Scratchback Scratches Back

Recently I emailed some feedback to Jimmy Kukral (the developer of Scratchback) after testing out his widget on my site. When it comes to using widgets I like to use IFrames whenever I can in order to prevent them from bogging my site down, just in case the servers running the widgets crap out for whatever reason. Anyone who’s ever used a Twitter widget knows exactly what I’m talking about too. :wall:

Only problem was, clicking on a link in the Scratchback widget opened it up within the IFrame instead of loading a new page altogether. So I made the suggestion of including a target that directed the link outside the frame in order to resolve this minor issue.

And what happens? I get this snippy response from Jimmy:

That violates our terms of service. Can you stop doing that? If not, please stop using the widget. We have to maintain a consistent user experience.

:blink:

Never mind the fact that there’s no direct link to the terms of service on his site, (I had to pretend to register again in order to locate it), but there’s no visual difference between me adding the widget directly into the source code or enclosing it within an IFrame instead. So I’d be changing the user experience… how again?

I emailed Jimmy back again asking for clarification, since there was certainly nothing on the Scratchback site itself that addressed the use of IFrames. I got this response:

It’s in there in so many words. You’re modifying the pre determined user experience by putting our code in an iframe.

Ah, it’s there in so many WORDS. Well that certainly clears it up. :eyeroll:

I don’t think any thought may have been given to the possibility that some users may opt to use IFrames in order to offload potentially slow loading widgets from the main source code, that way it doesn’t interfere with the page’s load time. That this would be considered a nefarious act on my part and a violation of Jimmy’s sacred TOS kinda cheesed me off.

Look, it’s not a huge deal, and I don’t really want to even worry about it. I’m just asking you don’t do it.

Oh don’t you worry your pretty big head about it honey pie, I’ve permanently taken the widget off. You can sleep easy now knowing us evil bloggers will not be changing the “user experience” of your precious widgets.

You know, it was just an innocent suggestion too. If I thought the way I used IFrames would significantly change how the Scratchback widget operated on my site, would I have emailed the DEVELOPER about it so he’d know exactly what I was doing??? Idiot.

Ah well, it’s one less widget I need to worry about. Next time I’ll be more careful before getting into those types of arrangements where I’m expected the shave the backs of those who scratches mine.

Tags: code, email, iframes, scratchback, suggestion, terms of service, tos, user experience, widget
Categories: Blog Fog

( Print This Post | | 1,011 views )

(No Ratings Yet)

Loading ...

19 Responses to “Scratchback Scratches Back”

Damien Riley wrote a comment on March 1, 2008 @ 10:43:pm
Quote

Thanks for sharing that. Tose iframes can be tricky but I never heard of a company asking someone to not use them. Odd.

Sicarii wrote a comment on March 1, 2008 @ 11:04:pm
Quote

Pfft, widgets. I’m trying to cut the number of these nefarious things to a minimum at my blog nowadays.

Lincoln Adams wrote a comment on March 1, 2008 @ 11:38:pm
Quote

@Damien: Actually you can’t do it with Google Adsense either, but it makes sense with them since the code analyzes the text on your site in order to deliver relevant ads, which can’t be done with an IFrame. Ive read that some try to game the system here like dumping a load of keywords into an IFrame along with the Adsense code, so I could see why this would be an issue with them.

@Sicarii: Most widgets are really a form of advertisement for its creator, a way for them to promote their products on your site without actually paying you. Some widgets do provide enough of a value to keep them, so I wouldn’t rule them out altogether. With the exception of Twitter, the widgets on this site either bring me traffic or money, so I can’t really complain. :banana:

dr_clairebear wrote a comment on March 2, 2008 @ 02:54:am
Quote

Hey, linc! thanks for the visit. Tag, you’re it! Do you do tags? I get the feeling you can make something out of this one!

Tish wrote a comment on March 2, 2008 @ 06:56:am
Quote

Hey there, Sugar Bear!

You sure have a way of getting under people’s skin, don’t ya?

ConsrvYank1 wrote a comment on March 2, 2008 @ 09:03:am
Quote

I have no clue what you computer nerds are talking about. Okay, I will quietly back away. :nerd:

Lincoln Adams wrote a comment on March 2, 2008 @ 01:02:pm
Quote

@claire: Oh NO, not again!!!!!! :hang: BTW, your blog link is misspelled. :wideeyed:

@Tish: But I really am a nice guy. If I had any friends you could ask them.

@ConsrvYank1: Half the time *I* don’t know what I’m talking about. :gaga:

Tish wrote a comment on March 2, 2008 @ 10:25:pm
Quote

*LOL* Linc. Will you be my friend?

Lincoln Adams wrote a comment on March 2, 2008 @ 11:40:pm
Quote

@Tish: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FmcKBdEJ_U

:ggrin:

Tish wrote a comment on March 3, 2008 @ 12:38:am
Quote

Awww, I am so feeling the LOVE! Thanks, friend!

Tish wrote a comment on March 3, 2008 @ 12:39:am
Quote

Btw, I hate tea, but that Blooming Tea ad is so cool. I checked it out earlier, and it would make an awesome gift!

John wrote a comment on March 3, 2008 @ 08:05:am
Quote

I’m Linc’s friend. Even met him in RL. He’s not nice.

:nyah:

Lincoln Adams wrote a comment on March 3, 2008 @ 10:22:am
Quote

@Tish: Yep, the tea guy has been stup… uh… I mean he made the very wise decision of advertising on my site, for which I am entirely grateful.

Lincoln Adams wrote a comment on March 3, 2008 @ 10:27:am
Quote

@John: Gees, I only leave you stranded in a dangerous town for a few hours and suddenly I’m not a nice guy anymore? :huh:

Beth wrote a comment on March 3, 2008 @ 11:00:pm
Quote

Apparently, if he has a business attorney, he/she isn’t a very good one. “In so many words,” is not a legal wording. Any TOS should clearly state any rule that is in effect or has the possibility of becoming one in the future, just to cover all bases. With my next theme, which I’m working on, the ScratchBack Widget is being removed. I made a little money on it but not enough to brag about.

Lincoln Adams wrote a comment on March 3, 2008 @ 11:36:pm
Quote

@Beth: I have to wonder if the reason he was being vague was because the widget could potentially be spying on your site. The MyBlogLog widget tracks all sorts of data when it’s placed in your source code, however the data gets screwed up when it’s placed in an IFrame instead. If ScratchBack is doing something similar, an IFrame could potentially screw it up just as easily. Regardless, as far as MyBlogLog goes it’s not considered a violation of their TOS as far as I know. I do the same thing for BlogCatalog and Blogrush with no complaints either.

Considering that I have to contribute 10 percent of my earnings to use ScratchBack, having the courtesy of a polite response would have been nice, instead of being accused of violating TOS and then being asked to stop it like I’m a five year old kid.

With that kind of attitude, Kukral can take his little widget and suck on it.

Fortunately everything on my blog is an experiment right now, and I’m having a lot more success than I expected with the WP Text Ads I’m trying out. I’ve already made $13 with it, which is more than I probably would have earned even after several months of using ScratchBack. Don’t have to pay off no weenie middle man either. :ggrin:

Jim Kukral wrote a comment on March 7, 2008 @ 02:14:pm
Quote

I asked you to not use the iframe because by using it, you’re changing the user experience with the widget, which is against the TOC. I designed it to function in a certain way, and having an iframe around it was not in my design, so I nicely asked you to stop using the widget. It’s a rule. Every day you sign up to use stuff and agree to rules. This is the same thing.

I suppose some other companies would have banned your account or had a lawyer contact you first without warning, which I would never do. That would be a waste of time for everyone and I hate lawyers. I thought my way was better, no? To just ask you not to do that?

I did not intend for you to take it as me being a jerk. I thought I was pretty nice about it, guess not?

Lincoln Adams wrote a comment on March 7, 2008 @ 02:30:pm
Quote

I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree. I simply wanted to optimize my site so my pages will continue to load quickly even if there’s a problem with the server that delivers the widget (or any other widget for that matter.) I don’t see how it changes the user experience since I’m using them for other widgets here, and there’s virtually no difference in look or usage than if I placed it directly in the source. Since the links in the Scratchback widget will not break out of IFrames, there would have been no point in using it in this manner anyway. Oh well.

moserw wrote a comment on June 29, 2008 @ 09:28:pm
Quote

Iframes are tough at times. Even Google would not allow them. I tried custom search in them, but my ads were not getting displayed at all. Still working on a fix myself.