This is Interesting: Free Magazines for Graphics designers and webmasters
Home > Archive > Webmaster forum > August 2006 > Site owners check your site for robots.txt file!
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Site owners check your site for robots.txt file!
|
|
| softwarelabus@yahoo.com 2006-08-08, 6:44 pm |
| Hi,
I wanted to warn all website owners that some evil web hosts like
vistapages will periodically place a robots.txt file on your site that
disallows all search engines. It happened to me.
Over the last several months I've noticed my web traffic dropped to
nearly zero. A few days ago I noticed a new file, robots.txt. As most
of you know, if your site has a robots.txt in your websites home
directory then all search engines will look at it for possible
instructions. The robots.txt file tells search engines what to do or
what not to do. In my case, it had simple instructions to disallow all
user-agents; i.e., telling all sites they cannot come here.
How to check:
If you web site is called www.mywebsite.com then you want to check the
following web page:
www.mywebsite.com/robots.txt
You should also look for this file when you ftp to your site in case
your web host places a sneaky server script to make robots.txt
invisible only to you.
Paul
| |
| Safalra 2006-08-08, 6:44 pm |
| On 8 Aug 2006 07:16:01 -0700, softwarelabus@yahoo.com wrote:
> [snip hosts adding robots.txt file]
> You should also look for this file when you ftp to your site in case
> your web host places a sneaky server script to make robots.txt
> invisible only to you.
They could of course hide the file on the server (as mosts hosts do with
server configuration files) - and much more reliably than doing so for HTTP
requests.
--
Safalra (Stephen Morley)
http://www.safalra.com/hypertext/
| |
| Adrienne Boswell 2006-08-08, 6:44 pm |
| Gazing into my crystal ball I observed softwarelabus@yahoo.com writing in
news:1155046561.133316.32210@n13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
> Hi,
>
> I wanted to warn all website owners that some evil web hosts like
> vistapages will periodically place a robots.txt file on your site that
> disallows all search engines. It happened to me.
>
> Over the last several months I've noticed my web traffic dropped to
> nearly zero. A few days ago I noticed a new file, robots.txt. As most
> of you know, if your site has a robots.txt in your websites home
> directory then all search engines will look at it for possible
> instructions. The robots.txt file tells search engines what to do or
> what not to do. In my case, it had simple instructions to disallow all
> user-agents; i.e., telling all sites they cannot come here.
>
> How to check:
> If you web site is called www.mywebsite.com then you want to check the
> following web page:
> www.mywebsite.com/robots.txt
>
> You should also look for this file when you ftp to your site in case
> your web host places a sneaky server script to make robots.txt
> invisible only to you.
>
> Paul
>
>
I really doubt that this was done with evil intent, probably a misguided
system administrator who got tired of seeing 404 errors, but was too lazy
to look up the robots.txt protocol and get it right.
It's perfectly okay to have blank file, that way the bots are happy, and
the system admins are happy, too.
--
Adrienne Boswell at Home
Arbpen Web Site Design Services
http://www.cavalcade-of-coding.info
Please respond to the group so others can share
| |
| Andy Dingley 2006-08-08, 6:44 pm |
|
softwarelabus@yahoo.com wrote:
> I wanted to warn all website owners that some evil web hosts like
> vistapages will periodically place a robots.txt file on your site that
> disallows all search engines. It happened to me.
OK, so that's pretty evil. Not quite sharks with frickin' laser beams
on their heads, but it's more evil than you want from people you're
giving money to.
What did they say about this? How abject was their grovelling apology?
You're not still _with_ these people are you?!
> You should also look for this file when you ftp to your site in case
> your web host places a sneaky server script to make robots.txt
> invisible only to you.
If I were evil (Mwwaa ha ha ha) I wouldn't place a robots.txt in
anyone's web root, I'd use some config to serve a standard robots.txt
for HTTP requests for it, without you even having a file to see. As
easy for the evil admin to do, and less obvious.
| |
| softwarelabus@yahoo.com 2006-08-08, 6:44 pm |
| Andy Dingley wrote:
> softwarelabus@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>
> OK, so that's pretty evil. Not quite sharks with frickin' laser beams
> on their heads, but it's more evil than you want from people you're
> giving money to.
>
> What did they say about this? How abject was their grovelling apology?
>
> You're not still _with_ these people are you?!
>
>
>
> If I were evil (Mwwaa ha ha ha) I wouldn't place a robots.txt in
> anyone's web root, I'd use some config to serve a standard robots.txt
> for HTTP requests for it, without you even having a file to see. As
> easy for the evil admin to do, and less obvious.
Sometimes I wished some x-virus creator who turned good would write a
god virus. A virus that actually did some good by destroying other
viruses, removing evil disallows in robots.txt from your hosts server.
;-) I know, I know, two wrongs don't make a right ... don't sink to
the level of evil, lol.
Is this such a bad idea? If the government agencies caught a good
virus maker would they be prosecuted or given the nobel price.
just food for thought is all.
Paul
| |
| softwarelabus@yahoo.com 2006-08-08, 6:44 pm |
| Safalra wrote:
> On 8 Aug 2006 07:16:01 -0700, softwarelabus@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> They could of course hide the file on the server (as mosts hosts do with
> server configuration files) - and much more reliably than doing so for HTTP
> requests.
You could ftp a blank robots.txt file. If it succeeded then you're ok.
If not, then you should contact the SA to delete the hidden robots.txt
Paul
| |
| softwarelabus@yahoo.com 2006-08-08, 6:44 pm |
|
Adrienne Boswell wrote:
> Gazing into my crystal ball I observed softwarelabus@yahoo.com writing in
> news:1155046561.133316.32210@n13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
>
>
> I really doubt that this was done with evil intent, probably a misguided
> system administrator who got tired of seeing 404 errors, but was too lazy
> to look up the robots.txt protocol and get it right.
>
> It's perfectly okay to have blank file, that way the bots are happy, and
> the system admins are happy, too.
I'd say that was a misguided SA alright, lol. IMHO that's when it's
time to call it quits, start looking for another web host because
that's like dropping a nuke on a site.
Paul
| |
| SpaceGirl 2006-08-08, 6:44 pm |
|
softwarelabus@yahoo.com wrote:
> Andy Dingley wrote:
>
>
>
> Sometimes I wished some x-virus creator who turned good would write a
> god virus. A virus that actually did some good by destroying other
> viruses, removing evil disallows in robots.txt from your hosts server.
> ;-) I know, I know, two wrongs don't make a right ... don't sink to
> the level of evil, lol.
>
> Is this such a bad idea? If the government agencies caught a good
> virus maker would they be prosecuted or given the nobel price.
>
> just food for thought is all.
> Paul
Given that even commercial antivirus occasionally mis-detects
legitimate software as a virus, imagine if say, by some mistake,
"photoshop.exe" is accidentally labelled as a virus. With your "virus
killing virus", you could do vastly more damage than an regular wild
virus would ever do. Really Really Bad Idea.
| |
| Andy Dingley 2006-08-08, 6:44 pm |
|
Adrienne Boswell wrote:
> I really doubt that this was done with evil intent, probably a misguided
> system administrator who got tired of seeing 404 errors,
I'm cynical enough to suspect that it was evil intent, because hosting
companies can reduce costs by reducing traffic to small sites on
flat-fee hosting plans.
No robots, no search hits, no traffic.
| |
|
| On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 07:56:46 -0700, softwarelabus wrote:
> Sometimes I wished some x-virus creator who turned good would write a god
> virus. A virus that actually did some good by destroying other viruses,
> removing evil disallows in robots.txt from your hosts server. ;-) I know,
> I know, two wrongs don't make a right ... don't sink to the level of evil,
> lol.
There was an example of this a couple of years ago that, due to a poorly
written anti-virus virus, actually caused more harm than good. Well, to
be precise, it caused very little good, and very little harm.
--
JDS
| |
| David Cary Hart 2006-08-08, 6:44 pm |
| On 8 Aug 2006 07:16:01 -0700, softwarelabus@yahoo.com opined:
> Hi,
>
> I wanted to warn all website owners that some evil web hosts like
> vistapages will periodically place a robots.txt file on your site
> that disallows all search engines. It happened to me.
That's putting a bandage on gunshot wound. The real issue is how
a third party obtained write privileges.
--
"Black Hole": The economic effect of administering a DNSBL
Our DNSBL - Eliminate Spam at the Source: http://www.TQMcube.com
Don't Subsidize Criminals: http://boulderpledge.org
| |
| easygoin 2006-08-08, 6:44 pm |
| softwarelabus@yahoo.com wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I wanted to warn all website owners that some evil web hosts like
> vistapages will periodically place a robots.txt file on your site that
> disallows all search engines. It happened to me.
>
Just as no one has mentioned this - I wouldn't assume its your ISP
unless you have confirmation from them and sometimes hosts (being one
myself) have set their servers up to add certain files / folders by
default - usually an .htaccess file and this might be where it came from.
But rather as default - change your FTP password to something secure
using different cases and numbers, and also change any hosting passwords
if you have a dedicated / reseller / managed etc server - just in case
some malicious personage has decided to "secretly" sabotage your site
as this would indeed be a very good way to do this... as most have
backups (don't we) of our online sites ;).
Just a thought - Dimitri
| |
|
| David Cary Hart wrote:
> On 8 Aug 2006 07:16:01 -0700, softwarelabus@yahoo.com opined:
>
> That's putting a bandage on gunshot wound. The real issue is how
> a third party obtained write privileges.
If it was the sysadmin obtaining write permissions is noteven a question.
If it was a mis guided sysadmin who put the said robots.txt file there,
he was just plain wrong. He should of instead of contacted the owner of
the site telling the owner why it is needed and how to go about doing
it. There is no reason that a sysadmin should be screwing with or
adding files to my site, unless something I am doing is causing major
problems. Sorry a 404 error is not good cause. If the sysadmin or the
owner of the site didn't place the robots.txt file there, than there are
possibly other issues that need to be looked at. If the sysadmin did
place said file on his site, then he should by all means change hosting
providers. no if ands or buts.
| |
| Big Bill 2006-08-08, 6:44 pm |
| On 8 Aug 2006 07:16:01 -0700, softwarelabus@yahoo.com wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I wanted to warn all website owners that some evil web hosts like
>vistapages will periodically place a robots.txt file on your site that
>disallows all search engines. It happened to me.
>
>Over the last several months I've noticed my web traffic dropped to
>nearly zero. A few days ago I noticed a new file, robots.txt. As most
>of you know, if your site has a robots.txt in your websites home
>directory then all search engines will look at it for possible
>instructions. The robots.txt file tells search engines what to do or
>what not to do. In my case, it had simple instructions to disallow all
>user-agents; i.e., telling all sites they cannot come here.
>
>How to check:
>If you web site is called www.mywebsite.com then you want to check the
>following web page:
>www.mywebsite.com/robots.txt
>
>You should also look for this file when you ftp to your site in case
>your web host places a sneaky server script to make robots.txt
>invisible only to you.
>
>Paul
I guess your web hosts don't like you, do they? Did you ask them about
this?
BB
--
http://www.here-be-posters.co.uk/ma...oe-pictures.htm
http://www.kruse.co.uk/seo-maintenance.htm
http://www.crystal-liaison.com/arti...luna-glass.html
| |
| Big Bill 2006-08-08, 6:44 pm |
| On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 14:29:51 GMT, Adrienne Boswell <arbpen@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>
>I really doubt that this was done with evil intent, probably a misguided
>system administrator who got tired of seeing 404 errors, but was too lazy
>to look up the robots.txt protocol and get it right.
>
>It's perfectly okay to have blank file, that way the bots are happy, and
>the system admins are happy, too.
Adrienne! Not even a bit dead, I see, just absent, eh?
BB
--
http://www.here-be-posters.co.uk/ma...oe-pictures.htm
http://www.kruse.co.uk/seo-maintenance.htm
http://www.crystal-liaison.com/arti...luna-glass.html
| |
|
| easygoin wrote:
<snip>
>
> Just as no one has mentioned this - I wouldn't assume its your ISP
> unless you have confirmation from them and sometimes hosts (being one
> myself) have set their servers up to add certain files / folders by
> default - usually an .htaccess file and this might be where it came from.
Can you please show me one web hosting provider that places by default a
robots.txt file that disallows search engines. Seeing that you are "in
the business". I have yet come across a web provider that places such a
restriction as that. And yes I do know that as a default some providers
do add the .htaccess file, but I know none that go into a customers site
and than adds or removes information. If I did find out that a sysadmin
did or was doing that without my knowledge I would run fast to find a
different provider......
>
> But rather as default - change your FTP password to something secure
> using different cases and numbers, and also change any hosting passwords
> if you have a dedicated / reseller / managed etc server - just in case
> some malicious personage has decided to "secretly" sabotage your site
> as this would indeed be a very good way to do this...
It is well too late to think about changing your passwords after
"someone" has gotten into your system. Who knows by the time you found
out they were there, what they had changed or have done. The only way to
make sure that they do not further damage is to wipe out and reinstall
your stuff. But than again a reinstall isn't a 100% deal as if one was
making a backup regularly they might have backed up infected files and
at that point would be just copying them back.
as most have
> backups (don't we) of our online sites ;).
The odds are no.......
>
> Just a thought - Dimitri
| |
|
|
<softwarelabus@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1155049006.719519.26800@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Andy Dingley wrote:
>
>
>
> Sometimes I wished some x-virus creator who turned good would write a
> god virus. A virus that actually did some good by destroying other
> viruses, removing evil disallows in robots.txt from your hosts server.
> ;-) I know, I know, two wrongs don't make a right ... don't sink to
> the level of evil, lol.
>
> Is this such a bad idea? If the government agencies caught a good
> virus maker would they be prosecuted or given the nobel price.
>
> just food for thought is all.
> Paul
>
Did anyone else get affected or just you? If they did it to all of you
perhaps you should get together and sue them. It would also be fairly strong
proof that it was the hosting company that did this as it is unlikely
someone would break the passowrds on serveral acccounts.
| |
| axel@white-eagle.invalid.uk 2006-08-08, 6:44 pm |
| In uk.net.web.authoring David <youcantoo@findmoore.net> wrote:
> It is well too late to think about changing your passwords after
> "someone" has gotten into your system. Who knows by the time you found
> out they were there, what they had changed or have done. The only way to
> make sure that they do not further damage is to wipe out and reinstall
> your stuff. But than again a reinstall isn't a 100% deal as if one was
> making a backup regularly they might have backed up infected files and
> at that point would be just copying them back.
> as most have
[color=darkred]
> The odds are no.......
Rather than relying on back-ups of a site, a far better policy is to
maintain a development version of the site on your own machines and
refresh the production site from the development site as and when
required.
Of course if the site makes changes in a database, then the database
will need to be backed up separately.
Axel
| |
| softwarelabus@yahoo.com 2006-08-08, 6:44 pm |
| easygoin wrote:
> softwarelabus@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> Just as no one has mentioned this - I wouldn't assume its your ISP
> unless you have confirmation from them and sometimes hosts (being one
> myself) have set their servers up to add certain files / folders by
> default - usually an .htaccess file and this might be where it came from.
>
> But rather as default - change your FTP password to something secure
> using different cases and numbers, and also change any hosting passwords
> if you have a dedicated / reseller / managed etc server - just in case
> some malicious personage has decided to "secretly" sabotage your site
> as this would indeed be a very good way to do this... as most have
> backups (don't we) of our online sites ;).
>
> Just a thought - Dimitri
I wouldn't put it past vistapages given their horrible customer review
record. One day their system admin deleted all my PERL scripts just to
see who was bombarding the server. Well, it wasn't my scripts, but he
didn't even bother to put my scripts back, lol.
Also I've told the SA many times about their security risks, but he
doesn't bother fixing them. Not that long ago my entire account was
wiped. He simply told me to make sure I periodically change my cPanel
password. Well, it turned out the hacker even deleted all _their_ site
back ups, so they couldn't restore my site. You can't just log into
cPanel and start deleting the entire server files because you don't
have access. It was obviously a site hack. Oh well. I guess we can
look back at such things and laugh.
Just beware of web hosts that promise huge amounts of bandwidth, like
100GB, for practically nothing, like $5/month. If web host want, and
they lack a little common compassion, they have countless methods of
getting rid of you and even destroying your traffic while blaming it
all on you, lol.
Paul
| |
| softwarelabus@yahoo.com 2006-08-08, 6:44 pm |
| Big Bill wrote:
> On 8 Aug 2006 07:16:01 -0700, softwarelabus@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>
> I guess your web hosts don't like you, do they? Did you ask them about
> this?
>
> BB
BB, I had several domains with vistapages, but only switched one domain
so far. It was a very important domain-- business related.
As far as contacting vistapages, I can't bear yet another conversation
with them. And call me cheap for not yet switching all my domains to
another host because they still have my money and laugh whenever I ask
for a partial refund.
BTW, so far I've had good luck with bethehost.com-- knock on wood.
Except they've been under severe attacks from a hacker this week and
had to take the entire server down for about 4 hours. I still give
them an A grade. They always email everyone with server updates, etc.
As for vistapages, I can't recall a single informative email from them.
Anyhow, I would appreciate other web host recommendations.
Paul
| |
|
| softwarelabus@yahoo.com wrote:
<SNIP>
>
>
> I wouldn't put it past vistapages given their horrible customer review
> record. One day their system admin deleted all my PERL scripts just to
> see who was bombarding the server. Well, it wasn't my scripts, but he
> didn't even bother to put my scripts back, lol.
First of all I wouldn't call him a sysadmin. Second if any sysadmin went
into my site and removed anything without first telling/asking I would
find another web provider. FAST There is *NO* excuse for that type of
action. PEROID
>
> Also I've told the SA many times about their security risks, but he
> doesn't bother fixing them.
That should of been a clue to move your stuff somewhere else.
Not that long ago my entire account was
> wiped. He simply told me to make sure I periodically change my cPanel
> password. Well, it turned out the hacker even deleted all _their_ site
> back ups, so they couldn't restore my site. You can't just log into
> cPanel and start deleting the entire server files because you don't
> have access. It was obviously a site hack. Oh well. I guess we can
> look back at such things and laugh.
Personally I don't see much to laugh about. That is really sad to know
there are businesses out there like that.
>
> Just beware of web hosts that promise huge amounts of bandwidth, like
> 100GB, for practically nothing, like $5/month.
Anyone with 2 brain cells would know that bandwidth is NOT cheap. Just
how do you think that they are able to do this? Perhaps over
subscribing. Perhaps if one *reads* the companies TOS they might find
that it is not "unlimited" or "unmetered"
If web host want, and
> they lack a little common compassion, they have countless methods of
> getting rid of you and even destroying your traffic while blaming it
> all on you, lol.
>
> Paul
>
| |
|
|
<snip>
>
>
> BB, I had several domains with vistapages, but only switched one domain
> so far. It was a very important domain-- business related.
And how long will it be before it happens to the others. Are you willing
to gamble that it will not happen.
>
> As far as contacting vistapages, I can't bear yet another conversation
> with them.
Man they would hate me than, I would be calling them all the time when
things were not working properly.
And call me cheap for not yet switching all my domains to
> another host because they still have my money and laugh whenever I ask
> for a partial refund.
Which has cost you more, the loss of traffic or the difference in
whatever refund that you would be getting?
I think the smart thing to do would be cut my losses and move.
>
> BTW, so far I've had good luck with bethehost.com-- knock on wood.
> Except they've been under severe attacks from a hacker this week and
> had to take the entire server down for about 4 hours. I still give
> them an A grade. They always email everyone with server updates, etc.
> As for vistapages, I can't recall a single informative email from them.
>
> Anyhow, I would appreciate other web host recommendations.
>
> Paul
>
| |
| William Tasso 2006-08-08, 6:44 pm |
| Fleeing from the madness of the arbpen.com jungle
Adrienne Boswell <arbpen@yahoo.com> stumbled into
news:alt.html,alt.internet.search-engines,alt.www.webmaster,uk.net.web.authoring
and said:
> Gazing into my crystal ball I observed softwarelabus@yahoo.com writing in
> news:1155046561.133316.32210@n13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
>
ouch!
[color=darkred]
How would your host (reliably) know your IP?
[color=darkred]
> I really doubt that this was done with evil intent,
I doubt it was done by a sys admin at all.
> probably a misguided
> system administrator who got tired of seeing 404 errors, but was too lazy
> to look up the robots.txt protocol and get it right.
far fetched? ok, plausible.
> It's perfectly okay to have blank file, that way the bots are happy, and
> the system admins are happy, too.
Certainly it is
Speaking generally (and not to the o/p in particular) I'd suspect the
developer had been experimenting and forgotton to delete the file before
the latest sync/upload.
--
William Tasso
http://williamtasso.com/words/what-is-usenet.asp
| |
| Philip Herlihy 2006-08-08, 6:44 pm |
| <softwarelabus@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1155061913.695363.300900@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
....
> Anyhow, I would appreciate other web host recommendations.
>
www.liquidsix.com - reliable, fast, full-featured, inexpensive and
astonishingly helpful. (No connection, just consistently delighted with
them).
--
PH, London
===========
| |
| Jerry Stuckle 2006-08-08, 10:39 pm |
| Andy Dingley wrote:
> Adrienne Boswell wrote:
>
>
>
>
> I'm cynical enough to suspect that it was evil intent, because hosting
> companies can reduce costs by reducing traffic to small sites on
> flat-fee hosting plans.
> No robots, no search hits, no traffic.
>
I doubt it, Andy. They wouldn't stay in business for long if they did.
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
| |
| Adrienne Boswell 2006-08-08, 10:39 pm |
| Gazing into my crystal ball I observed Big Bill <kruse@cityscape.co.uk>
writing in news:fmghd2d02p7j9vl3i29uhpublqp760u4lu@4ax.com:
> Adrienne! Not even a bit dead, I see, just absent, eh?
>
> BB
>
No, not really absent either, just haven't been posting to SE as much as
before.
--
Adrienne Boswell at Home
Arbpen Web Site Design Services
http://www.cavalcade-of-coding.info
Please respond to the group so others can share
| |
| softwarelabus@yahoo.com 2006-08-09, 3:32 am |
| Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> Andy Dingley wrote:
>
> I doubt it, Andy. They wouldn't stay in business for long if they did.
There are too many newbies don't read hosting ratings, so they'll
probably stay in business. Vistapages really has horrible ratings.
Truth is I don't play with robots.txt files. It could have been from a
hacker, but I've talked with vista SA's too much to know they're not
innocent. IMHO they really have no morals.
Paul
| |
|
|
| axel@white-eagle.invalid.uk 2006-08-09, 3:32 am |
| In uk.net.web.authoring William Tasso <SpamBlocked@tbdata.com> wrote:
> Fleeing from the madness of the http://groups.google.com jungle
[color=darkred]
> Interesting - I've never heard of a s/a do that before.
It sounds like a breach of professional ethics. :)
When I worked as a Sys Admin, not even in our wildest nightmares would
we have envisaged talking to a customer... we were not even allowed to
be disturbed by the second level helpdesk except in an emergency or by
email.
Axel
| |
| Andy Dingley 2006-08-09, 6:37 am |
|
axel@white-eagle.invalid.uk wrote:
> It sounds like a breach of professional ethics. :)
These are _sysadmins_ we're talking about. Web sysadmins at that.
Sysadmins will cheerfully switch off your core business server for 2
days, on 1 days notice. Even those who work foor your company 8-(
(Not a happy bunny today!)
| |
| Karl Groves 2006-08-09, 7:16 pm |
| softwarelabus@yahoo.com wrote in
news:1155092281.073287.295360@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
> Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>
>
> There are too many newbies don't read hosting ratings, so they'll
> probably stay in business. Vistapages really has horrible ratings.
>
> Truth is I don't play with robots.txt files. It could have been from
> a hacker, but I've talked with vista SA's too much to know they're not
> innocent. IMHO they really have no morals.
>
Which begs the question: Why are you still with them?
It is hilarious how many people come to newsgroups and complain about their
hosts. MOVE! If you hate them so much, take your business elsewhere.
Problem solved.
--
Karl Groves
www.karlcore.com
| |
| Jerry Stuckle 2006-08-09, 7:16 pm |
| softwarelabus@yahoo.com wrote:
> Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>
>
>
>
> There are too many newbies don't read hosting ratings, so they'll
> probably stay in business. Vistapages really has horrible ratings.
>
> Truth is I don't play with robots.txt files. It could have been from a
> hacker, but I've talked with vista SA's too much to know they're not
> innocent. IMHO they really have no morals.
>
> Paul
>
Paul,
Word gets around. Sure, there are new suckers coming all the time. But
it's also very expensive to try to get new customers. Sooner or later
the turnover will kill them, if nothing else.
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
| |
| Jerry Stuckle 2006-08-09, 7:16 pm |
| Andy Dingley wrote:
> axel@white-eagle.invalid.uk wrote:
>
>
>
>
> These are _sysadmins_ we're talking about. Web sysadmins at that.
>
> Sysadmins will cheerfully switch off your core business server for 2
> days, on 1 days notice. Even those who work foor your company 8-(
>
>
> (Not a happy bunny today!)
>
Yep, and it is a huge breach of professional ethics.
And any sysadmin who does something like that for any company I've
worked or consulted for would be on the streets about five minutes after
switching off the server. Fooling with a customer's robots.txt (or any
other file) might allow him 10 minutes.
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
| |
| Roy Schestowitz 2006-08-09, 7:16 pm |
| __/ [ softwarelabus@yahoo.com ] on Tuesday 08 August 2006 19:31 \__
> Big Bill wrote:
To put it politely, your Web host got you f**ked. This is unacceptable unless
you received some form of notification and an opportunity to rebutt. I have
heard similar stories before though (Cat, are you there?).
[color=darkred]
> BB, I had several domains with vistapages, but only switched one domain
> so far. It was a very important domain-- business related.
Now that you mention this, I suspect this affected Darren as well. When the
shared server is getting overloaded, rather than upgrading or
redistributing, the host filters out visitors (indirectly -- humans too).
It's laziness; or an attempt to cut down running costs.
> As far as contacting vistapages, I can't bear yet another conversation
> with them. And call me cheap for not yet switching all my domains to
> another host because they still have my money and laugh whenever I ask
> for a partial refund.
I suggest you get a host you can trust. If you can't speak to your host and
if dread an argument with the host, then the relationship is unhealthy. It's
time to break up.
> BTW, so far I've had good luck with bethehost.com-- knock on wood.
> Except they've been under severe attacks from a hacker this week and
> had to take the entire server down for about 4 hours. I still give
> them an A grade. They always email everyone with server updates, etc.
> As for vistapages, I can't recall a single informative email from them.
>
> Anyhow, I would appreciate other web host recommendations.
I have been happy with http://catalyst2.com for the couple of years that I
was with them (still going strong). I have 3 domains on their servers and
communication with them is a snap (spoke to them last night).
| |
| John Bokma 2006-08-12, 10:36 pm |
| Big Bill <kruse@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:
> On 12 Aug 2006 22:25:00 GMT, John Bokma <john@castleamber.com> wrote:
>
>
> I did have PHP at one point but things went a bit foobar on 98SE.
>
>
> I'll probably get servers going here but just to fiddle with.
I have plans to add howto's on installing PHP, mysql and a few more fun
things :-) Maybe next week. I somehow needed this week to adjust to not
travelling every day :-D.
And I just noticed that I missed out on a very important PERL serp: Perl
support :-) (Made a quicky, I hope to be on #8 next week)
--
John Freelance PERL programmer: http://castleamber.com/
Firefox Keywords: http://johnbokma.com/firefox/keymarks-explained.html
| |
| Adrienne Boswell 2006-08-12, 10:36 pm |
| Gazing into my crystal ball I observed Big Bill <kruse@cityscape.co.uk>
writing in news:l9bsd2lr0icoepkr7e7g8inbj0t3o408v2@4ax.com:
>
> Adrienne, my dove, you need a spell-check on your site. It seems to be
> the one thing you lack :-(
>
Bill, thank you so much. It's probably something I look at all the time
and never see. Which page? What's misspelled?
--
Adrienne Boswell at Home
Arbpen Web Site Design Services
http://www.cavalcade-of-coding.info
Please respond to the group so others can share
| |
| Leonard Blaisdell 2006-08-13, 3:30 am |
| In article <Xns981DB2BBEE03Farbpenyahoocom@69.28.186.121>,
Adrienne Boswell <arbpen@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Bill, thank you so much. It's probably something I look at all the time
> and never see. Which page? What's misspelled?
I don't take glee from pointing out misspellings, but you asked so I did
a cursory inspection of your site to find one misspelling. On Spane's
page, the menu says "Horospoce" instead of "Horoscope".
I originally clicked on Spane because I thought you might mean Spain ;-)
You didn't.
leo
--
<http://web0.greatbasin.net/~leo/>
| |
| Adrienne Boswell 2006-08-13, 3:30 am |
| Gazing into my crystal ball I observed Leonard Blaisdell
<leo@greatbasin.com> writing in
news:leo-1ED22B.21192112082006@sn-indi.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net:
> In article <Xns981DB2BBEE03Farbpenyahoocom@69.28.186.121>,
> Adrienne Boswell <arbpen@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> I don't take glee from pointing out misspellings, but you asked so I
> did a cursory inspection of your site to find one misspelling. On
> Spane's page, the menu says "Horospoce" instead of "Horoscope".
> I originally clicked on Spane because I thought you might mean Spain
> ;-) You didn't.
>
> leo
>
You know, I alway thought that looked a little funny... Thank you. Yes,
it's Spane not Spain. It was my mother's idea if I had been a boy, Spane
Anthony Boswell.
--
Adrienne Boswell at Home
Arbpen Web Site Design Services
http://www.cavalcade-of-coding.info
Please respond to the group so others can share
| |
| axel@white-eagle.invalid.uk 2006-08-14, 10:45 pm |
| In uk.net.web.authoring John Bokma <john@castleamber.com> wrote:
> axel@white-eagle.invalid.uk wrote:
[color=darkred]
> See: <http://johnbokma.com/windows/apache...l-hosts-xp.html>
> on how to create local versions of your site(s). (Windows XP).
Hi John... greetings in a different forum than usual.
A good guide.
The approach I adopted (on MACOSX) was to assign different private IP
addresses in /etc/hosts and configure httpd.conf accordingly.
Your approach makes more sense in using 127.0.0.1 as the one base
IP address when only using a single local machine, which I'm doing
at the moment... it saves having to edit configuration files when
moving to a different network (a couple of months ago I had to
switch to a 10.0.1 network).
Although I have a development site on my local machine which I use
to check out things before uploading... I do my real development a
stage before that by using Makefiles, the htp 1.15 HTML pre-processor
(old, but it works just fine) and various PERL scripts to create
the deveopment site, or parts thereof. In other words I write as
little HTML as possible.
Axel
| |
| John Bokma 2006-08-16, 6:57 am |
| axel@white-eagle.invalid.uk wrote:
> In uk.net.web.authoring John Bokma <john@castleamber.com> wrote:
[color=darkred]
>
> Hi John... greetings in a different forum than usual.
>
> A good guide.
Thanks Axel, I have been working today like crazy to update it to 2.0 and
fix some minor issues with the 1.3.x version.
> The approach I adopted (on MACOSX) was to assign different private IP
> addresses in /etc/hosts and configure httpd.conf accordingly.
>
> Your approach makes more sense in using 127.0.0.1 as the one base
> IP address when only using a single local machine, which I'm doing
> at the moment... it saves having to edit configuration files when
> moving to a different network (a couple of months ago I had to
> switch to a 10.0.1 network).
It depends a lot on what you want, I don't want most of my sites to become
visible on the LAN :-)
> Although I have a development site on my local machine which I use
> to check out things before uploading... I do my real development a
> stage before that by using Makefiles, the htp 1.15 HTML pre-processor
> (old, but it works just fine) and various PERL scripts to create
> the deveopment site, or parts thereof. In other words I write as
> little HTML as possible.
Ditto. I use XML for the content, and parse and process it with PERL into
HTML. All things that the PERL script can solve it does (like finding out
the values for width and height attributes for the img element).
Another script creates the RSS feed (it extracts the title from the page,
and uses it as the title for the feed, etc.).
And another script uploads the stuff using plink (part of PuTTY).
And all is kicked into action using ant :-)
ant local to update the local version
ant upload to update the local version, and the remote one :-)
--
John Skilled PERL programmer for hire: http://castleamber.com/
Fox noGO:http://johnbokma.com/firefox/removi...search-bar.html
| |
|
|
| Adrienne Boswell 2006-08-16, 6:57 am |
| Gazing into my crystal ball I observed Big Bill <kruse@cityscape.co.uk>
writing in news:l9bsd2lr0icoepkr7e7g8inbj0t3o408v2@4ax.com:
> On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 18:21:16 GMT, Adrienne Boswell <arbpen@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> Adrienne, my dove, you need a spell-check on your site. It seems to be
> the one thing you lack :-(
>
> BB
Thanks, everyone, for having good eyes and pointing out misspellings.
All fixed now.
--
Adrienne Boswell at Home
Arbpen Web Site Design Services
http://www.cavalcade-of-coding.info
Please respond to the group so others can share
| |
| Phil Payne 2006-08-16, 6:40 pm |
| > Which begs the question: Why are you still with them?
> It is hilarious how many people come to newsgroups and complain about their
> hosts. MOVE! If you hate them so much, take your business elsewhere.
> Problem solved.
Seen demon.service ?
| |
| Luigi Donatello Asero 2006-08-16, 6:40 pm |
|
"Phil Payne" <phil@isham-research.co.uk> skrev i meddelandet
news:1155728478.236904.302030@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
their[color=darkred]
>
> Seen demon.service ?
There might be some people who are not interested in some e-mails at all.
--
Luigi Donatello Asero
https://www.scaiecat-spa-gigi.com/
ä½_干什么明天早上 ?
| |
| axel@white-eagle.invalid.uk 2006-08-17, 10:40 pm |
| In uk.net.web.authoring John Bokma <john@castleamber.com> wrote:
> axel@white-eagle.invalid.uk wrote:
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
> Thanks Axel, I have been working today like crazy to update it to 2.0 and
> fix some minor issues with the 1.3.x version.
Niks te danken :)
[color=darkred]
> It depends a lot on what you want, I don't want most of my sites to
> become visible on the LAN :-)
I see your point.
[color=darkred]
> Ditto. I use XML for the content, and parse and process it with
> PERL into HTML. All things that the PERL script can solve it does
> (like finding out the values for width and height attributes for
> the img element).
I suppose my approach came from something I originally some years ago.
We wanted to scan, cut and paste press releases from a specific market
area. I found the simplest approach was for those who did it was to fill
in a blank file with two or three lines starting with '#' indicating the
title, possible subtitle and company. Such a brain-dead scan, copy and
paste thing that anyone could do it.
Obviously formatting and clickable URLs were lost, but it was a free
service and if more was wanted, it could be paid for.
Originally it had been an experimental thing with actual HTML files
being filled in (a 3-stage business process... test something in raw
HTML, if it is found of interest move to a script, and then finally
to a database if decided worthwhile).
That was interesting especially when someone, ok, mea culpa, was
rushed/lazy and forget to replace the text 'XXX' markers that had
been set up for cut-and-paste. The result: Many hits from over the
world on a press release of little interest to anyone outside a
limited audience from all over the world and offers to buy the
URL... not the domain, but specifically the individual deep URL.
We were bemused, but then found out why... on a search engine search
for 'XXX' (I think it was Yahoo... it might have been Alta Vista)
it was turning up in the top ten results.
> Another script creates the RSS feed (it extracts the title from the page,
> and uses it as the title for the feed, etc.).
> And another script uploads the stuff using plink (part of PuTTY).
I use scp (well, we use different OS's)... I make an initial copy and
then ssh in and run an update (delete and move files) script.
> And all is kicked into action using ant :-)
Yes... that makes a lot of sense.
Although where do you find the time to do all this!? I'm still behind
uploading a few cat photos taken over a month ago... ag, I'm just a
lazy toad (my tutor at university always called me that).
Axel
| |
| John Bokma 2006-08-25, 10:45 pm |
| axel@white-eagle.invalid.uk wrote:
> In uk.net.web.authoring John Bokma <john@castleamber.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Niks te danken :)
:-) I should try to reply to messages when I mark them as todo at least
within a short time frame :-) Anyway, the 2.0 version is up, still
working on PHP though.
[..]
>
> I suppose my approach came from something I originally some years ago.
:-) I once started my own macro language based on LaTeX somewhere in
1997. Later I dropped that approach, and used mostly plain text with
subtle hints, and a smarter parser. Much later (2003) I started to move
to XML but for various reasons it took me almost a year to start using
it in combination with PERL for my johnbokma.com site. The
castleamber.com site still uses the plain text approach.
[..]
> That was interesting especially when someone, ok, mea culpa, was
> rushed/lazy and forget to replace the text 'XXX' markers that had
> been set up for cut-and-paste. The result: Many hits from over the
> world on a press release of little interest to anyone outside a
> limited audience from all over the world and offers to buy the
> URL... not the domain, but specifically the individual deep URL.
> We were bemused, but then found out why... on a search engine search
> for 'XXX' (I think it was Yahoo... it might have been Alta Vista)
> it was turning up in the top ten results.
:-) I have a picture with a horse on my site, and one of the comments
has xxx (as kisses). And yes, I get people looking for horse xxx (I
guess that's special pr0n to get stallions in the mood in horse breeding
programs?)
>
>
> I use scp (well, we use different OS's)... I make an initial copy and
> then ssh in and run an update (delete and move files) script.
Somewhere on my todo list is: find new files, tar those, gzip, and use
plink to tar zx them in the web directory. Currently quite some time is
wasted in building up the connection and breaking it. Not a big issue
though with 10 files, but with 30+ it eats up a lot of time.
>
> Yes... that makes a lot of sense.
Ant is weird at first, but it has some nice things. I also use it to
pack PERL modules + script(s) + other files into a zip file and mail it
to a customer in one go.
> Although where do you find the time to do all this!? I'm still behind
> uploading a few cat photos taken over a month ago... ag, I'm just a
> lazy toad (my tutor at university always called me that).
By trying to post less on Usenet. But I have a huge "stack" of digital
photos that I have to put on line some day, and countless of pages I
still have to write.
And lazy is good, makes excellent programmers or scientists/engineers in
general. Always looking for shortcuts, so there is more time to do fun
things.
--
John Experienced PERL programmer: http://castleamber.com/
Textpad quick reference card (pdf): http://johnbokma.com/textpad/
|
|
|
| | Copyright 2003 - 2008 forum4designers.com Software forum Computer Hardware reviews |
|