What the Hell?

I left a comment on an entry earlier at noupe.com, re: “WordPress Security Tips”. Now, aside from the fact that the entire entry consists of tips ripped from other sites and balled into one, the first tip incorrectly states that by using $_SERVER['PHP_SELF'] a person is able to search your entire server. Talk about spreading FUD! That beats my security rantings hands down.

Anyway, I left a comment explaining the actual use for $_SERVER['PHP_SELF'] (i.e. $_SERVER is a PHP superglobal, etc) and when I checked back just now, I’ve discovered that the entry has been changed with text that links back to the original (where it was copied from) and my comment has been pasted into the comment form on the original site.

I have two problems with this:

  1. My comment was specifically for noupe.com and had I wanted it posted anywhere else I could have done it myself
  2. The lazy git didn’t capitalise my name — I fucking hate that — and nor did they attribute my genius insight to my web URL.

How about instead of laying the blame on someone else (however wrong they may be) you correct the post and approve the comment that made you realise you’d cocked up in the first place? That way, I’m not left having supposedly agreed to a comment policy that I’ve never even read, and my name is correctly bloody written!

Published
Posted in
affiliate window advert

33 comments so far

  1. Rachael said:
    On February 18, 2008 at 7:43 pm

    Ooh, I know what you mean. It really bugs me when people get my name wrong. I’ve been particularly helpful in a forum today, and have received about four different “Thanks, Rachel!” comments.

  2. Sarah said:
    On February 18, 2008 at 7:55 pm

    That’s pretty ridiculous, and comes off as cowardly. The person could’ve easily made a note that he got it wrong, thanking you for pointing that out. I left a comment on the original site, pointing out that “jem” != Jem, because I’m a go-getter like that.

  3. Jem said:
    On February 18, 2008 at 8:01 pm

    Ooh Sarah, very daring ;)

  4. Vera said:
    On February 18, 2008 at 8:06 pm

    It’s rather odd. I mean if he didn’t like what you said, I suppose he could have always deleted or left your comment in moderation. But to move it to a different site? Seems like a rather roundabout way of going about it. It’s beyond ridiculous, and I’m not entirely sure what it achieved.

  5. Jordan said:
    On February 18, 2008 at 8:07 pm

    Your comment isn’t even on noupe anymore, nor is Sarah’s (if they were originally.) :\\

  6. Stephanie said:
    On February 18, 2008 at 8:09 pm

    You know, I hate idiots.

  7. Jem said:
    On February 18, 2008 at 8:10 pm

    @Jordan: no, they’re on the site that the original source was ‘stolen’ from (wpdesigner.com/2008/01/30/wordpress-tips-part-1/)

  8. Joshua Goodwin said:
    On February 18, 2008 at 8:44 pm

    The tip does have a point, however. Some people place their WordPress blogs in, say, http://example.com/blog/. $_SERVER[‘PHP_SELF’] will echo just http://example.com/ wheras the recommended code will echo the actual installation directory. That said, it’s not really a security-related thing. And stealing is bad.

  9. Louise said:
    On February 18, 2008 at 8:48 pm

    Some people have no sense of decency that’s all. And most people can’t handle their information being wrong. It’s not like you were being mean or anything.

  10. Jem said:
    On February 18, 2008 at 8:54 pm

    @Joshua: the tip doesn’t have “a point” in the context given at all. It’s bugger all to do with security. If the post was on “wordpress tags not best suited for the job”, then sure.. then it would have a point.

  11. Jordan said:
    On February 18, 2008 at 9:28 pm

    I can’t read obviously! I must have skipped over your “approve the comment that made you realise,” because I was actually referring to Noupe’s website originally D: /fail

  12. Aisling said:
    On February 18, 2008 at 10:53 pm

    I hate when people alter comments. They might as well just… make up new people and write their own!

  13. barbilee said:
    On February 19, 2008 at 2:52 am

    well yah that was wrong to take that caoment you made and move it what was the reason to move it to a new site? i would of never don’t that crap …… any ways i relay an very new to the wordpress game i am still laring and trying to tweak up mine to look the way i want it but i an never happy with anything i do back on topic…… so if you but the $_SERVER[‘PHP_SELF’] some one can look tho all your files on your server? WOW i did not know there was something like that but like i said i am very new to this …….. thanks for this info

  14. Vera said:
    On February 19, 2008 at 5:55 am

    Barbilee: um no? That’s precisely what Jem was talking about here.

  15. Jem said:
    On February 19, 2008 at 9:13 am

    so if you but the $_SERVER[‘PHP_SELF’] some one can look tho all your files on your server? No; $_SERVER[‘PHP_SELF’] just delivers the page you’re on (basically). The people who said that $_SERVER allows you to look through the server are wrong.

  16. Chien Yee said:
    On February 19, 2008 at 11:32 am

    And now I see the comment where he talks about the similarity of Jordan’s site and the web studio which we all have once mentioned and noticed before. But of course, Web 2.0 is a style that have many similarities, so I think that Noupe’s claim is wrong.

  17. Jem said:
    On February 19, 2008 at 11:35 am

    Noupe is not just wrong, they are actually lying. The post was edited after I left my comment and they are denying it. I wish I’d taken a bloody screenshot now.

  18. Curl smith said:
    On February 19, 2008 at 12:18 pm

    When i checked Noupe’s post, i found someone have a good point . ts realy easy to know if Noupe gave credits or not. Just go to http://www.wpdesigner.com/2008/01/30/wordpress-tips-part-1/ and you will find that a trackback link was added on the same day Noupe published this post which is on Feb17, this means its one day before these lazy commentators create this buzz out of nothing

  19. Jem said:
    On February 19, 2008 at 12:25 pm

    @Curl: That doesn’t mean anything. Adding the link AFTER the blog entry was initially created, but on the same day, would have created a trackback to WPdesigner. Furthermore, the link to WPdesigner could have been placed elsewhere in the post and then moved to top where it is now. I can unequivocally state that the entry was edited after I had left my comment. Had noupe.com simply changed the entry to remove the false statement regarding $_SERVER or approved my original comment (instead of passing on my personal details without my permission) this wouldn’t even be an issue.

  20. Curl smith said:
    On February 19, 2008 at 12:34 pm

    Furthermore, the link to WPdesigner could have been placed elsewhere in the post and then moved to top where it is now This doesn’t make sense, why would Noupe place the link elsewhere in the post while one tip was just taken from WPdesigner which is the one on the top. When did you send your comment to Noupe?

  21. Jem said:
    On February 19, 2008 at 12:41 pm

    Whether or not it makes sense is irrelevant – only noupe.com can answer that, although they’re conveniently deleting my comments – I read that first tip back to myself several times to make sure I understood the claim they were making before I opened my mouth. My comment was left on the post quite early – around 10:30am – yesterday morning (18th Feb). The entry itself was published “Mon, 18 Feb 2008 00:12:27 +0000” for the record (that information is only available in the feed). So, for around 10 hours that post will have had the original text (“DO NOT use this search code in the search.php:” directly copied from WPDesigner, instead of the new text “WPdesigner advices us to NOT use this search code in the search.php”). I will find someone who saw the unedited entry, and I will publicise the fact that noupe.com are bloody liars. The fact of the matter is, whether or not the link was there is a separate topic. I’m not WPDesigner, so I can’t possibly say whether or not credit is even required. The point of this entry – please read it if you haven’t bothered – is that a) noupe edited their post to hide their initial claim; b) noupe denied editing their post; c) noupe transferred my personal details to a secondary domain without my permission and didn’t even bother to let me know.

  22. Jem said:
    On February 19, 2008 at 12:58 pm

    Oh, look at this.. Yahoo’s cache shows us the original text exactly how I said it was: http://www.jemjabella.co.uk/junk/noupe-original.jpg Is this an “I told you so” moment? Oh yes, I think it is.

  23. Curl Smith said:
    On February 19, 2008 at 1:07 pm

    So you are saying that you placed your comment on the 18th of Feb not the 17th, but how did the trackback link to the article was placed on WPdesigner on the 17th not the 18th? Also Noupe’s published date is on the 17th, the same day the trackback link was added on WPdesigner. This mean its one day before you sent your comment to Noupe.

  24. Jem said:
    On February 19, 2008 at 1:12 pm

    @Curl: you’re very obviously not familiar with the small matter of “timezones”? The entry was published at 12 minutes past midnight GMT – i.e. my own timezone – on the 18th. Noupe’s server is obviously “behind” GMT, rendering the published date on the blog 17th. The feed available on noupe verifies that fact. Nonetheless, it doesn’t change anything. I’ve just given you proof that noupe changed their entry as per my initial claim. To continue defending them is about as retarded as the idea that $_SERVER allows you to search a person’s web server.

  25. Curl smith said:
    On February 19, 2008 at 1:23 pm

    Well, yahoo cache shows there is a link to WPdesigner’s site, so the credits was there. I guess they just added the words ” WPdesigner advice us” Also could you give me the link to yahoo cache as it seems to be faster than googl’s cache.

  26. Jem said:
    On February 19, 2008 at 1:29 pm

    Like I had already said, whether or not the credits were there was not what my entry was about – I couldn’t give a crap – in fact, the only time I mentioned a link was to offer theories as to how a trackback could exist after the fact. It seems the Yahoo cache has already expired and is now showing the updated entry; such is the nature of the web.

  27. Jem said:
    On February 19, 2008 at 1:32 pm

    I take that back, I was looking at the wrong page. Here’s the cached copy: http://tinyurl.com/2zyz3h

  28. Arwen said:
    On February 19, 2008 at 3:21 pm

    Wow, wtf? I hope you got that other comment removed!

  29. Cristina said:
    On February 19, 2008 at 5:14 pm

    Did I miss something? What’s with Barbilee commenting?

  30. Jabed said:
    On February 19, 2008 at 5:33 pm

    Hi Jem, I have a small request, could you tell me what kind of doctype my website is. I’m not sure at all, maybe HTML 4.01 Transitional?

  31. Christine said:
    On February 19, 2008 at 5:54 pm

    Wow. The lengths some people will go to, to cover up their mistakes. They should have just approved your comments, and corrected the site. As cliche as it sounds, honesty really is the best policy! @curl: In all my months of webstalking Jem, she is pretty much never wrong ~_~ So it seems silly to argue esp when she can offer proof. Yah, I second Cristina’s puzzlement on the whole Barbilee thing ~_~

  32. barbilee said:
    On February 19, 2008 at 6:44 pm

    oh sorry jem and guys i miss read the post …… well like i said i am very new to the wordpress thing ….. i am sorry for the misunderstanding