[Greasemonkey] Question: what would happen if Greasemonkeysentthe ID of every applicable user script with each request?

Matthew Gertner matthew at allpeers.com
Fri Apr 29 19:05:06 EDT 2005


> Replace the words "harmful if the site structure changes" with
> "absolutely anything the content producer didn't approve of, was
> scared of, or didn't like for any reason whatsoever or no reason at
> all."

I understand your concern, but I still think that your view of this is a bit
lopsided. Yes, there is a dangerous of "user disempowerment" if too much
control is given to the site operators. At the same time, depriving them of
any information or possibility for intervention eliminates any chance for
them to play ball, if they want to. People aren't always mean and nasty,

I think someone mentioned the possibility of giving the site operator some
control, but with an all-powerful opt-out for the script author. So my
original proposal (script-specific versions in a META tag) or something
similar could be adopted, but could be turned off with a @ignorePageVersion
metadatum in the script. A script author could first leave that option out
and trust the site operator not to abuse his/her power. But if the latter
were to block the script unfairly, the next version could add the flag...
basically the GM equivalent of giving someone the finger.

Would you be *as* passionately, unyieldingly opposed to something like that?


More information about the Greasemonkey mailing list