Marti Admin

Please point your scripts @updateURL to the content from the Author Tools not the one that shows up in your .user.js engine template.

Thanks,
OUJS Admin



Re: @chmorik:

Announcing your script is not necessary especially in three forums. We do that already in the script Userscripts list. Usually you would only do this sort of thing in this forum if someone requested it as a response... not proactively pushing it.

If you do that again you'll be removed for spamming. The other two are deleted. This is your only warning.

OUJS Admin


Re: @jscher2000:

Could I suggest truncating the IP addresses sent to Google Analytics?
...
See:

That sounds reasonable to me. This is a @sizzle exclusive thing so I'll have to run it by him. I never see that thing. I usually block it everywhere so I didn't even know this existed. Thanks mate! :)

While you may lose some precision in your geographic statistics, that level of detail may not be particularly relevant/useful anyway.

According to the image it's just one octet which again seems reasonable ... I am eventually going to be interested in how that reacts with IPv6 compatibility but that's probably way down the line.


Some of you may have heard about the EU laws regarding the GDPR. We already have very strict privacy policy so there may be a layer or more added.

Although jurisdiction is the United States for this server we are making an effort to incorporate some of the basics provided they do not compromise the integrity of OUJS.

  1. First thing you will notice, so far, is that there is a check box saying you consent to the TOS and Privacy Policy. This is already the case for existing users however to humor the EU law on their end we've added it as a mandatory action.

  2. If you are a GitHub user and are using the webhook you must pay us a visit and login to get that flag set on your account then the webhook will work as usual. If you don't pay us a visit the server will currently reject script updates.

It's simple so far... just check the box when logging in (preferably giving those documents a read too which you should have already done in the first place). Once this happens normal webhook operations will resume.

Apologies for any inconvenience including whatever else might be implemented later to participate.

OUJS Admin


Re: @DarKZonEDZ:

Please remember to do a code fence around your code blocks. An example exists at this FAQ. One has been added to your comment so it is readable.

Thank you,
OUJS Admin


It'd be great if there were some easily locatable documentation that spelled this all out.

Guess you didn't read the page here.


Re: @rosslh:

Will it continue updating to the code in the repo?

Only if you have the webhook setup on GH it should auto-sync a UserScript.

Should I change my update url to my github source?

Usually not if you have the webhook. But pay attention to the Announcements forum on occasion in case we require something specific in the script source e.g. don't just forget about visiting every once in a while. Have a read also here at your leisure.

Do I have to set up a webhook?

Usually it's a nice thing to have but not required.

Thanks.

Welcome.

Specific to your current script I would suggest adding @supportURL explained here in the UserScript Block so that your Issues go to GH like you mentioned in your Script Info page. Admin+ may also create issues here if it's a TOS violation, or the like, but I, personally, check and possibly submit at GH as well. e.g. visit us occasionally. :)


Re: @ladroop:

Appreciate your taking the time to address this. Thanks. Seems to be working well at your current revision.

GM is going through some growing pains with Fx... one would hope that Moz will proceed with their updates and allow GM to do what it is supposed to.



Re: @ladroop:

I usually am doing other things but confirmed in SM with NoScript blocking highwebmedia.com domain. Go to any home page that has locked images/videos and you will see the locks visible since script execution is blocked by the error. The script also seems to not support GM4 at this time:

Here's a possibility on how you can fix these (tried to match your indentation style with the diff ignoring whitespace changes but probably failed ;):

--- a.user.js	2018-05-15 21:04:27.708858472 -0600
+++ b.user.js	2018-05-15 21:04:00.910999467 -0600
@@ -345,6 +345,10 @@

 // after clean up set spy/private/group price in the profile

+	// Test for GM4
+	var win = window.wrappedJSObject ? window.wrappedJSObject : window;
+
+	if (win.defchat_settings){
     if (document.getElementById('einfo')){
         einfo=document.getElementById('einfo');
         einfo.parentNode.removeChild(einfo);
@@ -352,13 +356,13 @@
     pnod=document.getElementById('tabs_content_container');
     rnod=pnod.getElementsByTagName('h1')[0];
     nnod=document.createElement('dl');
-	spyprc=window.defchat_settings.spy_price;
-	pvtprc=window.defchat_settings.private_price;
-	grpprc=window.defchat_settings.group_price;
-	noexhib=window.defchat_settings.allow_tipping;
+	  spyprc=win.defchat_settings.spy_price;
+	  pvtprc=win.defchat_settings.private_price;
+	  grpprc=win.defchat_settings.group_price;
+	  noexhib=win.defchat_settings.allow_tipping;
     topictxt="";
     if(!document.getElementById("player")){
-		topictxt="<dt>Last Roomtopic:</dt><dd>"+decodeURIComponent(window.defchat_settings.default_subject)+"</dd>";
+		  topictxt="<dt>Last Roomtopic:</dt><dd>"+decodeURIComponent(win.defchat_settings.default_subject)+"</dd>";
     }

     spytxt="<dt>Spy:</dt><dd>"+spyprc+" Tkns/Min.</dd>";
@@ -385,7 +389,10 @@
     nnod.id="einfo";
     pnod.insertBefore(nnod, rnod.nextSibling);

-	}
+	}else{
+		// Domain highwebmedia.com script blocked by NoScript or equivalent
+		// Do not block script execution
+	}	}

     function blockelm(tag){
         image = container.getElementsByTagName(tag);

See also:


Re: version 1.0+709432d at line #16.

May want to put // @grant GM_addStyle in the UserScript metadata block to enable this section of code.


Next time if you plan on forking someones code here on OUJS please go to that scripts homepage, then click on Source Code tab... make your changes optionally or later... then click the "Submit Code as Fork" button and it will back link it automatically on your fork to that Authors.

It's been fixed on this script for now. Appreciate you being honest that it was forked but you need to do it otherwise scripts that aren't may be eligible for removal. If you don't do that you risk your account too if a flag comes through or Admin+ notices it.

Thanks,
OUJS Admin

Ref:



Re: @Enora:

It's working now!

I'm guessing based off your timeline you may have run into the GitHub caching mechanism which would explain a failure here on importing scripts from there. e.g. their raw linkage is cached and your changes may not have propagated yet from the rapid fire source commits. In other words they will slow you down which trickles to us across the pond.


Re: @Enora:

But I am still getting the error.

  • Worked for me as you in your 86eab94 as an imported script.
  • Worked for me as you in your 7386712 as a script written directly online.

Could you please make it simple....

Doesn't get any simpler. You seem to have found this Discussion so it is packed full of information.

The timing of your comment here and the commits on GH are different and do not corroborate your storyline.

If you are still having issues try a clean profile in your browser with just the Userscript engine and try again. I have removed the script from your account as you and you are free to reimport.

it's really a pain to go through this to simply share a script.

Seems like User error to me. Good luck.


Who

  • ...did this to me (and OUJS)? ... The Steam OpenID authentication service over there.

What

  • ... did they do to me (and OUJS)? ... Earlier this month Steam changed how they send the authentication to our site.

Where

  • does this affect me (and OUJS)? ... Their servers that authenticate you to use OUJS with this authentication method.

When

  • ...did they do this? ... Around April 5th, 2018 (this month).

Why

  • ... did they do this (and to OUJS)? ... Going from HTTP to HTTPS.

How

  • ... does this affect me with my Steam login?

What this means in short is the following:

  1. We have a recovery routine in place.
  2. This recovery routine has a limited migration recovery time. We have set it to be tentatively removed from the source at or shortly thereafter the 1st of November, 2018 (depending on what we're doing that day... perhaps a few days later but don't rely on that and procrastinate. Hopefully another curve-ball won't be pitched between then and now).
  3. Once expiry of this authentication recovery happens anyone who hasn't logged in with their Steam authentication will lose access to that authentication method. Requests for any accounts that haven't been recovered will be denied as it takes too much coordination between one of us and the target user. e.g. the period allotted is automatic and at your earliest possible convenience. So please do it if you wish to keep the Steam authentication method.

As I have Steam as a test authentication method I am already recovered so the routine should be solid and well tested.

  • If you have multiple authentications, including Steam, please spend a moment to logout of your default authentication here on OUJS then login selecting Steam. This is a two fold process. One login is to migrate you. You will see in the tail end of the URL address bar ?retryauth in order to confirm. Then one more time to confirm to your own satisfaction that you are migrated. After that logout and then you can login, selecting your preferred authentication default if it is different, or visit your preferences to toggle it back.

  • If you have only Steam as your authentication all you have to do is login, then you'll see the ?retryauth and then login again for your confirmation.

Thank you for taking a few moments to read this. If you have further questions please let us know preferably at #1347 on Development.

P.S. This is similar to Google Authentication Deprecation announcement...so don't be locked out of your account beyond expiration of the recovery period. Sooner rather than later is a good thing. Ciao for now.


Next time if you plan on forking someones code here on OUJS please go to that scripts homepage, then click on Source Code tab... make your changes optionally or later... then click the "Submit Code as Fork" button and it will back link it automatically on your fork to that Authors.

It's been fixed on this script for now and some others. Appreciate you being honest that it was forked by versioning it as such but you need to do it otherwise scripts that aren't may be eligible for removal.

You should also know that I'm a contributor to the upstream script so I'm curious why you are executing it sooner than document-end? e.g. is there an issue on some GH page?

Thanks,
OUJS Admin

Ref:


Also you should probably remove the word function in front of GM_addStyle for it to work.


Re: Version 0.3+63eef9f

// @grant       	none
// ==/UserScript==

function GM_addStyle("				\
    video.webm { 			\
        max-width: 100%;	\
        height: auto;		\
    }						\
");

Assuming this script is still maintained this section of code should be at least @grant GM_addStyle and not @grant none.

Thanks for the look.


Btw this script is in violation of our TOS... removing. Luckily you forked it properly so it will keep your account here for now.


Re: @hackerb9:

One of the two is wrong and needs to be fixed.

I see it now... thanks for the heads up. This is an attempt at unlicensing as per our TOS.

In the future I would recommend that you just flag it for anonymity. Try to be brief but if you need to fill it out a little more please do.


Re: @hackerb9:

This page claims the script to be under the MIT license, ...

Script source claims... we usually mirror the @license key unless it is a hammer in which a previous agreement was made between Author and OUJS for MIT default in our TOS. Good for you to check though.

... however if you follow the link in the description to popupblockerscript.com/terms

Those are supposed to be site terms for site hosted software only not Userscript terms on our site. We wouldn't allow a proprietary script here hence why it's now mandatory to declare @license with OSI compatible and is primary governance in conjuction with the TOS.

If it is proprietary software, does it even belong on this site?

Other sites may not extend their TOU or TOS to our site. That would be the only grounds for removal in this scenario. So if you can find that in their site TOS/TOU then, briefly mention it in flagging, I'd be able to take further action.


Test on your own issues please not some other owners script. You will have a better chance at continuing here.

OUJS Admin


Done.

Miscellaneous note:

  • Haven't decided if should merge the orphaned comments here or not. Good for a site unit test in this case I think.
  • Too much caffeine will make you twitchy. ;)