Freesites and Javascript (js)

[wrk4]

Hello Everyone -

I submitted a fs, which has a small and fast loading js, and it got approved by big and small link list reviewers. However, one reviewer told me that js is a "no go" on fs. I've always used js on my freesites and haven't had any issues. The js is used to only clean up my href info.

I'm trying to improve and I don't want to be accused of cheating or any other nasty allegations. Can you pls tell me if my href js may be a concern for other ll reviewers?

Ex. http://nedsnookie.com/free-sex/milf/hot-milf/

Thanx -

wrk4

[kitty_kate]

I'm no rewiewer, but why do you need to hardcode that JS?
What does that JS exactly?

[ponygirl]

Originally Posted by wrk4

Hello Everyone -

I submitted a fs, which has a small and fast loading js, and it got approved by big and small link list reviewers. However, one reviewer told me that js is a "no go" on fs. I've always used js on my freesites and haven't had any issues. The js is used to only clean up my href info.

I'm trying to improve and I don't want to be accused of cheating or any other nasty allegations. Can you pls tell me if my href js may be a concern for other ll reviewers?

Ex. http://nedsnookie.com/free-sex/milf/hot-milf/

Thanx -

wrk4

You will not find many (if any) Link Lists that allow java. If your site was accepted it was because no one has noticed yet.

You can use an onmouseover to change your status bar text as long as it shows the correct destination, and that's what I'd start doing or you'll get blacklisted pretty quick.

hope that helps

[Jim]

The whole Java thing is sad. There are so many cool things you can do, much like active-x. And yet, people have learned to cheat with both so they end up being put on the "no good" list.

A sad state of affairs...

[wrk4]

Pony Girl - my script does only and exactly what you stated. Additionally, my sites have been approved in the past and i find it difficult to believe other reviewers have just been careless. Perhaps I've been approved because only my status is affected.

Kitty_Kate - the script is an improved version of your standard/typical "onmouseover" code. By simply adding a title and a class to the tag, I can produce the same result. And by placing the guts of the java at the bottom of the page, the visitor won't notice any delays due to java.

Basically, if normal "onmouseover" code is allowed I would think my code would be allowed as well. However, that's a bit more technical than needed. I guess the appropriate question is....

Is it acceptable to use java onmouseover code to remove your affiliate information if you maintain the linked to site in the status bar?

-wrk4

[kitty_kate]

No offence wrk4, but it smells fishy to me.
I haven't seen until now JS doing this simple thing and being hardcoded that much.

Btw, I didn't knew that you need AJAX to make a bloody mouse over. (ajaxHandles XMLHttpRequest textarea keypress keydown file password image button checkbox radio - nice strings in your code)

[ponygirl]

Originally Posted by wrk4

Is it acceptable to use java onmouseover code to remove your affiliate information if you maintain the linked to site in the status bar?

-wrk4

short answer - no

do a search on the board and you'll see. Java is just not acceptable on free sites. See Jim's post - a few ruined it for everyone.

sorry, don't mean to be rude but that's just the way it is.

[MrYum]

Yep, it was me that declined your site due to the js.

Onmouseovers are fine and accepted at pretty much all link sites to the best of my knowledge.

As Jim mentioned...js was abused for too long, so now it's a no go at almost all link sites. Don't know what to tell you as to how you've gotten away with it for this long.

Even if your code is simply to hide paysite codes, the reality is reviewers don't have time to analyze your code to confirm that purpose. When I view source on a page and see js...it's an instant decline. That's true of almost all reviewers in todays link list/free site game.

[wrk4]

Kitty_Kate -"No offence wrk4, but it smells fishy to me" - Offense taken!
"Btw, I didn't knew that you need..." - It's not about what you know. And the key word is need. And no I don't but I find this more efficient.

"I haven't seen until now JS doing this simple thing and being hardcoded that much" - What can I say to that without being mean... You haven't seen it, fine. If you'd like to learn feel free to poke around cssbeauty.com or stylegala.com and look for jquery.

Hello PonyGirl - Thanks for the input. But I keep reading contradicting answers to this question. You said no but then cool Mr. Yum said yes.

What's up MrYum. I know you're the one that declined me I just didn't want to throw your name out there. A friend of mine, who has a ll, adviced me to take it to the board to get a consensus opinion. As you can see it isn't going so well. Although disappointed, I understand your position.

[Useless]

This is acceptable on a free site:

<a href="http://www.shitbag.com/idiot/moron.php?id=XXXXX" onmouseover="window.status='http://www.shitbag.com/';return true" onmouseout="self.status='';return true" title="Stupid Fucker">Idiot</a>

That chunk of shit you want to use IS NOT ACCEPTABLE and isn't going to become acceptable.

[ponygirl]

Originally Posted by Useless Warrior

This is acceptable on a free site:

<a href="http://www.shitbag.com/idiot/moron.php?id=XXXXX" onmouseover="window.status='http://www.shitbag.com/';return true" onmouseout="self.status='';return true" title="Stupid Fucker">Idiot</a>

That chunk of shit you want to use IS NOT ACCEPTABLE and isn't going to become acceptable.

hehe thanks for clarifying that, UW

wrk4, that's what I (and mrYum) meant - java NO, onmouseover YES

[wrk4]

Wow, Useless!
But Ok.

thx again pgirl, mr.yum and of course UW

[MrYum]

Originally Posted by ponygirl

hehe thanks for clarifying that, UW

wrk4, that's what I (and mrYum) meant - java NO, onmouseover YES

Exactamundo

No worries Wrk4...you can always leave a message on these forums with questions for me...or hit me up on email. So, feel free to toss me |bus| anytime

[wrk4]

Yes.

However, let it be known that the code you all agree to be acceptable is actually called javascript. Hence the misunderstanding. The js is performing the onmouseover function. One can assume that this is the only piece of js code that is allowed.

To further clarify -
Java (programming lang) code is very different from js and I doubt anyone will use this.

[Useless]

Why isn't there a sticky thread of all the shit we already know so that newbies to this part of the game won't stumble in and attempt to correct our woeful ignorance in an uppity manner?

Do I seem grouchy today? When I read my posts, they look much grouchier than I feel.

[kitty_kate]

Originally Posted by wrk4

Kitty_Kate -"No offence wrk4, but it smells fishy to me" - Offense taken!
"Btw, I didn't knew that you need..." - It's not about what you know. And the key word is need. And no I don't but I find this more efficient.

"I haven't seen until now JS doing this simple thing and being hardcoded that much" - What can I say to that without being mean... You haven't seen it, fine. If you'd like to learn feel free to poke around cssbeauty.com or stylegala.com and look for jquery.

Efficient my flat ass!
The uncompressed version of jquery has 1814 lines of code. Didn't you thought that people may get a little suspicious when you'll tell them you need a huge AJAX library to make a bloody mouseover?

I won't discuss this anyfurther. If you really want, we can continue on PM.

Oh shit, I ran out of cigarettes

[zack2004]

UW,
It is not what you say but how you say it!
In the future try "Dear Cocksucker, Dear Asshole, Dear Stupid MF....." in the salutation of your response instead of in the body of the message. Also try to limit your caffeine intake .

[wrk4]

lol - hello UW. Coming off "uppity" was not my intent. In all seriousness I was trying to wrap my head around this stuff. And the terminology was tripping me up and the source of my confusion. I made the last post in an effort to express the issue clearly for future newbies. For their benefit only. A reference if you will.


Kate, are you serious!?!?

"Didn't you thought that people ..." the jquery code remains on the server and doesn't involve the site visitor. Furthermore, I meant efficient in the sense that all i have to add to the href is "class" and "title".... which equals more efficient in my book.

As you can see I don't have 1814 lines of uncompressed code on my site nor compressed.

Cheers