View Single Post
Old 01-15-2005, 07:53 AM  
Nathan
Confirmed User
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,108
Quote:
Originally Posted by wedouglas
i prefer my affiliates to use MPA3. my NATS stats have been shit since the switch
Again, and again, and again.. MSG ME!

You keep accusing NATS of making your stats worse, but you do not msg me so I can take a look into the problem.

Makes me wonder if you are making this up...

Quote:
Originally Posted by richmedia
I'm against NATS untill they help cheaters and multiposters to hide faces from editors on all traffic resources. The main problem is encoded affiliate codes.
Makes the encoding a LOT worse than it is. Especially because its so friggin dead easy to decode it.

The reason we encoded it is that we did not want non-alphanumeric chars in the urls because those chars often makes urls less SE and script friendly.

In your post on AWI we did agree about not offering a non-encoded version was a mistake and we are changing that very soon. Then affiliates will have the choice to use either the encoded or decoded version, totally up to them.

We can not make these multi-variable urls (ie w=123&c=123&p=1&s=1) because of backward compatibility.

They will look something either like this: nats=123:123:1:1 or nats=c123:w123:p1:s1

richmedia, could you please contact me on AIM? I see no reason why we should not work together to make this a better system for everyone out there. If you have a problem with it, talk to us directly. We have nothing against suggestions for changes in our software.
__________________
"Think about it a little more and you'll agree with me, because you're smart and I'm right."
- Charlie Munger
Nathan is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote