worst abuse on PA ever

I don't know, I kind of feel the evil of it has been totally exaggerated. So it's occasionally annoying (no doubting that), but a deal-breaker for being active on the site?

Because I now expect it, I simply highlight and COPY whatever I'm doing each time, then if I have to get stopped by It That Shall Not Be Named and have to go back, I just PASTE it back in and try again. It usually doesn't hit two times in a row. I know it shouldn't have even come to this point, but it's pretty easy to adjust to.

Edited by Aussie-Byrd-Brother - May 21 2017 at 18:59

Aussie-Byrd-Brother wrote: I don't know, I kind of feel the evil of it has been totally exaggerated. So it's occasionally annoying (no doubting that), but a deal-breaker for being active on the site? Because I now expect it, I simply highlight and COPY whatever I'm doing each time, then if I have to get stopped by It That Shall Not Be Named and have to go back, I just PASTE it back in and try again. It usually doesn't hit two times in a row. I know it shouldn't have even come to this point, but it's pretty easy to adjust to.

^ And here's the proof. A siting off the coast of Albania 

I bet if you're on a site that's collecting money you're not going to get this sh*t.

lazland wrote: I got an access denied message yesterday for the first time. I gave it four goes, kept getting it, gave up.

Aussie-Byrd-Brother wrote: I don't know, I kind of feel the evil of it has been totally exaggerated. So it's occasionally annoying (no doubting that), but a deal-breaker for being active on the site? Because I now expect it, I simply highlight and COPY whatever I'm doing each time, then if I have to get stopped by It That Shall Not Be Named and have to go back, I just PASTE it back in and try again. It usually doesn't hit two times in a row. I know it shouldn't have even come to this point, but it's pretty easy to adjust to.

I agree, Michael, it's really annoying but not impossible to accommodate.
I guess it's a security trade-off M@x has certainly considered beforehand, otherwise why have bothered in the first place ???

^I would say a mass exodus instead.

Guldbamsen wrote: Aussie-Byrd-Brother wrote: I don't know, I kind of feel the evil of it has been totally exaggerated. So it's occasionally annoying (no doubting that), but a deal-breaker for being active on the site? Because I now expect it, I simply highlight and COPY whatever I'm doing each time, then if I have to get stopped by It That Shall Not Be Named and have to go back, I just PASTE it back in and try again. It usually doesn't hit two times in a row. I know it shouldn't have even come to this point, but it's pretty easy to adjust to. I get your point Michael but it shouldn't have to be this irritating to frequent a music site - especially since this new nuisance basically has no function other than arbitrarily erasing one's posts and demanding that you prove your carbon based existence. It does not stop spammers + the usual robots that frequent PA never really posted and I don't see that changing in the future. But, and this is the part that pisses me off the most, there has been no official explanation nor rationale on why this thing was implemented in the first place. We, the people who actually use and run the site, are merely left with speculation. Is this out of caution? Is it a business thing ie profitable? Was it forced on Max?

I've tried reading up a bit on Google's Captcha software David, and as far as I can tell, it is a FREE service offered to site owners and web administrators but is not compulsory. It identifies the browser being used, the user's IP address and looks for cookies which will identify any historical activity as inherently 'human' Google also claim that the software is sophisticated enough to distinguish mouse movements made towards the "I am not a robot' check box as human or by machine. No, I've no idea how they do that either and yes, Google are therefore monitoring our every keystroke online. There is an article on Wired (albeit it's 3 years old) which explains some of the background

http://www.wired.com/2014/12/google-one-click-recaptcha/

I believe that originally the hugely irritating picture galleries we are assailed with was designed just for smartphone and tablet users but that no longer appears to be the case.

ads between reviews