Please don't apply this to all urls in the browser. This is considered a form of obfuscation since it is unclear exactly where this is being applied.

You have a short period to fix this before the default TOS action is applied.

Thank you for your immediate cooperation.

OUJS Admin

Please don't apply this to all urls in the browser. This is considered a form of obfuscation since it is unclear exactly where this is being applied.

You have a short period to fix this before the default TOS action is applied.

Thank you for your immediate cooperation.

OUJS Admin

This might be a little on the old side of news but noticed it today. A few Authors here are using it in script source for some assets.

Re: https://rawgit.com/

RawGit has reached the end of its useful life
October 8, 2018

RawGit is now in a sunset phase and will soon shut down. It's been a fun five years, but all things must end.

GitHub repositories that served content through RawGit within the last month will continue to be served until at least October of 2019. URLs for other repositories are no longer being served.

If you're currently using RawGit, please stop using it as soon as you can.
...

Those parties utilizing this MITM CDN may want to adjust their .user.js soon.

OUJS Admin

A notable, and noticed, change:

https://github.com/blog/all.atom seems to have changed domain names... so if you are following pay a visit to https://github.blog/ for some of the current feeds.

As of right now the "All" category seems to be broken. e.g. at https://github.blog/all.atom

Please use these instead:

--- /scripts/FreeStyler/linuxmint.com.ru_improvements/source@0.0.3+ebac760
+++ /scripts/FreeStyler/linuxmint.com.ru_improvements/source
@@ -9,8 +9,8 @@
 // @supportURL   mailto:zanygamer@gmail.com
 // @include      *linuxmint.com.ru/
 // @match        *linuxmint.com.ru/
-// @updateURL    https://openuserjs.org/meta/FreeStyler/linuxmint.ru.user.js
-// @downloadURL  https://openuserjs.org/install/FreeStyler/linuxmint.ru.user.js
+// @updateURL    https://openuserjs.org/meta/FreeStyler/linuxmint.com.ru_improvements.meta.js
+// @downloadURL  https://openuserjs.org/install/FreeStyler/linuxmint.com.ru_improvements.user.js
 // @grant        none
 // @run-at       document-end
 // @require      https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.2.1/jquery.min.js

OUJS Admin

Good sure didn't. YAY! Been a while since I've tested this mode of the site out.

Did I RO discussion/comments?

Test

Test Chromium update

Re: @x2000:

a fork of this

Please use the "Submit Code as Fork" on the scripts Source Code page. Had you not mentioned it here and we received a flag of not using this fork mechanism (or seen it ourselves) we would be within the guidelines of the TOS to terminate your account.

I have manually fixed it. Please don't repeat however you did it the first time again. You must use the Submit Code as Fork option available on everyones Source Code page. All you needed to do was to change the @name before you click it to modify it for your account. Then it creates the fork on your account. Then you do the actual changes for FLAC support to the code base. It's not that difficult to figure out.

Thanks for your cooperation,
OUJS Admin

Re: @dlupu:

I'm collaborating with a colleague on several scripts and found it would be easier to create in advance empty scripts.

The moment you change @name the system will spawn off a new script at a different URL compounding the issue further. So unless I'm missing your point there's not an advantage to doing that methodology. Most of the .user.js engines have a template manager as well.

We don't mind testing within reason.

Re: @channelstage:

Can I download the following like site ?

Please rephrase the question for everyone here as it is unclear (at least to me). That link is currently a ~2 hour video of a fireplace and some other audio stream which doesn't appear to work.

Re: @StylishThemes:

but it shows an error - I think it was also a 403

403 is "forbidden" so it is intended behavior. The 4xx codes are almost always user error. The reason why is you need to attach GitHub (GH) as an auth to your OUJS account. You currently have a different authentication strategy that isn't GH.

1. Go to https://openuserjs.org/user/preferences
2. Select GH in the dropdown.
3. Click "Attach new default preferred".
4. If you aren't already logged in with your user account at GH do so... then answer the dialog question that GH brings up e.g. allow access to OUJS.

Current security requirements are to have a user account, master branch only, on GH, in order for the webhook receiver to accept push notifications. If you don't meet this criteria then you need to do it manually via upload or paste into the web editor.

Is there some reason why you are flood spamming the script list with the same script but a different name?

You need to respond very quickly to this inquiry or they will all get removed.

OUJS Admin

Re: @colddegree:

Yandex is a Chrome back end. The issue is a bit vague though.

Translation courtesy of bing:

Яндекс-это хром-бэк-энд. Этот вопрос немного расплывчатым, хотя.

Minimal wording clarification under https://openuserjs.org/about/Terms-of-Service#etiquette since we accept donations.

Okay migration for this fix is no more. Hope you didn't allow your account access to be orphaned with this auth.

Re: @ProxyFiend:

I couldn't find the original code that you wrote, nor the licensing

• Count Issues first reference and incarnation with commit. Also latest starts here which you can find via my user profile here on OUJS. I advertise everywhere where I'm Userscripting.
• usoCheckup history here and earliest reference starting here.
• installWith repo is here and again on OUJS under my scripts.
• OUJS usage was here (again when I joined the team at OUJS I removed a bunch of this as time passed and we migrated to a more verbose methodology which is still in that particular, more current, file)
• GM Classic Wiki KYOM

…

• primary usoC LICENSE (View the page and look for License under the nav bar)
• primary CI LICENSE
• primary iW LICENSE

match the GPL licensing

GPL would be ideal. LGPL has some weird legal quirks, but as I stated before it's double licensed on GM (Port optional) wiki (It's now called the GM classic wiki over on SF) so if that's what you chose to sell some software please use that. If you don't plan on selling it use GPL instead. 2010+ seems to be my oldest for the copyright year range and I still use it locally with some mods for userscripts-mirror.org which its link is also in my OUJS profile. If you make a change then add another @copyright yearYouDidIt-OptionalSupportedUntilCurrentYear, nickNameOrRealName, (homepageOfScriptUsually) just like we mention here and on the Write Script Online page.

Additional notes for Copyright and misc:
Part of the reason I added @copyright to the Write Script Online page is to assist Authors and save a few keystrokes. We don't currently make it mandatory as Copyright is implied via the CA1976 (Copyright Act of 1976). However since you will probably need the dates it's good to have the 2010+ for mine. Add your @copyright blurb after mine so that makes the rest of your code yours. Usually you want to mention if parseMeta has changed/renamed/ported in a very short comment. installWith is PHP with JavaScript so it may look a little different. parseHeaders also has been ported into other languages too and other projects.

I'll also gladly give you credit for it, as it's a beautifully elegant way to read and manipulate script metadata.

I appreciate that compliment. Thank you from our teams and other forkers. :)

1. This is the second time that I've had to remove a library that's had the Code in it... and that user ignored the issue and reposted under a different library name... this month. The time period for everyone gets shorter as my patience can run thin. As I have stated before I usually have more patience than other Admin+... but I'm just about done trying to explain this.
2. Keep all *GPL code licensing the same unless it's 100% yours then you are the one violating your own licensing if you remove it and you will lose all protections that GNU grants you. Remember this: "Once GNU always GNU". I booted off a user a few years back because he wanted to argue with me even after I pointed it out in the full licensing text agreement.
3. *GPL is meant to keep free software free... the only exception is LGPL... that has a specific requirement of keeping copyrights added to the script e.g. who wrote it. Then you may sell it but not without attribution; that code must usually be a module; and freely distributed in its source code form. Most of the code is purely GPL but currently on the GM Port wiki it's L/GPL indicating double licensing e.g. pick one of those two. I personally chose this to encourage wider adoption but definitely not absorption. Count Issues predates the wiki so it technically has precedence. Also on OUJS which we have used it as GPL since it was ported from uso - Count Issues and I was given credit by @sizzle himself; I removed the comment because I joined the OUJS team and my nick is all over the place showing attribution throughout the source commits which is enough for me since we at OUJS are GPL. He knows this; I know this. The rest of the team knows this. Contributors know this.
4. Someone back in the day on USO said that they didn't like *GPL because it's "sticky". e.g. they wanted to usurp the FOSS standards and just be a general inept person (and that's using nice words). I keep software free for a reason... so does OUJS... and I say this as a co-owner of the site.
5. You may add the code back into this library provided you keep it *GPL and give attribution. That would probably be Johan of GM, and myself for sure in which I filled it way out, fixed a few items, and licensed it from his brief snippet to full Code module which is posted in great detail on the GM Port wiki (split between different types of usage over the last decade or so). It's very unique, and tracked, in all of its forms including Count Issues which is where I used it mainly along with installWith and usoCheckup.

I understand that you may be "at work" but that's not an excuse in my book for ignoring licensing and copyright. Give people attribution and preferably maintain their licensing. *GPL forces, in a good way, authors to maintain licensing and copyright whereas MIT can be taken over very easily by almost any other license, sold without your knowledge, and hidden from your sight (This is where ineptness comes into play by not understand this licensing). If you want history on this look into the TiVo fiasco of GPL-2.0... which is why GPL-3.0 and GPL-3.0-or-later exists. Give attribution with same licensing and you avoid these sorts of issues. Don't give attribution, change the license, then pay the consequences. Add yourself to the copyright list if it merits it with a change. If it doesn't list someone, add them, usually with a @copyright UserScript metadata block item, before you publish yours. It's that simple.

Hopefully this is the last time I get to explain this as it's getting cumbersome saying the same thing over and over. I'm not trying to be a jerk but maintain copyrights and maintain licensing when required. Fork to your hearts content as the TOS states but don't upset people by trying to rid them of their attribution for their hard work to the community. Keep their protections in place is a good rule of thumb. :) GitHub itself works this way which is why LICENSE exists; So does npm with their package.json; This is a primary motivating factor for using SPDX and OSI.

OUJS Admin

Please close this when you have read it and hopefully understand it.
I will probably be following this up on GH as well soon.

Tell you what it's the library itself is going to be removed... if I see this again there will be no further warnings.

OUJS Admin

The bulk of this library is L/GPL protected. Failure to change this from MIT will mean account removal. If a bit of code is GPL or LGPL you can not change this. I am one of the original authors so please do this. The corrected licensing is acceptable with your other MIT code.

Thank you for your immediate cooperation.

OUJS Admin

**FINAL REMINDER BUMP**

Re: @wili:

"share your script"

I'll see if a generic string can be tweaked however that statement implies that you have an option to share with others vs yourself. That's not the case. I will ponder some verbage changes when I have some free time.

Re: @wili:

I tried to import from GitHub, but it doesn't appear in the list of repos.

You have to have a Userscript up on a GH repository first. Currently both of your repositories only have python based code and not Userscripts which are JavaScript.

Re: @jscher2000:

If your code is in a gist, you probably need to use copy/paste to post it on this site.

Correct. Full repositories are required. Gists aren't a full SCM from the last look. Usually it's just dumps of data rather than real Code. They might, and I use this word loosely, be supported at a way later date but at this time they are definitely not for sure. Thanks for piping in.

Re: @manuelc:

I Removed ads from script

You can have ads but you must let people know on the script homepage here that you will be doing that so they can expect it. e.g. an informed decision on whether or not to install it with that criteria. When you don't tell them before they install that's very deceptive... so tell them before they install it on the script homepage.

Open Source isn't against donations and other revenue but when ads are forced on someone without knowledge that can be a very bad experience.

If we had gotten a flag on this your account would have gone to the graveyard... this is just my courtesy explanation that I hope you understand well.

Doing a quick investigation on your script you are injecting ad scripts. Failure to notify the user is not wise especially when an admin sees this.

You have a short period to respond before the default TOS action is applied. It doesn't matter what your tenured account is.

OUJS Admin