The problem is, as I have said countless times, that the f#^&*'in thing produces completely ambiguous images. I just got a failure with this one - fortunately I got a screen shot of it first because I suspected it:
What ARE those middle 2 letters?
Is that a Q and a J? An O and a Y? A 0 (zero) and a Y?
Kill the captchas! Kill the captchas. They SUCK. SUCK I tell you!
Yeah. It doesn't matter if you enter it right or not. I'm getting really tired of having to deal with it. whoever runs this site for Adam is screwing up.
I think part of the problem is that the captcha times out after a few seconds, so if you're typing anything more than a quick post, it will reject it the first time because it's already timed out.
If that were a Q, the cross bar should be the same color as the "O" but it isn't, its the same color as the "J. Making that a Y and the first an O or 0. But that is my point. If we have to have a captcha system, then we should use what most sites use - all numbers, or words (even fake ones like "fakle" or "prenty" - because human beings have an easier time seeing/reproducing them. It is not captcha in general that sucks. It is THIS captcha system that sucks. The one on eBay never fails me, for example.
AND I think it fails even when you get the letters right - forcing the 2 tries thing.
Quote AND I think it fails even when you get the letters right - forcing the 2 tries thing
I agree. In fact often my first attempt is spot on but is rejected. But on 2nd attempt I get a scrambled unintelligible mix that I take pot luck on and surprise it works! My bank uses more straightforward captchas & they have more need of security than MBH. It needs simplifying. ---------- HARPOLDIE’S YOUTUBE
yes, its enough to give you the blues. Wouldn't it be great if our biggest worry was having to punch in a code a few times before we could post on our favourite forum? ---------- Lucky Lester
BTW this one posted first try for me; no wonder they call me 'Lucky'!
Last Edited by on Feb 23, 2012 9:54 PM
"I think part of the problem is that the captcha times out after a few seconds, so if you're typing anything more than a quick post, it will reject it the first time because it's already timed out." ----------
For what it's worth, I run a network of web sites and several employ captcha to weed out spam-bot comments, etc. And I agree, the captcha used on this site is horrible.
Last Edited by on Feb 23, 2012 9:58 PM
Much as I hate to admit it, when I posted my reply to Greg at the top I had just logged on, and quickly posted, and the Captcha did NOT make me re-enter.
I think Todd is right about the time factor. ----------
That's because of the aforementioned time factor. If it's posted within like a minute of going on the page, it works fine. Just like this post I'm making now. ---------- Hawkeye Kane
Ahhh, so like, if you actually take the time to read what's been written already, or think about what you write before you reply, it works against you? ---------- /Greg
That time-out theory does make sense. I just typed a reply but switched to another app for 5 or so minutes before sending it. When I returned the send failed, and this time I'm pretty sure I did NOT misinterpret the thing. This is the one:
But I STILL think we could use more intelligently-generated codes as well.
I appreciate it may not be ideal but this may help.
Just type the message as you normally would (as previously mentioned it's the long messages that are the problem or the delay in posting the message) then copy the message, hit the browser refresh icon, paste your message back in the Message box, Type in the Captcha and hope for the best:)
The thing that gets me (and I'm the furthest thing from a computer geek), wouldn't lengthening the "timed out" part of the captcha software just be a matter of changing a line or two of code somewhere by someone?
A minor inconvenience yes, but it would seem like a minor fix as well.
Oh Honk, you dear sweet boy if only that were true.
Unfortunately, as we all know, any code change must first be submitted to the design review committee with a formal problem statement and user level validation plan. Once the request is approved it is scheduled with a developer who has to update the System Requirement, Design Requirement and Software Design documentation and schedule a review meeting. Once that meeting takes place and the document changes are approved the developer can then update the release note for Previous Functionality, New Functionality and Impact of Change. A unit level verification plan and regression plan must be in place at which time the actual code change can take place and be logged into source control and the whole thing shipped off for code review. Once that is approved the unit testing can be done, be documented along with any regression testing. Then it's sent off to the Verification and Validation people who along with Regulatory approve the Release Note and run the Validation Plan on a certified version of the software. Everything is reviewed again, officially documented in the Design History Library and scheduled with Manufacturing to cut new code for distribution.
A minor fix. Ha, ha, ha. Such a silly notion.... ---------- (Unfortunatley all of the above is true :( ) MBH Webbrain - a GUI guide to Adam's Youtube vids FerretCat Webbrain - Jason Ricci's vids (by hair colour!)
this is really a funny thread! :0} bluemoose and gregg crack me up.
it's true, if you actually take the time to read, consider, weigh the consequences of your words, Captcha penalizes you. Captcha is like an impatient drunk at the gig to whom reason is a foreign idea.
or like those vending machines that slowly push the snickers bar to the edge of that precipice and it a-l-m-o-s-t drops...but no.
ok, i'm going for my two tries and i see X9pwuE
WRONG!! here i go again. sometimes i fail more than twice. ----------
MP doctor of semiotics and reed replacement.
"making the world a better place, one harmonica at a time"
