bdcheung
Why?
Rickroll = ban?
The BikeForums Team
-adv-
This is an archived thread, you can find the full version of this thread, with images, links and more content here.
Ready to buy? Check out these two online bike stores:
- http://www.nashbar.com (you can find the latest bike nashbar coupons in this thread)
- http://www.performancebike.com (you can find the latest performance bike coupons in this thread)
Cya on the forums,
- The BikeForums Team
- http://www.bikeforums.net
Ready to buy? Check out these two online bike stores:
- http://www.nashbar.com (you can find the latest bike nashbar coupons in this thread)
- http://www.performancebike.com (you can find the latest performance bike coupons in this thread)
Cya on the forums,
- The BikeForums Team
- http://www.bikeforums.net
Tom Stormcrowe
Depends on which RR site. If it's the You Tube video, then it's not a ban. There is a rickroll site though that hijacks your computer with an irritating script that opens a browser you have to CTRL-ALT-Delete to shut the process down. No real harm, but a PITA, especially if you don't figure it out quick enough and wind up with RAM buffer overflow and have to reboot and consequently lose data on a project or something.
It also has a real risk of causing the forum to get blacklisted on employer's servers, and that wouldn't be a good thing at all......:eek:
It also has a real risk of causing the forum to get blacklisted on employer's servers, and that wouldn't be a good thing at all......:eek:
bdcheung
Tom, please clarify this policy (especially the two different sites) with the other moderators. I was warned when I posted an April Fools rickroll to the YouTube site (see this link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0))
timmyquest
bdcheung, it's all explained very clearly in the link below. On the surface it sounds odd but i think it'll make sense after reading the thread...
http://bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=32429 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBGIQ7ZuuiU)
http://bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=32429 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBGIQ7ZuuiU)
Rowan
Why was I taken to a YouTube link when I clicked on the showthread link provided above???????
And can someone explain just what this rickroll means without suggesting that I go to ANY other website except this one?
And can someone explain just what this rickroll means without suggesting that I go to ANY other website except this one?
donnamb
From Wikipedia: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rickroll#cite_note-nussenbaum-0)
Rickroll is an Internet meme involving Rick Astley's music video for his song "Never Gonna Give You Up". In a rickroll, a person provides a link they claim is relevant to the topic at hand which actually takes the user to the Astley video. It can also mean playing the song loudly in public in order to be disruptive.
The practice began as a variant of an earlier prank called duckrolling, in which a link to a popular celebrity or news item would instead lead to a photoshopped picture of a duck with wheels. By May 2007, the practice had become widespread, and it eventually began to receive some coverage in the mainstream media.
Rickroll is an Internet meme involving Rick Astley's music video for his song "Never Gonna Give You Up". In a rickroll, a person provides a link they claim is relevant to the topic at hand which actually takes the user to the Astley video. It can also mean playing the song loudly in public in order to be disruptive.
The practice began as a variant of an earlier prank called duckrolling, in which a link to a popular celebrity or news item would instead lead to a photoshopped picture of a duck with wheels. By May 2007, the practice had become widespread, and it eventually began to receive some coverage in the mainstream media.
Rowan
Thanks, Donna
Maybe a special, moderator-imposed avatar that says: Child at play, can be applied to those who indulge in the practice on these forums.
Maybe a special, moderator-imposed avatar that says: Child at play, can be applied to those who indulge in the practice on these forums.
bdcheung
Thanks, Donna
Maybe a special, moderator-imposed avatar that says: Child at play, can be applied to those who indulge in the practice on these forums.
:rolleyes:
how's the view from your high horse?
Maybe a special, moderator-imposed avatar that says: Child at play, can be applied to those who indulge in the practice on these forums.
:rolleyes:
how's the view from your high horse?
botto
Depends on which RR site. If it's the You Tube video, then it's not a ban. There is a rickroll site though that hijacks your computer with an irritating script that opens a browser you have to CTRL-ALT-Delete to shut the process down. No real harm, but a PITA, especially if you don't figure it out quick enough and wind up with RAM buffer overflow and have to reboot and consequently lose data on a project or something.
It also has a real risk of causing the forum to get blacklisted on employer's servers, and that wouldn't be a good thing at all......:eek:
god forbid that there'd be a productive workplace in contemporary america.
It also has a real risk of causing the forum to get blacklisted on employer's servers, and that wouldn't be a good thing at all......:eek:
god forbid that there'd be a productive workplace in contemporary america.
timmyquest
Why was I taken to a YouTube link when I clicked on the showthread link provided above???????
And can someone explain just what this rickroll means without suggesting that I go to ANY other website except this one?
OH SNAP!
I got you good
And can someone explain just what this rickroll means without suggesting that I go to ANY other website except this one?
OH SNAP!
I got you good
Catweazle
There is a rickroll site though that hijacks your computer with an irritating script that opens a browser you have to CTRL-ALT-Delete to shut the process down. No real harm, but a PITA, especially if you don't figure it out quick enough and wind up with RAM buffer overflow and have to reboot and consequently lose data on a project or something.
It also has a real risk of causing the forum to get blacklisted on employer's servers, and that wouldn't be a good thing at all......:eek:
"You got rickrolled", in my experience, almost inevitably involves such a browser hijack, and IMO the posting of it on an internet forum is behaviour which should attract a response no different to that you'd expect to see for a person intentionally posting virus or spyware laden links to trap the unwary. The intentional browser hijack is a malicious attack, and definitely NOT funny.
High horse? Maybe, but I don't care. Disruptive 'fun' is still disruptive, no matter which way you look at it.
It also has a real risk of causing the forum to get blacklisted on employer's servers, and that wouldn't be a good thing at all......:eek:
"You got rickrolled", in my experience, almost inevitably involves such a browser hijack, and IMO the posting of it on an internet forum is behaviour which should attract a response no different to that you'd expect to see for a person intentionally posting virus or spyware laden links to trap the unwary. The intentional browser hijack is a malicious attack, and definitely NOT funny.
High horse? Maybe, but I don't care. Disruptive 'fun' is still disruptive, no matter which way you look at it.
Tom Stormcrowe
I agree, Catweazle...(Cool name, by the way ;) )
"You got rickrolled", in my experience, almost inevitably involves such a browser hijack, and IMO the posting of it on an internet forum is behaviour which should attract a response no different to that you'd expect to see for a person intentionally posting virus or spyware laden links to trap the unwary. The intentional browser hijack is a malicious attack, and definitely NOT funny.
High horse? Maybe, but I don't care. Disruptive 'fun' is still disruptive, no matter which way you look at it.
"You got rickrolled", in my experience, almost inevitably involves such a browser hijack, and IMO the posting of it on an internet forum is behaviour which should attract a response no different to that you'd expect to see for a person intentionally posting virus or spyware laden links to trap the unwary. The intentional browser hijack is a malicious attack, and definitely NOT funny.
High horse? Maybe, but I don't care. Disruptive 'fun' is still disruptive, no matter which way you look at it.
bdcheung
"You got rickrolled", in my experience, almost inevitably involves such a browser hijack, and IMO the posting of it on an internet forum is behaviour which should attract a response no different to that you'd expect to see for a person intentionally posting virus or spyware laden links to trap the unwary. The intentional browser hijack is a malicious attack, and definitely NOT funny.
High horse? Maybe, but I don't care. Disruptive 'fun' is still disruptive, no matter which way you look at it.
The link that I (and, later, timmyquest) posted was neither malicious, a "browser hijack", "virus" or a "spyware laden link". What, exactly, do you have against Rick Astley and a bit of a rewind to the 80's?
High horse? Maybe, but I don't care. Disruptive 'fun' is still disruptive, no matter which way you look at it.
The link that I (and, later, timmyquest) posted was neither malicious, a "browser hijack", "virus" or a "spyware laden link". What, exactly, do you have against Rick Astley and a bit of a rewind to the 80's?
Catweazle
My comment, if you take notice, is specific to the hijack linkage.
That said,, however, I'm not in favour of being tolerant of Youtube rickroll linkings either, because I believe their presence fosters an environment in which the more malicious links are likely to appear.
For the record, I have nothing against Rick Astley, very much enjoy hearing "Never Gonna Give You Up", and think that the 80s were one of the most enjoyable decades for popular music since the 60s. The "rickroll" prank, however, is something else again, and yet another instance of the apparently uncaring and irresponsible early years of the 21st century.
That said,, however, I'm not in favour of being tolerant of Youtube rickroll linkings either, because I believe their presence fosters an environment in which the more malicious links are likely to appear.
For the record, I have nothing against Rick Astley, very much enjoy hearing "Never Gonna Give You Up", and think that the 80s were one of the most enjoyable decades for popular music since the 60s. The "rickroll" prank, however, is something else again, and yet another instance of the apparently uncaring and irresponsible early years of the 21st century.
donnamb
god forbid that there'd be a productive workplace in contemporary america.
If I wasn't able to access BF during my so-called lunch hour, I'd be getting overwhelming amounts of unpleasant PMs. For some strange reason, many members think I'm independently wealthy or something. I wish.
That said, however, I'm not in favour of being tolerant of Youtube rickroll linkings either, because I believe their presence fosters an environment in which the more malicious links are likely to appear.
I agree.
If I wasn't able to access BF during my so-called lunch hour, I'd be getting overwhelming amounts of unpleasant PMs. For some strange reason, many members think I'm independently wealthy or something. I wish.
That said, however, I'm not in favour of being tolerant of Youtube rickroll linkings either, because I believe their presence fosters an environment in which the more malicious links are likely to appear.
I agree.
bdcheung
That said,, however, I'm not in favour of being tolerant of Youtube rickroll linkings either, because I believe their presence fosters an environment in which the more malicious links are likely to appear.
I agree, instead of punishing those who actually post malicious links, we should be completely intolerant of any activity that could possibly lead to the offensive action. Like running and hosting BikeForums. Or allowing the Internets to exist.
You're free to your opinions, and we are free to disagree. But until a user violates the forum guidelines, don't go preaching intolerance.
The "rickroll" prank, however, is something else again, and yet another instance of the apparently uncaring and irresponsible early years of the 21st century.
Sorry, I'll get off your lawn now.
I agree, instead of punishing those who actually post malicious links, we should be completely intolerant of any activity that could possibly lead to the offensive action. Like running and hosting BikeForums. Or allowing the Internets to exist.
You're free to your opinions, and we are free to disagree. But until a user violates the forum guidelines, don't go preaching intolerance.
The "rickroll" prank, however, is something else again, and yet another instance of the apparently uncaring and irresponsible early years of the 21st century.
Sorry, I'll get off your lawn now.
Catweazle
..either..
..instead..
Discrepency?
I didn't enter the thread to engage in any pissing contest or to attempt to deny anybody their right to express opinion, or to preach intolerance or anything else of the sort. I merely expressed an opinion of my own, regarding something which I'd consider is already covered in the rules here under the heading of "Disruption".
..instead..
Discrepency?
I didn't enter the thread to engage in any pissing contest or to attempt to deny anybody their right to express opinion, or to preach intolerance or anything else of the sort. I merely expressed an opinion of my own, regarding something which I'd consider is already covered in the rules here under the heading of "Disruption".
KrisPistofferson
I wish that the mods, in their defense, would make it explicitly clear that Rick-rolling in general and the viral form that people were banned for are two seperate animals. The fact that they haven't made that clear I think is what's leading to much of the confusion and resentment. Shoot, I post stupid links (usually preceded by stupid posts, BTW) all the time, and nobody cares. They just don't lock up people's computers.
These "Rick-rolls" Tom and some others banned people for would lock your computer down, though. Different than what most people think of as a "Rick-roll."
Seriously, mods, go and edit the posts in the "Banned Users" thread, it would make things a lot more clear, as I've seen a lot of users exasperated by this.
This also proves my theory that what people on Bikeforums find funny is what people on Something Awful found funny 4 years ago.
These "Rick-rolls" Tom and some others banned people for would lock your computer down, though. Different than what most people think of as a "Rick-roll."
Seriously, mods, go and edit the posts in the "Banned Users" thread, it would make things a lot more clear, as I've seen a lot of users exasperated by this.
This also proves my theory that what people on Bikeforums find funny is what people on Something Awful found funny 4 years ago.
Tom Stormcrowe
I have said there was a difference :eek:
The one that'll get ya banned is the nasty lock your computer down one. That one won't be tolerated at all. Just linking to that horrible and stupid youtube video isn't an issue (other than the persons taste in music, but that's another issue entirely ;) ).
The one that'll get ya banned is the nasty lock your computer down one. That one won't be tolerated at all. Just linking to that horrible and stupid youtube video isn't an issue (other than the persons taste in music, but that's another issue entirely ;) ).
Catweazle
Just linking to that horrible and stupid youtube video isn't an issue (other than the persons taste in music, but that's another issue entirely ;) ).
At the very least, people could instead link to Beaker's version! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hczaiM3LH0M)
Caution: That link IS a 'rickroll' ;)
At the very least, people could instead link to Beaker's version! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hczaiM3LH0M)
Caution: That link IS a 'rickroll' ;)
bdcheung
Love it, but he's clearly lipsyncing. :)
Air
Can the malicious RickRoll site be added to the censor list? Seems like that lighten your load a bit ;)
I don't really 'get' the whole RickRoll thing - however I think what happened to the Mets is hysterical. They had an online survey to decide a singalong for the 9th inning. Fark encouraged its users to Rick Roll them - and they won! The Mets tossed it out and took the top 6 ones instead and will determine by the largest audience participation. Now THAT's funny. Fooling someone with a link - so 90's.
I don't really 'get' the whole RickRoll thing - however I think what happened to the Mets is hysterical. They had an online survey to decide a singalong for the 9th inning. Fark encouraged its users to Rick Roll them - and they won! The Mets tossed it out and took the top 6 ones instead and will determine by the largest audience participation. Now THAT's funny. Fooling someone with a link - so 90's.
Rowan
I have said there was a difference :eek:
The one that'll get ya banned is the nasty lock your computer down one. That one won't be tolerated at all. Just linking to that horrible and stupid youtube video isn't an issue (other than the persons taste in music, but that's another issue entirely ;) ).
Despite the obvious mirth it brought to kindergarten kid, the most significant issue for me is trust in both the integrity of this site and its users. Both of which have been severely eroded for me. Leading a user to a destination that is not what is depicted in the link *is* malicious behaviour in itself. It's a bit like saying "It was only a toy gun that I pointed at the bank teller as a joke".
The one that'll get ya banned is the nasty lock your computer down one. That one won't be tolerated at all. Just linking to that horrible and stupid youtube video isn't an issue (other than the persons taste in music, but that's another issue entirely ;) ).
Despite the obvious mirth it brought to kindergarten kid, the most significant issue for me is trust in both the integrity of this site and its users. Both of which have been severely eroded for me. Leading a user to a destination that is not what is depicted in the link *is* malicious behaviour in itself. It's a bit like saying "It was only a toy gun that I pointed at the bank teller as a joke".
Sixty Fiver
Beaker rocks.
The others will make me want to come to your house to beat you senseless with a Rick Astley cd.
The others will make me want to come to your house to beat you senseless with a Rick Astley cd.
bdcheung
Despite the obvious mirth it brought to kindergarten kid, the most significant issue for me is trust in both the integrity of this site and its users. Both of which have been severely eroded for me. Leading a user to a destination that is not what is depicted in the link *is* malicious behaviour in itself. It's a bit like saying "It was only a toy gun that I pointed at the bank teller as a joke".
hyperbole much? sounds like you're taking this whole Internets thing too seriously.
hyperbole much? sounds like you're taking this whole Internets thing too seriously.
Previous - Top - Next
Copyright 1999 - 2007 BikeForums.Net - All rights reserved.
Common bike forum topics in clue bicycles, cycling, mountain biking,
cycling jerseys, shorts, socks, shoes and bike equiptment selection.
Common bike forum topics in clue bicycles, cycling, mountain biking,
cycling jerseys, shorts, socks, shoes and bike equiptment selection.