Gator download pop-up - Page 6

DanQ · September 7, 2003, 15:31

Quote:

Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola
UGO has been very responsive to a crtain other site in tracking down the third party providers who do this and deep sixing them. I am not certain what technical info from the site was required, but whatever it was, they got it.

For the record, Apolyton is not affiliated with UGO (United Gamers Online) in any way and has not been since April 21, 2002.

----------
Dan; Apolyton CS

Tuberski · September 12, 2003, 18:53

I got the gator pop-up again, fiest time in a week. I had assumed it was fixed.

I am wrong?

ACK!

geeslaka · September 12, 2003, 19:02

It amazes me that you are still badgering DanQ when you could fix the problem by using a good browser with a builtin popup killer.

And for those too attached to IE(

.), somewhere in this thread, panag posted a link to the Google toolbar, which has a popup killer.
And yet, people still complain.

Frozzy · September 12, 2003, 19:10

I actually think that Dan wants to remove the pop-up himself, as people who are unaware of such illegal pop-ups whilst they browse the site, as opposed to the forums.

Ben Kenobi · September 12, 2003, 19:34

Quote:

when you could fix the problem by using a good browser with a builtin popup killer.

Remind me how Apolyton generates revenue? I'd like to see this popup removed so that I can allow popups from Apolyton without worrying about Gator downloads.

Frozzy · September 12, 2003, 19:49

I believe the script for the pop-up is enabled when you access the site, however the "blocker" actually stops it from appearing on your browser. Thus, the site where the pop-up originates from believes the script to have been successfully enabled, and therefore registers it as a "hit".

Tuberski · September 12, 2003, 19:59

Quote:

Originally posted by geeslaka
It amazes me that you are still badgering DanQ when you could fix the problem by using a good browser with a builtin popup killer.

And for those too attached to IE(

.), somewhere in this thread, panag posted a link to the Google toolbar, which has a popup killer.
And yet, people still complain.

Since I am at work, I can't really add a pop-up blocker without permission. Which I won't get.

So complaints are all I have.

FYI I do run a pop-up blocker at home.

ACK!

Ben Kenobi · September 12, 2003, 20:32

Quote:

I believe the script for the pop-up is enabled when you access the site, however the "blocker" actually stops it from appearing on your browser. Thus, the site where the pop-up originates from believes the script to have been successfully enabled, and therefore registers it as a "hit".

That's news to me.

Thanks Frozzy.

DanQ · September 12, 2003, 21:48

See "Open Letter From Administration: 'Operation Gator'" news post at http://apolyton.net/about or its corresponding announcement at http://apolyton.net/forums/announcem...s=&forumid=31.

-----------
Dan; Apolyton CS

Frozzy · September 12, 2003, 21:55

Massive

to yourself and Markos, Dan.

TCO · September 13, 2003, 07:02

1. I read Dan's remarks and that is ok...I guess. Still wonder why Dan has to go to the effort of tracking the gator down vice having the agency do it. He could switch or threaten to switch agencies.

2. And that German porn popup was NOT just for German viewers. It came onto my puter as well.

Asmodean · September 13, 2003, 07:32

Problem is that perhaps the agency that Apolyton signed up with probably don't know which third-party agency carries the Gator-Ad. Which all goes to show what a messed up business this is

Asmodean

DrSpike · September 13, 2003, 07:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Frozzy
I believe the script for the pop-up is enabled when you access the site, however the "blocker" actually stops it from appearing on your browser. Thus, the site where the pop-up originates from believes the script to have been successfully enabled, and therefore registers it as a "hit".

I asked Mark about this a while back and IIRC he suggested using a blocker would mean that no revenue was attained from the blocked ad.

Panag · September 13, 2003, 16:22

Quote:

Originally posted by DrSpike

I asked Mark about this a while back and IIRC he suggested using a blocker would mean that no revenue was attained from the blocked ad.

hi ,

, and what about a special tailor made blocker for only gator , .........

have a nice day

Frozzy · September 13, 2003, 16:27

Because that would be pointless. Why block one ad when you can block them all?

Panag · September 13, 2003, 16:36

Quote:

Originally posted by Frozzy
Because that would be pointless. Why block one ad when you can block them all?

hi ,

cause the rest is more or the less " harmless " , ........

have a nice day

Frozzy · September 13, 2003, 16:50

People either allow pop-ups because a) they have to or b) they are ignorant

People block pop-ups because they piss them off.

People will not just block Gator because most people will just download a pop-up blocker to get rid of them all.

TCO · September 13, 2003, 18:06

Quote:

Originally posted by Asmodean
Problem is that perhaps the agency that Apolyton signed up with probably don't know which third-party agency carries the Gator-Ad. Which all goes to show what a messed up business this is

Asmodean

The problem is that Dan doesn't hold the contractor responsible for the subs.

TCO · September 13, 2003, 18:08

Quote:

Originally posted by Frozzy
People either allow pop-ups because a) they have to or b) they are ignorant

People block pop-ups because they piss them off.

People will not just block Gator because most people will just download a pop-up blocker to get rid of them all.

Or because they'vbe been told by the owners of this site, that the site may lose advertising contracts if it becomes known that people are blocking.

geeslaka · September 13, 2003, 22:36

panag: Writing a popup blocker for a specific pu would be much more difficult than a global pu blocker. A global pu blocker simply tells the browser to ignore all calls to whatever function generates the new window. A blocker for a specific pu would have to be able to recognize that pu, then tell the browser to block that specific call to whatever function generates the new window.

I'm not blocking anymore, in the hope that it helps Apolyton.

DrSpike · September 14, 2003, 06:48

Quote:

Originally posted by Frozzy
People either allow pop-ups because a) they have to or b) they are ignorant

People block pop-ups because they piss them off.

People will not just block Gator because most people will just download a pop-up blocker to get rid of them all.

I think you are missing the point. Loads of users give up their possible option to block so 'Poly doesn't lose revenue. At least that's how I remember it from when this came up a while back.

Panag · September 14, 2003, 11:29

Quote:

Originally posted by geeslaka
panag: Writing a popup blocker for a specific pu would be much more difficult than a global pu blocker. A global pu blocker simply tells the browser to ignore all calls to whatever function generates the new window. A blocker for a specific pu would have to be able to recognize that pu, then tell the browser to block that specific call to whatever function generates the new window.

I'm not blocking anymore, in the hope that it helps Apolyton.

hi ,

who said anything about writing , .......

its amazing what one can find of tools for free on the net , ......

have a nice day

Asmodean · September 14, 2003, 12:09

Quote:

Originally posted by TCO

The problem is that Dan doesn't hold the contractor responsible for the subs.

Well, I'm no expert, but AFAIK he can only do that, if the contract says he can. Probably the contract between 'poly and the ad agency says that said agency is not responsible for any malintent by third party advertizers.

But like I said. What do I know?

Asmodean

Wittlich · September 14, 2003, 16:13

Glad to see that Dan has initiated "Operation Gator." Now it only be a matter of time before he finds the culprit. Way to go Dan!

TCO · September 14, 2003, 17:32

Quote:

Originally posted by Asmodean

Well, I'm no expert, but AFAIK he can only do that, if the contract says he can. Probably the contract between 'poly and the ad agency says that said agency is not responsible for any malintent by third party advertizers.

But like I said. What do I know?

Asmodean

You clueless moron, if he pays money to the agent, he holds the agent responsible. It's that simple. If they won't take action, he walks. Think about it.

Asmodean · September 14, 2003, 17:37

So it's back to the name-calling again, eh TCO??

Asmodean

Frozzy · September 15, 2003, 01:25

Quote:

Originally posted by DrSpike

I think you are missing the point. Loads of users give up their possible option to block so 'Poly doesn't lose revenue. At least that's how I remember it from when this came up a while back.

This is what I referred to in "have to"

Urban Ranger · September 15, 2003, 02:05

Quote:

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Remind me how Apolyton generates revenue? I'd like to see this popup removed so that I can allow popups from Apolyton without worrying about Gator downloads.

Once again, disable ActiveX (or set it to alert) inside MSIE. Then when you see the dialogue box asking you to allow permission to run ActiveX script, say no. About 99% of the time, you don't miss anything. If disallowing the scipt screws you up, reload the page and allow it to run this time.

Unless you are going to sites such as Windows Update, which you know has to run ActiveX.

DrSpike · September 15, 2003, 09:42

Quote:

Originally posted by Frozzy
I believe the script for the pop-up is enabled when you access the site, however the "blocker" actually stops it from appearing on your browser. Thus, the site where the pop-up originates from believes the script to have been successfully enabled, and therefore registers it as a "hit".

But you also said this. Now it may be true, I don't know, but it is in conflict with what I had heard to be true.

spartak · September 15, 2003, 14:52