View Full Version : Yes or No to pop-under advertising (cookie security discussi

01-14-2003, 07:34 PM
~ Simply vote I AGREE or I DISAGREE ~

I AGREE = I DO NOT mind having pop-under advertising implemented into TweakTown

I DISAGREE = I DO mind having pop-under advertising implemented into TweakTown

This is your website as much as ours!

So do us a favour and help us make a decision - we will go with whatever the votes shows after two days.

01-14-2003, 09:03 PM
Hey! I'm the first to vote Yes! Remember "Greed is good!" :devil:

01-14-2003, 09:31 PM
as long as it only shows up on my task bar and appears once per 24hrs as stated.

01-15-2003, 01:53 AM
Or Pop-under ads (same thing as far as I'm concerned) are not effective. Ads that are smaller and built-in to the website with the least amount of graphics and gifs are more effective and are way more likely to be clicked on. Eventually marketers will realize this....unfortunately, when they do, websites will start to almost confuse people with ads and content being very similar looking. But at least there will be fewer ads.
And eventually they'll all goto text only...once they see how incredibly effective they are.

01-15-2003, 02:32 AM
It's ok, as long as the ads do not open a second window when attempting to close them. Those multiple pop unders are a real pisser.

Also, none of the semi-invisible windows, the ones that you have to close all other windows in order to get to and some you just need to quite and restart.

Also, make sure they’re not too heavy. I've in broadband now, but it still pisses me off when I have to deal with a large add that even slightly slows things down. And nothing pisses a 56K user more then bandwidth hogging ads.

Also, (Not again!) make sure that the text in window before graphics are loaded is descriptive. There have been a hand full of times when I closed an ad just as the graphic appeared and as it closed realized I was interested.

In the end I agree with the above post. Small adds and adds in general that actually give some explanation as to where they lead have a higher chance in catching interested parties.

Sir talk a lot

01-15-2003, 02:35 AM
Wait a sec,

all the votes so far are from newbies...

where are the long time pros who are going to flame our butts?


01-15-2003, 04:23 AM

01-15-2003, 05:29 AM
If it's financially prudent, go for it .....there's always Popupstopper
which is far more effective than the evil it fragz

01-15-2003, 06:20 AM
Wait a sec,

all the votes so far are from newbies...

where are the long time pros who are going to flame our butts?

:angryfire :flames: :angryfire :flames:

Happy now? :) Actually, the pop-ups around here don't seem to surface for me. As long as it's only 1, I don't see why it is a problem.

01-15-2003, 08:21 AM
The votes are a lot closer than I would have expected them to be - but we still need more people to vote!

01-15-2003, 08:24 AM
In an ideal world we wouldn't have any ads, but these ads mean, as Mr Tweak says, that TweakTown will be able to provide a better level of service and continue to grow.

So Popunder ads = more resources = better content

If you disagree with the ads, keep in mind that the content is free to you and has to be paid for somehow.

Mr. C
01-15-2003, 11:11 AM
First of all, I would like to thank Mr. Tweak for once again putting us folks first.

Not everyone would be so sensitive to the desires of a gang of misfits like those of us that gather at this fountain of knowlege.
You da' man Mr. Tweak:clap:

Now I must admit that I don't find pop-up/under ads to be very appealing - though on rarest of occasion they do actually hold content that is of interest to me, if so I click.

But the fact that Mr. Tweak finds enough merit in the prospect to consider it, indicates to me that perhaps he deems it desirable on a financial level.

Seems to be a fair appraisal on my part to say that I've probably burned up my fair share of bandwidth here at TweakTown - even my 2+kbs adds up over time.
If allowing the advertisers to utilize this tactic will enable Mr. Tweak to offset the costs incurred through operation of this site, then by all means give it a try and see if it helps.
I truly hope it will work out well for all of us if such a venture is implemented.

So go for it Mr. Tweak, and I'll do my very best to keep looking at the positive side of things here at my online home away from home.

I guess no one will know exactly how this will turn out until we give it a try -- I'm up willing to give it a fair chance for both our sakes

01-15-2003, 03:59 PM
I do my best Mr.C


01-15-2003, 04:22 PM
wings: all newbies face Mecca and bow to thy king.......
praise Allah the Jihad has begun....:cheers:

01-16-2003, 04:37 AM
wings: all newbies face Mecca and bow to thy king.......
praise Allah the Jihad has begun....:cheers:

Message by proxy:


01-16-2003, 06:15 AM
When I surf I always have five+ windows open. Tweaktown now keeps poping to the front which can get very annoying. Is there anyway to stop that?

Or has it always been like that and I just didn't notice?


01-16-2003, 09:19 AM
That's just your computer telling you which of the open windows has the best content...go with it buddy :)

01-16-2003, 09:23 AM
2 days has passed and I was proved wrong - pop under code has been added to TweakTown.

If you see anymore than one pop under ad per day, contact me straight away and I will go sick at our advertising agency!

01-16-2003, 10:12 AM

Persian Immortal just let me know if you have cookies blocked (e.g. if you have a HIGH level of Privacy in Internet Explorer) you will see a pop under each time you refresh a page since these ads are cookie based.

Either way, our advertising agency is aware of this and is looking to have the problem fixed within a week...


Mr. C
01-16-2003, 10:28 AM
Just go ahead and add *.tweaktown.com to your trusted sites list.
The ads are not generated from this domain so it is cool.
And Mr. Tweak isn't going to do anything nasty to your PC, so just take the TweakTown cookie - they are delicious and free.

Many internet advertisers have long been on my restricted sites list - to date, this has caused me no conflicts when accessing TweakTown. Even if those restricted domains are serving the ad content, tweaktown.com comes through just fine.

Good luck on this new venture Mr. Tweak!

01-16-2003, 12:25 PM
I'm getting a pop up with about every window I open.

Though right now it stopped. Hmmm...

I'll do what Mr. C says though. :D

Goo Idea!

Mr. C
01-16-2003, 12:38 PM
whether or not you make this a "trusted site" is your choice - but do yourself a favor and take the cookie.

Tweaktown has been on my trusted site list for 1 1/2 years and it's never done me wrong.

Take my word for it, this is a very short list with exactly 7 sites total -- so I don't take making a site part of the "trusted" area lighlty at all.

Bahamut Zer0
01-16-2003, 01:04 PM
Im getting a popup every page as well. (ACESS YOUR PC FROM ANYWHERE! ad) as long as I dont close it, it wont popup every page that i get served from tweaktown. I voted against including popunder/up ads on tweaktown. If you can guarantee no cookies are stored/used and the ads do as advertised (once ever 24hrs not page hit) then it could be tolerable and my vote changed.

01-16-2003, 01:10 PM
It should do it - I just tested Mr.C's theory myself and if you add high security or block cookies altogether the pop under does display each time.

Like Mr.C said, add *.tweaktown.com to your trusted sites list and you should be right.

Mr. C
01-16-2003, 01:43 PM
Bahamut Zer0 in my experience there has never been any foul play on my system from having a cookie from tweaktown.

Having it also saves me from having to log in each time I arrrive in the forum -- and now, it also saves me from a whole lot af ads I'm hearing about. Yup, just 1 per 24 hours as prescribed.

Now, I can't testify what any cookies placed by the ads may do, but I assure you the cookie from TweakTown is pretty much the good things a cookie is supposed to be.

Those ads are not coming from TweakTown itself, but rather by a third-party advertiser. Enabling cookies from TweakTown will prevent an overabundance of the ads though as they are likely triggered by a lack of or expired time-date stamp on the cookie from TweakTown.

Here's how I do it, for those that may be unfamiliar with the process.
In the IE Window or Internet Control Panel;
For IE, click the "Tools" menu
Choose "Internet Options"

At this point, it is the same instruction for doing this through the Control Panel

Click the "Security" tab
Highlight the desired area icon at the top of the dialouge box -- in this case, the "Trusted Sites"
Click the "Sites" button, then a second dialouge box will appear
in the input field lableled "Add this Web site to the zone", type in
Click the "Add" button
Click the "OK" button
Click OK to exit the dialouge completely.

The wildcard character (*) is used to designate all content from the tweaktown.com domain -- so it catches www. or forum. or whatever -- it is all included that way.

The same process can be used to put a domain on the "Restricted" list.
Just follow the steps above ---- except choose the "Restricted Sites" icon.

again, use the *, as in *.stinkingwebadvert.net
In addition to adding a domain to the restricted list, I also like to customize the restricted zone by using the "Custom Level" button and disabling everything there, lock stock & barrel.

Truth is, most of the advertising on the web has been added to my restricted sites already, regardless of whether they appear in conjunction with this site or not -- I've been working on that list for a couple of years and it is still growing.

In this manner, by accepting the TweakTown cookies I do not get bombarded by the ads everytime I come here.
If you are concerned about cookies from the ads (which I state again, do not come from the tweaktown.com domain) then Internet Explorer has a pretty good tool built-in to deal with those.

The fact is, TweakTown is doing their best to control the frequency of the ads, but it is the cookie from that tweaktown domain that enables them to do so.

01-16-2003, 02:20 PM
Could not have said it better myself.


01-16-2003, 02:52 PM
I couldn't have said it better myself Mr.C. I've just finished another 4 PC's that will go to their owners as secure against these bad cookies as I can make them atm. :thumb:

Mr. C
01-16-2003, 06:53 PM
Fact is, a lot of people aren't too keen on cookies. Actually the cookie was developed for some rather useful purposes. Like everything else though, the concept has been exploited by some groups and that has given the whole thing a bad reputation.

But if you think the TweakTown cookie may be suspect, I invite you to enable cookies globally for a surf session, then run Spybot Search & Destroy (that's right, it detects nasty cookies too:thumb: )

You won't find a cookie from TweakTown in the results list - I bet you that!

And those you do see, use the directions in my previous post to restrict the domain - then allow spybot to disintegrate 'em.

Like I said before, there are 7 places on the entire internet that I allow access to my PC by being "trusted" and TT is 1 of them --- why is that? Because in my book, TweakTown earned the priveledge fair 'n' square.

and if Mr. Tweak ever screwed it up, he knows I'd remove the priveledge in a heart beat :no:

01-16-2003, 06:57 PM
7? :?:

Sheesh TT is the only one here. :D

:beer: :beer: :beer: :beer: :beer:

01-16-2003, 06:59 PM
7? :?:

Sheesh TT is the only one here. :D

:beer: :beer: :beer: :beer: :beer:

I have the following added to make TweakTown totally trusted:

*.tweaktown.com (of course)

Mr. C
01-16-2003, 07:09 PM
I'm pretty sure a couple on that list are restricted on this system, but it doesn't interfere with the content of TweakTown in any way.

01-16-2003, 07:10 PM
I do have 12 listin' in the restricted sites though but after some free time to thoroughly examine a certain program linked above I'll make that list longer. ;)

Mr. C
01-16-2003, 07:26 PM
That doesn't begin to touch the nasties out there running loose!

Maybe I should just post a .reg file ---hmmm :?:

I dare say, a certain previously mentioned program will be the one examining you :laugh:

01-16-2003, 07:37 PM
Even just a .txt file will do just to copy and paste. ;)

:beer: :beer: :beer: :beer: :beer:

Bahamut Zer0
01-16-2003, 07:45 PM
10 years of being online and ive never had to use the trusted domain box. Shouldnt have to either.

Im just being stubborn. I believe ive been around long enough. :)

Mr. C
01-16-2003, 07:58 PM
I can appreciate that point of view -- it's all about freedom of choice:thumb:

You are certainly entitled to use any method you like - or even to fully enjoy the advertisement just as the advertisers hoped you would.

I would not be so bold as to tell anyone what they must do to thier system, these are only suggestions that I'm making.

01-16-2003, 11:58 PM
Actually Mr. C I would really aperciate either a text file or just posted of trusted and restricted sites.

Also, I never had cookies disabled. Was excepting all of them. Was getting multiple pop ups. I only had one window opened pointed at TT, a pop up opened then I clicked a link and a second one opened. I now have 2 pops open.

They are:
Cheep Tickets
Access You PC from Anywhere!

01-17-2003, 12:57 AM
Mr. C, when I was wondering why I didn't have TT on my trusted list and when I tried, I remembered why. It gives me a box saying the only addresses with "https://" are accepted and since TT has a "http://" adress, it won't let me add. Any ideas?:confused:

I am using Win98SE using IE6. :?:


01-17-2003, 01:25 AM
Just untick that box JM. :thumb:

:beer: :beer: :beer: :beer: :beer:

01-17-2003, 07:24 AM
or just type in:


Mr. C
01-17-2003, 10:39 AM
Just untick that box JM. :thumb:

That should do the trick - just disable the secure server verification check-box under the list of sites.

negomike - you don't have to type http:// as just the domain will be sufficient, good use of the wildcard though, that really does save time when a domain has multiple forms of addresses such as this site.:thumb:

Mr. C
01-17-2003, 10:41 AM
Actually Mr. C I would really aperciate either a text file or just posted of trusted and restricted sites.

Also, I never had cookies disabled. Was excepting all of them. Was getting multiple pop ups. I only had one window opened pointed at TT, a pop up opened then I clicked a link and a second one opened. I now have 2 pops open.

They are:
Cheep Tickets
Access You PC from Anywhere!

is it possible that adding the http:// is confusing the security tools in IE:?:

You remove that by editing the entry and see if that does the trick.

Mr. C
01-17-2003, 11:17 AM
OK folks, if you really want to pick out the nasties, here is my domains residing in my registry from usage of the security tools in IE.

""*"=dword:00000002" = a trusted site
""*"=dword:00000004" = a restricted site

Most of the domains can be quickly spotted with no problem
some are a bit trickier, as they appear as;

[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\Curre ntVersion\Internet Settings\ZoneMap\Domains\cnet.com\ads]

in this instance, the actual site being restricted is ads.cnet.com

Someone with some basic skills in Office could probably clean this up quickly, leaving only the domains behind.

But, I've been doing the work for 2 years already:laugh:

and no, I'm not done yet:shoot3:

some of these might actually be benign, but were on my local drive and considered suspect as they served no purpose I could think of that would be useful to me.

And don't even hassle me about some of the domain names in this file --- you'd be amazed at the garbage you can pick up doing everyday surfing.:no:

01-17-2003, 12:07 PM
Someone with some basic skills in Office could probably clean this up quickly, leaving only the domains behind.

why clean it up when you can just import it straight to the registery?
then if you want to have access to some of the sites on hte restricted list, go and delete them from the lsit

01-17-2003, 01:20 PM
I have my Privacy level set to MEDIUM in IE6. Never had any problems with accepting cookies and I'm not stopping now. In my opinion trying to block cookies and restricting sites only causes problems because they won't operate the way they were designed to.

Use of spyware killers and regular maintenance/cleaning of registry etc. (as per my XP Guide ;)) makes sure that I've never had any foul play or problems on my machine.

Mr. C
01-17-2003, 06:32 PM
....trying to block cookies and restricting sites only causes problems because they won't operate the way they were designed to.

That, kind sir, is exactly my intention - to prevent these sites from operating the way they were designed to do.

Admittedly, some of those sites listed are benign. Others indeed actively pursue courses of action which, given the choice, I would just as soon they were not enabled with the ability to carry out those activities.

As I stated previously, cookies were designed to be useful tools for users and operators of websites. This has been *******ized by some to the point where unfortunately, some folks don't like to accept any cookies from anywhere.

Sad isn't it, when the number of bad apples ruins the whole concept of the good things a cookie is supposed to be.

Mr. C
01-17-2003, 06:50 PM

I just closed all my browser windows, getting ready to shut down the PC and depart for work.

Upon closing all the Windows --- there lay in wait a small pop-under.
As I was moving to close it, ZoneAlarm notified me that RPCSS.EXE was trying to utilize the internet connection.


Does anyone consider this to be "acceptable behaviour" -- because I sure as hell do not.
Yes, I restrict websitess -- exactly because of heinious misuse (or attempted misuse) of my machine. I monitor my system and am quite careful as to what is taking place there.

If I had the opportunity, I would most certainly put a pop-knot on the head of the individuals who attempted this unwarranted intrusion upon my PC.

This is the type of thing that really gets my goat!:shoot2:

amazing, we were just talking about this crap -- and there you go, classic example.

Surely you don't expect me to give these goons access to my ActiveX and other avenues of ingress, now do you:?:

01-17-2003, 08:12 PM

Another good find Mr.C - Gee, I seem to be learning a whole bunch of new security methods over the past few days... :)

01-17-2003, 11:38 PM
This checklist is from the Open Web Application Security Project (OWASP). ;)

OWASP's top risks list<br><br><ol><li>Invalidated parameters: Failure to validate information from a Web requests before these are used by a Web application. Attackers can use these flaws to attack backend systems through a Web application.<br><li>Broken access control: Restrictions on what authenticated users are allowed to do are often not properly enforced. Attacks use this to access other users' accounts, view sensitive files or run unauthorised functions.<br><li>Broken account and session management: Account credentials and session tokens left without proper protection, leading to the risk that crackers could assume victims' identities.<br><li>Cross-site scripting flaws: A modern classic - mistakes here mean Web applications can be used as a mechanism to steal session tokens, attack a local machine or spoof content.<br><li>Buffer overflows: Arguable the most common type of security risk (so why isn't it number one? Ed). Sloppy programming means applications fail to properly validate inputs - so maliciously constructed, malformed requests can crash a process and be used to inject hostile code into target machines.<br><li>Command injection flaws: If an attacker can embed malicious commands in parameters passed to external systems these may be executed on behalf of a web application, to unpleasant effect.<br><li>Error handling problems: If an attacker can cause errors which are improperly handled, all manner of mischief (information disclosure, system crashes etc.) might be possible.<br><li>Insecure use of cryptography: Web apps frequently use cryptography. If that's not coded properly, sensitive information won't be adequately protected.<br><li>Remote administration flaws: If remote Web admin tools are insecure then an attacker stands a chance of gaining full access to all aspects of a site.<br><li>Web and application server misconfiguration: Don't trust out of the box security </ol>

01-18-2003, 01:50 AM
Howsabout allowing that under-advertising, while *encouraging* certain "useful" s/ware that deletes such invasiveness, which is partly wot u do anyway? Just a thot.
Business as usual... :cantfocus

01-18-2003, 03:28 AM
To Mr. C

I have finished the first revision of you cookie restricted/trusted list
Please give it a glance to make sure I didn't make any huge mistakes.

Also, included in the list I have seperated most of those that had now security heading under NEITHER.

Though some may have been kept under restructed in my final editing.

Here are some of the sites that you listed as restricted and I was just wonder, why?


Here is the file.

I feel sick. :drunk:

now I sleep. Ugh.
P.S. I have little skill with MS word. Was mostly mouse grease.
P.S.S. No spell checking was used in this post & I can not spell

01-18-2003, 03:34 AM
After just goin' thru half that list I've come to the conclussion that some ppl spend far too much time on the internet and goin' places I stay away from. :laugh:

01-18-2003, 05:52 AM

Ok, got two hours of sleep and I'm back to my happy go lucky self.

For that list, should I got through it and add *. to all the address that don't have the prefix/first part of the domain thingy. I.e. www. Forgot what it's call... again.

Thanks, hope this is useful,


01-18-2003, 06:03 AM
* = Wildcard to cover variations. ;)

:beer: :beer: :beer:

01-18-2003, 06:16 AM

But should I got through and add it? :?:

01-18-2003, 06:31 AM
Of course.

Mr. C
01-18-2003, 09:04 AM
After just goin' thru half that list I've come to the conclussion that some ppl spend far too much time on the internet and goin' places I stay away from. :laugh:

I warned you!
Those are domains that I found in my cookies --- not places I was freaking visiting for crying out loud.

OK, last time --- next joker brings that up gets a pop-knot on his noggin in the shape of the wishbone formation:hammer:

geez, try to give these yahoos a hand and look how they treat you:laugh:

I didn't think you were gonn'a let that slide though, not really:rolleyes:

Mr. C
01-18-2003, 09:17 AM
To Mr. C


could be 3 possibilities.
1.) due to an activity I deemed unacceptable, they may have fallen victim to a "blanket sweep" of domains within the cookies on my system.
2.) possibly part of an old experiment in keeping IE windows from stealing focus.
3.possibly because at the time I actually did not want that domains cookie or something.

Keep in mind, this has been in progress for over 2 years so I'm not really sure in all cases. And after this amount of time spent, I am still in the learning process........but then, I think most of us are after all.
Hopefully, any errors made will be on the side of caution, after all;)

Nice work harvesting those domains, take a rest, you deserve it!:thumb:

Does anyone have any info to offer on that rpcss.exe call I posted about earlier:?:
As I stated, I was on the way to work and didn't have time to investigate the matter at all. But chalk up 1 more for ZoneAlarm:D

01-20-2003, 11:43 AM

Forget about it.

Mr. C
01-31-2003, 10:49 AM
ooh, these folks are nasty;

I would highly reccomend you put
on that restricted list of yours, and I do mean everyone.

if you've been playing along, you will be happy to note it was already restricted from the use of my "not-quite master" list of blocked sites

01-31-2003, 12:30 PM
Done. ;)

:beer: :beer: :beer:

01-31-2003, 05:08 PM
Ok, I finally got off my bum and finished this. added *. to all but complete links

Separated any links that I thought one might not wish to restrict and put them under perhaps to restrict.

Don’t think I broke any links kept an eye out for complete links i.e. ad.blah.com
But of course can't be sure. :)

If anyone knows any more just do a find on the list to see if it is in there if not, I'll be happy to add it, or someone else can. :D

Or in there any site that people should not be restricted, dito.

Also, you don't need to worry about viruses, because I did all this on a Mac. :D

02-16-2003, 11:29 AM
Is very bad too

02-16-2003, 12:15 PM
Done! - Added.

I also added cexx.org.
Sorry Mr. C I remember doing a search when you talked about it, and I could of sworn it was in there. Just did a second search and it wasn't so I now added it.

Also added *.xupiter.com even though it's already in your list, just to make it more likely that it will be blocked. Plus doesn't having a site on your block list twice make you twice as secure? :p

Sorry to have failed you Mr. C

No strangle strangle, o'ta? :D

Also, if anyone else has a web page they think should be added let me know. But do me a favor and do a search on the uploaded list to make sure it's not already there.

02-16-2003, 03:25 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by negomike
[B]Done! - Added.

I also added cexx.org...........Plus doesn't having a site on your block list twice make you twice as secure? :p

Sorry to have failed you Mr. C

No strangle strangle, o'ta?

O-tay butt weet :) What? doesn't everyone add at least
a quad-entry to restricted list for each bio-hazard site? Just
make sure......AhhhhhhhHhuuummm.....ya don't add 3 extra
*wildcards too!!:crazy: :cackle: :laugh: :cackle: Only kidding,
this was rhetorical question/lame attempt at humor ONLY:cackle: :cantfocus

On the serious tip though, Negomike, congrats on one of the few contructive jetlag reply's/post to a dying yet informatively useful thread that i have yet too see. :crazy: : peace2:

02-16-2003, 06:26 PM
Well it's gone off topic like most others but at least it's constructive. :devil:

Mr. C
02-16-2003, 09:29 PM
Actually if you add a domain to a zone which already exists in that or another zone, you should get a message box telling you so.

Not uncommon for those banner-ad type domains to use 3 or more variations of thier domain, tricky devils that they are and all.
Being as I only work within 2 zones, and I'm certain it isn't on the "short list" (Trusted Sites) - if it says it already exists in a zone, then we can be certain which one it's in:thumb:

02-16-2003, 09:47 PM
Thanks Mr. C. another great tip there, as per usual.
I,too , like you, am very festidious about i/o data access
when it concerns my personal computers; not only on the web, but , am very picky 'bout MS /OS control issues with which i am
alarmed by/fight with on constant vigle. That's why i prefer Win98se...............inspite of owning all MS/OS.....incl. 3.1(still luv
playing those old early dos games. :laugh: :wave:

Mr. C
02-16-2003, 10:35 PM
Thanks for the tip TwizlZone:thumb:
Added *.trafficswarm.com - and for good measure, *.trafficswarm.net. Can't be too careful you know:D
If you have any info as to other variations those folks use, please pass it on.

Anyone who is not aware of it, this Security Zone info can be easily backed up --- no point in recreating the wheel in the event of a reinstall.

The list of sites added to the zones is at;

HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\Curre ntVersion\Internet Settings\ZoneMap\Domains

The settings for the security zones is at;
HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\Curre ntVersion\Internet Settings\Zones

The only 1 to really be concerned with is "4" though it is just as easy to back them all up at once. 4 contains the settings for "Restricted sites".

Just export thoses as a .reg and put them in a safe partition or on floppy to be added with ease.

After you've got Windows and drivers all set, just right click on those files and choose "Merge", easy peasy

: peace2:

02-16-2003, 11:05 PM
I also like to throw the .org's in as well as a few have used those before. ;)

I must say though that that trafficswarm.com must have been a real nasty as each time that I checked someone's handy work Pow went down the gurglar but the firewall was closin' the window down before the AV could analyse the exact threat posed. Damn irritatin' havin' to reset POW! again to access the net though. :hmph:

02-17-2003, 05:20 AM
Done-y! added


On a side note - a newbie questions. no wait, I'll just post it in internet network so I can get flamed were I'm supposed too. :p

I'm such a well behaved newbie, I'm even removing my old attachments. :D

:bounce: ::shameless bid for praise:: :bounce:


Orignally posted by Wiggo
[b]Well it's gone off topic like most others but at least it's constructive.

Maybe a little thread name edit? Add something about cookie privacy list, come to think of it there would be a lot more people interested in the web cookie privacy then the pop up question. Being self-centered and all. :D

Or could you copy/paste the posts into a new thread. I don't know if you can do that or not. At least without a unreasonable amount of work.

Mr. C
02-17-2003, 05:58 AM
Poking around in these forums for these hidden treasures is what keeps riff-raff like us off the streets.
Kind of a public service provided by TweakTown.

After all, it is all in one forum - how easy do you want it:?:


02-17-2003, 06:05 AM
how easy do you want it:?:

The answer to that strongly depends on exactly what the topic is. :angel: :D

Mr. C
02-17-2003, 06:20 AM
Call me crazy, but I don't see a change in topic (till those last few posts).

It was a sequential progression of the original discussion. Read the first page of the thread, and see it in action.

Classic example of brilliant minds solving problems by working together.
Funny, some of my posts got in there too:D

02-17-2003, 07:24 AM
I never meant any critism. In fact the point I was trying to make has nothing to do with being on topic.

This has no impact on those who have been taking part here.
My thought is that our current discussion might interest people who have turned away due to the first post or the title.

02-17-2003, 03:13 PM
All good points and I hope Tweak don't chew me out for editin' the title of his thread a little to clue others in on what's goin' on here now. :D

<center>:beer: :beer: :beer: :beer: :beer:</center>