Tiny External Link Redirect Edit

[Niini]

There needs to be a whitelist made as well. Doing scam reports is a pain in the ass when I have to try and open 20 imageshack links >.<

Maybe have people writing up their scam reports use imgur and place all their photos in a single album

 

[Brendan]

Maybe have people writing up their scam reports use imgur and place all their photos in a single album

In theory it's a great idea, but people just won't do it.

I do think these image websites need to be unblocked, I can imagine the annoyance the extra click for each image would be.

 

[Niini]

In theory it's a great idea, but people just won't do it.

I know right- why try and make things easier for the admin who is helping you

 

I know these are really tiny changes, but right now this is annoying the fuck out of me
1. Make the external link URL bolded, so it is more obvious what it is. This is simply a matter of adding <b> tags around the link text. This will make it more readable and obvious what you are going to
2. Make the external link URL clickable, so that instead of looking for the Yes, Continue link every time, You can just click the link text and it will take you to the destination

Should take about 5 minutes to implement IMO

1. Done.
2. Done.

This.

Some URLs that should be whitelisted are:

www.tinypic.com
www.imgur.com
www.runescape.com
www.youtube.com
www.screensnapr.com
puu.sh
www.imageshack.us
www.photobucket.com

and more.

Done.

Is there any way to implement a whitelist of users who do not have to go through that page?

Not with the current plugin we're using. We wouldn't whitelist users anyways.

There is also a problem that when you try and right click + "Copy Email Address" (a feature on Chrome, not sure if it's on FF or IE). Now, it recognizes all emails as external links, meaning I have to highlight it manually. Not a big issue, but it was always really nice to just use two clicks and get an email copied.

I added an exception for e-mail addresses, see if that helps. *Note: it may take time for cached posts/signatures to update!

Is it possible to make certain section don't have redirects? Like disputes and scam reports?

Not with the current plugin we're using. We probably wouldn't whitelist sections anyways, might defeat the purpose of the mod.

When I posted the idea originally I anticipated the redirect page featuring some additional information about the person who posted the link to help the user decide if they want to proceed. ex: poster's name, ranks, post count

In my mind it would look basically how it does right now with an additional couple lines in the middle along the lines of "This link was posted by:" then a short snippet of the poster's info like a super minified version of the user profile page.

Sorry had to post here because my original was closed and I don't really see the need for another thread.

Again, not possible with this mod, nor is it really necessary. Look at the post you're clicking on and check out the user there.

 

[kendudex]

I remember people used to have sythe.org phishing sites as links to hack people's account, this will prevent that.

Good job!

 

[Noam]

Thanks Matthew. I think this should be closed now.

 

[NullAndVoid]

2. Make the external link URL clickable, so that instead of looking for the Yes, Continue link every time, You can just click the link text and it will take you to the destination

I completely disagree and fail to see your point for making such a change at all.

1. It's one-click either way.

2. The Yes, continue. is in the same place every time... just like the link. You make it sound as if you're chasing it around every time.

3. It somewhat defeats the purpose of having such a feature. If you have the user simply click the link again, if they aren't paying attention, they will most likely think for some reason it just didn't go through, so they have to click it again.

If you force them to actually click on Yes, continue., it at least brings more attention to their action and what they're doing when they actually click on it.

Small overall, perhaps, but there is absolutely no need to make the second change. If anything it detracts from the effectiveness of the feature.

 

I completely disagree and fail to see your point for making such a change at all.

1. It's one-click either way.

2. The Yes, continue. is in the same place every time... just like the link. You make it sound as if you're chasing it around every time.

3. It somewhat defeats the purpose of having such a feature. If you have the user simply click the link again, if they aren't paying attention, they will most likely think for some reason it just didn't go through, so they have to click it again.

If you force them to actually click on Yes, continue., it at least brings more attention to their action and what they're doing when they actually click on it.

Small overall, perhaps, but there is absolutely no need to make the second change. If anything it detracts from the effectiveness of the feature.

I see your point but most web browsers make the text into a URL anyways. I use Google Chrome which makes things into URLs automatically, so whether it's actually a link or not it'll be clickable for a lot of people... If we force it to be clickable, we at least ensure a consistent user experience across browsers. If people don't read before they click, they deserve to get hacked. The external page warning should be enough for people to realize they should be careful and if not they're morons.