Yo GreenGuy!
I can appreciate that there are reasons for 302 use... I have several in places. The beauty of it is the number see example:
day1: Pages served 70,000. 302s=64/24=2.7 per hour
day2: Pages served 70,000. 302s=64,000/24=2,667 per hour
What are the odds of that by accident or normal course of events?
I have a more advanced formula in mind, but they aren't getting it for free even if they would implement it.
As for the fact that it isn't against the law, I don't know that it has to be. Consider what is happening with HQ. Once everybody simplifies their life by blocking every IP range they have access to they are really hurting. As such, it seems in their best interest to control the serious troublemakers that they host.
Here's the really funny thing: They don't want the 302 freaks anyway. They only serve real sites for a day, after that it is all redirects which are almost ZERO bandwidth. The hosts can't make money on these bastards, so they aren't going to want them there.
It really is in their best interest to implement a system to boot these abusers. No law required, and nothing to do with our rules.
A pleasure to talk again,
Mr. H.
Quote:
Originally posted by Greenguy
Hey MrHackula
The problems with your 302 scenario are as follows:
1 - there are legit reason for 302 - I have some on my domains right now.
2 - it's not "against the law" to 302 a site/page - it may be against TGP's & Link List's rules, but we can't really expect the hosts to inforce our rules.
|