Errors

[Tcll]

well, I can assume it's ABP as that's reporting 14 blocked instances, though it's not specific as to what...
so if you could tell me what's being blocked that would cause this, I could white-list it in the plugin

looking in the console, this is everything that failed to load:

Failed to load resource: net::ERR_BLOCKED_BY_CLIENT http://ap.lijit.com///www/delivery/fpi.j...&height=90
Failed to load resource: net::ERR_BLOCKED_BY_CLIENT http://www.vg-resource.com/images/social..._small.png
Failed to load resource: net::ERR_BLOCKED_BY_CLIENT http://www.vg-resource.com/images/social...-small.png
Failed to load resource: net::ERR_BLOCKED_BY_CLIENT http://www.vg-resource.com/images/social..._small.png
Failed to load resource: net::ERR_BLOCKED_BY_CLIENT http://www.vg-resource.com/images/social..._small.png
Failed to load resource: net::ERR_BLOCKED_BY_CLIENT http://www.vg-resource.com/images/social...-small.png
Failed to load resource: net::ERR_BLOCKED_BY_CLIENT http://www.vg-resource.com/images/social..._small.png
Failed to load resource: net::ERR_BLOCKED_BY_CLIENT http://www.vg-resource.com/images/social...-small.png
Failed to load resource: net::ERR_BLOCKED_BY_CLIENT http://www.vg-resource.com/images/social...-small.png
Failed to load resource: net::ERR_BLOCKED_BY_CLIENT http://www.vg-resource.com/images/social...-small.png
Failed to load resource: net::ERR_BLOCKED_BY_CLIENT http://www.vg-resource.com/images/social..._small.png
Failed to load resource: net::ERR_BLOCKED_BY_CLIENT http://www.google-analytics.com/analytics.js
Failed to load resource: net::ERR_BLOCKED_BY_CLIENT http://www.vg-resource.com/images/social..._small.png
Failed to load resource: net::ERR_BLOCKED_BY_CLIENT http://www.vg-resource.com/images/social..._small.png

I'm not sure about the reputation of lijit.com (may be the issue) which Ghostery reports is being blocked for Advertizing.
Avast (if I'm right) catches this too as it reports "2 Companies tried to track you".
the other one is obviousely google-analytics, which I deeply hate with a passion for invasion of privacy (also reported by ghostery)

looking up lijit, it lookes to be tied with sovrn...
the reputation of lijit.com: https://www.mywot.com/en/scorecard/secur...=rw-viewsc
sovrn.com is unrated

just to note, I'm highly against online tracking for privacy reasons...

so I do believe the display issues are being caused by lijit being blocked.

EDIT:
btw, it's not ABP
count the lines blocked in the console, only 2 of those are JS... heh

EDIT2:
confirmed
opened your site in an incognito window (disabled extensions) and sure enough, no display issues.

I must note though this is a rather dangerous approach as 3rd-party content can't be trusted and can easily infect a host.


not to preach or anything, but isn't it up to the site developer to follow standards?
because who doesn't use content blockers now-a-days, it's kindof a standard in itself.

I'm personally sick of having to reinstall my OS because the internet can't be tamed.
so I block the internet and only allow what I can trust.

too many stupid people develop malicious content to destroy and bog-down people's computers.

@the argument: "but we need ads to put food in our bellies"
if you were using your own well-trusted ad-service with your own ads (like ProBoards does),
I'd have no problem as since it's trusted, my content-blockers wouldn't block it.

it's not my fault most ad-services have a bad rep.


sorry for the rant...
I have a deep hatred for malicious content and aim to fight it.

[Vipershark]

Considering that it's not your adblock that's the issue and the fact that the site works fine with no extensions, have you tried disabling your extensions one by one to figure out which one is causing the problem?

[Tcll]

not yet, though I was intending on it to pinpoint the issue
it would only help out

[Vipershark]

Looking at your list of blocked stuff above, it seems as though your blocker is only blocking two ads (one google, one lijit) while the rest of that list is the icons from our Social Sites plugin.

I'm not sure why your blocker would block those icons (unless you turned them off manually) since they're nothing more than links but perhaps that could be the cause?

[Tcll]

no the icons were ABP, everything else just caught those 2 things.
(I was trying to point at the 14 lines in the console being linked to ABP's count of 14)
^ I'm autistic and have problems wording myself... sorry

1 thing I can tell you is it's NOT Ghostery as I've temp-white-listed lijit and I'm still getting the display issues

[Petie]

not to preach or anything, but isn't it up to the site developer to follow standards?
because who doesn't use content blockers now-a-days, it's kindof a standard in itself.

I just want to point out that I do follow standards. Every page that I've written is HTML5 and CSS3 compliant and those are actual standards. What you're implying is that I should have to write sloppy code to account for the fact that extensions might screw up my site, which is kind of an absurd notion. How do I know who's using what? I can't really plan for everything. As a result, I've always taken the approach that I will code the site correctly and if it breaks for people who are disabling our ads or otherwise modifying our site content in transit, then so be it. I don't intend to waste my time coding in workarounds for people who aren't even doing the bare minimum to support the site.

Now, don't get me wrong. I do get where you're coming from. We do our best to keep malicious ads out of our rotation but the system isn't perfect and occasionally, something gets through that shouldn't. That's the nature of the game and it's here to stay unfortunately. The only other thing we run is Google Analytics which is harmless, essentially. Does Google have some way of connecting the anonymous data you leave behind here to the anonymous data you leave behind elsewhere? Probably. But you can't really expect absolutely privacy online ever.

All that being said, if you're careful, it's difficult for an ad to infect you. You still have to willingly interact with it in some way unless you're running something like an old XP install that's never been patched. So I do think the approach you're taking is a bit overkill but I still don't fault you for it. You're welcome to block or not block whatever you want but we're also welcome to ignore error reports caused by third party modifications.

I apologize if this comes off in an angry tone. I'm not angry. I wound up responding to a rant with another rant which really wasn't my intention but it does adequately address the issue so I'll leave it. If you have any questions or concerns, don't hesitate to ask. As for your error, just follow through with determining which extension is causing the problem and you should be good to go, at least in terms of figuring out what you have to do to fix it.

[Dazz]

I'm quite angry about it, unlike Petie. I've never heard of such ignorance as to suggest we adjust our site to be fitting to standards that are not actually standards. I don't use content blockers, and a damn large number of people don't either - that's why we remain open. If you'd like us to continue to go out of pocket for you, so be it, but don't go ahead and insult our intelligence because your choices aren't working for you, while they also damage us. Your problem doesn't equate to ours in terms of not earning revenue from the views you produce - you have us pay out of pocket for you.

I respect your desire for privacy, but you have absolutely no reason to be an ass about it. It's as simple as that.

[Vipershark]

Not to mention that, as Petie said, ads and such are really only an issue if you're running something unprotected like an old unpatched XP install or something and you're going on shady sites with it.

You've already confirmed that you're not even using Windows anyway so what exactly do you have to be afraid of in terms of malware? I mean, I know Linux isn't immune to malware or anything of course but realistically, in terms of the "target audience" for malware developers, you don't even show up on the radar. The chances of you actually getting hit with anything are so miniscule that all the blockers you have are way overkill.

If you're getting those kinds of issues to the point where the site isn't operating correctly (but you know the site is safe as this one is), just whitelist the site so it works and go about your day.

[Tcll]

@Petie: yeh, sorry if I sounded negative myself, I tried to make it sound stern but calm.

> but the system isn't perfect and occasionally, something gets through that shouldn't.

^ that's exactly my point (nothing more needs to be said)

Also, I don't fault you for what you have coded, we're all human
but ABP in itself is rather it's own standard as just about everyone uses it.
There ARE ways I've run across for detecting users of AdBlock/ABP/ABPro which deals with JS testing if a particular variable exists.
This was mainly discussed in malicious redirects for AdBlock users, so I don't remember the links. (those guys are soooo lucky they disabled commenting or they woulda heard my wrath)

you can ask a few webmasters if you know any, or perhapse look around on google... idk


I know my methods may seem like overkill, but I look at it as cloud-layers.

imagine you're a malicious content trying to shoot a devastating lazer at earth.
but you can't hit the clouds or your lazer scatters and is ineffective.

what I'm doing is adding about 7 extra layers of thick clouds which cover different areas.


I look at desktop security software in the same manner.
(because 1 software can't fully cover you, it's impossible for a "small" group of 1000+ people to know every lest virus in the next 15 seconds)


and btw, yes, google completely tracks all your online history.
- g.doubleclick
- google-analytics

both of these won't harm you, but they're extreme privacy infringements

facebook and twitter trackers are just about as big.

---

@Dazz: I'm sorry I came off like that to you.
I'm not trying to insult anyone's intelligence.

[Vipershark]

I honestly don't think it's really necessary (or fair) for us to have to try to code in support for addons, particularly ones such as ad blockers where there are many different types of blocker by many different developers and there's no way to know which user is using which combination of which addon.

Sure, you could code up some js to check the user agent and then modify the site based on what addons are found but that requires an immeasureable amount of unnecessary coding needed to fix issues caused by people modifying your site and not actually by the site itself.

I understand that ad blockers are widely used and maybe if there were only one ad blocker by one company in existence you might have a point but it's completely unrealistic to try to support every possible addon on every browser.

[Petie]

@Petie: yeh, sorry if I sounded negative myself, I tried to make it sound stern but calm.

> but the system isn't perfect and occasionally, something gets through that shouldn't.

^ that's exactly my point (nothing more needs to be said)

Also, I don't fault you for what you have coded, we're all human
but ABP in itself is rather it's own standard as just about everyone uses it.
There ARE ways I've run across for detecting users of AdBlock/ABP/ABPro which deals with JS testing if a particular variable exists.
This was mainly discussed in malicious redirects for AdBlock users, so I don't remember the links. (those guys are soooo lucky they disabled commenting or they woulda heard my wrath)

you can ask a few webmasters if you know any, or perhapse look around on google... idk

I think you misunderstood. I know that there are ways to detect AdBlock users. That's not the problem. The problem is that you seem to think that we should be detecting them and fixing the content that they break. I'll be blunt. That isn't going to happen. Like I said, you are welcome to continue browsing with ads disabled but you do so with the full knowledge that the site may be broken as a result and that we will do nothing to fix it.

As Vipershark said, you're on Linux so the chances of you being infected by anything you'll see in a browser are already minuscule even without your slew of extensions.

And as far as Google tracking you goes, you're naive if you think they can't find you anyway. So, in the end, what are you accomplishing? Let's list it.

1. You are potentially hurting the site by not allowing ad impressions. But, even if we ignore that, you're also:
   
2. Hurting your own experience to the point that the site is virtually unusable.
   
3. Not actually protecting yourself from any likely threats.
   
4. Not likely actually stopping Google from tracking you.
   

So, to sum it up, your approach is overkill and detrimental to everyone involved and we won't be fixing bugs caused by software like AdBlock.

[Maxpphire]

Honestly do you even know what google does by tracking you? Its nothing malicious, its that if you use their search engine they can tailor searches to be things you like. They also use that same technology to custom fit ads to be things that you'd be interested in. Its really not that much of an invasion of privacy as you're thinking, they just keep track of websites you go to, to be able to bring you to other similar websites.

Facebook tracks your location to bring you pages and friends that are around your area.

Twitter keeps track of your friends mainly to suggest new friends.

None of them are out to collect your credit card number, relax.

These days your location, who you are friends with, and what you like are not private things. To be honest they were never exactly private things in the first place, I mean not everyone knows your location at any given time, but no one ever will. You don't have to be so paranoid, particularly on Linux.

[Vipershark]

I wouldn't necessarily go that far to just allow those things willy-nilly (I block all those trackers myself) but at the same time I still realize that they're gonna collect data on you one way or another.

I'm pretty sure blocking the trackers isn't what's causing the issue here; it's from blocking the ads.
I'm not sure what would actually cause the site to react in such a way, but in my experience Chrome's ad blocker isn't very good.

[Tcll]

ok... could I just get an understanding as to what's causing these blocked out areas...

the only thing I have a hard time understanding is that no other site does this...

knowing that it's HTML5, it's quite possible it could be a browser issue as the format is still relatively new...
heck my forum doesn't even use HTML5.


I'm sorry for all the stress ok
I want to get to be known as a good person on the site, but I have alot of personal experiences which many people tend to disagree with.

also kat:
I hate google's custom searches
google started sucking ever since they implemented this.
I don't want google knowing what I look at, even if it is nothing but inventive engineering and programming stuff.
I want google to hand me the same results as it would 5 years ago.

facebook and twitter I can kindof understand... bleh

I hate social media though above forums
I hate skype too, but I'm rather forced to use it... heh (can't wait to get off of it)

[Vipershark]

ok... could I just get an understanding as to what's causing these blocked out areas...

We don't know any better than you do.
You can start by disabling your addons one by one to find which is causing the issue, then from there we can try to pinpoint the specific cause, if possible.