In article <MPG.174f6893573fa28989707@news.povray.org> , Lutz-Peter Hooge 
<lpv### [at] gmxde>  wrote:

> But this "cure" is a really ugly one since it bannes innocent people who
> just don't have cookies enabled from using the web interface, and also it
> obviously sometimes causes problems with enabled cookies...

Cookies are cookies and they do always work if enabled.  If someone disables
them and doesn't know how to turn them on again it is not exactly reasonable
to blame the site for it.  By default browsers today ask before accepting
cookies or accept them blindly if sent back only to the site setting them, so
it is very reasonable to expect them to be enabled.

Besides, it does not ban anybody from the site:

First, it is offered as a convenient *optional* way to read these newsgroups
without a newsreader.  Nobody says you cannot just get and configure any
newsreader and access the groups the "regular" way.

Second, it is a good protection against those who collect email addresses to
flood you with spam.  If you prefer spam which you cannot control over cookies
which you can control that may be your choice, but don't expect many to agree
with you in this regard.

> Such a "cures" should alway be server-side if possible
> (like don't showing email adresses, and limit the number of pages a
> client can request)

If you look, the server does not show email addresses of posters.  It would
have helped to check what you are claiming *before* complaining!  However, it
simply cannot remove email addresses from message bodies as that would in many
cases destroy parts of the messages.


And last, but surely not least:

Nobody, absolutely nobody is forcing you to use the web view.  If you don't
like it, its cookies, or can't figure how to use it, don't use it.


Oder auf Deutsch:  Einem geschenkten Gaul schaut man nicht in Maul ;-)

    Thorsten


____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich
e-mail: mac### [at] povrayorg

I am a member of the POV-Ray Team.
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 17 May 2002 23:53:21 +0200, Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
 
> A server does not "read" your cookies.  Your client has to send them as part
> of the request.  That is how cookies work.  If you managed to set your client
> to not send cookies the server cannot do anything about it.  You need to fix
> your configuration.
> 

Deleted the POV cookies and it works fine now. 

-- 
sphere{z*5,1pigment{rgb.5}finish{reflection.3specular.5}}box{<-50,-3,-50>
<50,-2,50>pigment{checker/*\__\\__/  * \_\\__*/scale 2}finish{ambient.7}}
light_source/*__\\__\\__\\__\\__\(    ~ )\__\\__\\__\\__\\*/{<2,5,1>*4,1} 
/*\\__\\__\\__\\__\\__\\__\\__\\__\~  -/__\\__\\__\\__\\__\\*//* Steve */

Post a reply to this message

In article <3ce5799e@news.povray.org>, tho### [at] trfde says...

> Second, it is a good protection against those who collect email addresses to
> flood you with spam.  If you prefer spam which you cannot control over cookies
> which you can control that may be your choice, but don't expect many to agree
> with you in this regard.

I didn't say that there should be made nothing to prevent spamming, but 
that it is generally better to perform such things server-side than 
asking the user to change something in their browser.

> If you look, the server does not show email addresses of posters. 

Oops. 
I assumed it does, because otherwise there are not really that much 
adresses to harvest anyway.

> Nobody, absolutely nobody is forcing you to use the web view.  If you don't
> like it, its cookies, or can't figure how to use it, don't use it.

I don't use it, a newsreader is IMO better anyway.
I just brought up the issue because I thought the usablility of the web 
interface isn't optimal.
I didn't want to complain, but thought a discussion if/how this could be 
made better could't hurt.

I now see that you think that cookie-thing is absolutely necessary and I 
don't have any problem with that.

> Oder auf Deutsch:  Einem geschenkten Gaul schaut man nicht in Maul ;-)



Lutz-Peter

Post a reply to this message