|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: decreased caching efficiency?
I can point out plenty of examples of large sites which do not work without JavaScript. Also don't confuse pofit with revenue. On Fri, 20 Oct 2000, Hendrik Visage wrote: > On Fri, Oct 20, 2000 at 12:43:51PM -0400, Dana Hudes wrote: > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Majdi S. Abbas" <[email protected]> > > To: "Dana Hudes" <[email protected]> > > Cc: <[email protected]> > > Sent: Friday, October 20, 2000 12:33 PM > > Subject: Re: decreased caching efficiency? > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 20, 2000 at 10:24:27AM -0400, Dana Hudes wrote: > > > > No, you are interfering with my revenue stream by preventing > > > > my getting credit for the banner impression. > > > > > > Tough. Banner ads aren't a guaranteed form of revenue. > > > > Neither is being an ISP a guarantee of revenue. > > Depends on a couple of factors, but it could be a pretty decent > form of "guaranteed" revenue. > > > > How would you feel if I said my cache at home filters banner > > > content out? > > > > I hope my JavaScript would detect this and refuse to display the photograph. > > Sofar you've given us LOTS of reasons NOT to visit your site (BTW, url > to exclude from our caches ;^) > > This will actually make several people turn away from your site, as > people don't always like java/javascript and have it actually turned > off, like when browsing via a Nokia 9110, lynx etc. > > Hendrik >
|