and nine times
> out of ten this involves one of the Google Capchas which
> of course won't work in Dillo either - so I'm blocked. The
> one where this annoys me most often is Mouser (electronics
> distributor), as even though I don't buy from them, they
> often pop up in search results when trying to find specs
> on a component that I already have or want to buy
> elsewhere.
> 
> And I haven't sent them a grumpy Email because life's too
> short (to spend half an hour finding a suitable address,
> for starters) and nothing ever comes of it anyway.
> 
I was using SeaMonkey to (attempt to) view the LLBean 
website. Lots of churn, then POOF a blank screen. The
only way I figured out it was a Google Captcha problem
was when I chose "no style" in the browser's options.

Using the default style just went from loading the
website (never did get to see any of the products) to
blank. Not very helpful and most people wouldn't have
thought/known to try "no style" to try to figure it out.

It simply does NOT make any sense to put a challenge
in at that point that keeps the user from viewing products.
Not customer-friendly, that's for certain. I'd think they'd
want to make viewing as easy as possible.

<grumble, grumble>

Trying to find contact information may be difficult as
well. If they lock down viewing products, they may also
hide or lock down their email and phone numbers as well...
just to avoid all those non-humans ya know.

Sheesh!

Nyssa, who probably will end up trying to refurbish her
old boots with some saddle soap and new laces rather than
jump through LLBean's (and Google's) hoops to find new
ones

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18154

Nyssa <Nyssa@logicalinsight.net> wrote:
> I was using SeaMonkey to (attempt to) view the LLBean website.  Lots 
> of churn, then POOF a blank screen.  The only way I figured out it 
> was a Google Captcha problem was when I chose "no style" in the 
> browser's options.

That often means that whatever web framework they are using defers much 
(or all) of the visual layout to javascript running on the local user's 
browser.

It also means they are not observing proper fallback for less capable 
browsers.

> It simply does NOT make any sense to put a challenge in at that point 
> that keeps the user from viewing products.  Not customer-friendly, 
> that's for certain.  I'd think they'd want to make viewing as easy as 
> possible.

No, it makes no sense from your viewpoint as a customer just browing 
the site to look for a product to buy.

To understand how it might make sense, you have to "follow the money".  
From their side, it (the 'are you human' challenge) is likely present 
as an attempt to thwart automated web scraping bots that then supply 
data to many of those "price comparison" websites.  Corporate likely 
does not want those price comparison websites to be able to obtain data 
(likely because corporate knows they charge a premium vs. competitors 
and can't compete only on price) and so corporate's response is not 
"find a way to compete on price" but is instead "find a way to block 
the bots".

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17998

On 17/05/2019 13:52, Sylvia Else wrote:
> Don't make visual elements change size in response to the mouse being 
> over them. It's really distracting.
> 
> Also, could the web designer who makes interactive elements run away 
> from the mouse pointer please be fired, along with the designer who 
> makes selecting a menu item a trial of hand-eye coordination lest the 
> menu disappear.

Firing is not good enough, they'll get a job elsewhere. Suggest shooting.

-- 
Adrian C

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17999

On 17/05/2019 16:57, Adrian Caspersz wrote:
> On 17/05/2019 13:52, Sylvia Else wrote:
>> Don't make visual elements change size in response to the mouse being 
>> over them. It's really distracting.
>>
>> Also, could the web designer who makes interactive elements run away 
>> from the mouse pointer please be fired, along with the designer who 
>> makes selecting a menu item a trial of hand-eye coordination lest the 
>> menu disappear.
> 
> Firing is not good enough, they'll get a job elsewhere. Suggest shooting.
> 

Disclaimer: Just to be clear (to the silly), I meant that completely in 
jest.

Shooting won't change a badly implemented design pattern if the twit 
isn't there to untangle the mess s/he left.

-- 
Adrian C

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18000

In article <gk7p3nF4gc8U1@mid.individual.net>,
Sylvia Else  <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote:
>Don't make visual elements change size in response to the mouse being 
>over them. It's really distracting.

...especially when the size change causes the element to no longer be under
the mouse pointer, in which case it returns to its normal size, which brings
it back under the mouse pointer, which makes it change again...

Another capital offense against good taste: using JavaScript to force smooth
scrolling of your page, even though I've turned off smooth scrolling in
browser settings.

  _/_
 / v \ Scott Alfter (remove the obvious to send mail)
(IIGS( https://alfter.us/           Top-posting!
 \_^_/                              >What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18001

On 05/17/2019 10:11 AM, Scott Alfter wrote:
> In article <gk7p3nF4gc8U1@mid.individual.net>,
> Sylvia Else  <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote:
>>Don't make visual elements change size in response to the mouse being
>>over them. It's really distracting.
>
> ...especially when the size change causes the element to no longer be under
> the mouse pointer, in which case it returns to its normal size, which brings
> it back under the mouse pointer, which makes it change again...
>
> Another capital offense against good taste: using JavaScript to force smooth
> scrolling of your page, even though I've turned off smooth scrolling in
> browser settings.

How about the fill-in boxes (such as "city") that suck in previous 
entries but cover the fill-in box so you have to make blind changes? 
Not certain whose fault that is, but there are plenty of empty pikes 
just crying out for heads.

-- 
Cheers, Bev
   "Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to
    spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and
    begin slitting throats."     -- H.L. Mencken

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18002

Scott Alfter <scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us> wrote:
> Another capital offense against good taste: using JavaScript to force smooth
> scrolling of your page, even though I've turned off smooth scrolling in
> browser settings.

The NoScript extension can help with that.  Blocking the JS also blocks 
all the silliness that often comes along with the JS.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18003

On 05/17/2019 10:43 AM, Rich wrote:
> Scott Alfter <scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us> wrote:
>> Another capital offense against good taste: using JavaScript to force smooth
>> scrolling of your page, even though I've turned off smooth scrolling in
>> browser settings.
>
> The NoScript extension can help with that.  Blocking the JS also blocks
> all the silliness that often comes along with the JS.

I've got a js switch button, but turning off js generally also turns off 
some functionality that I want/need :-(


-- 
Cheers, Bev
    Politicians are stupid like cats are stupid.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.misc

csiph-web