That was in response to a post I made in ORP which was later than my response above.

I understand that somebody is out of the office, but we're now going on three weeks. There's nobody else on the technical side of all of Internet Brands who can answer these questions?

Recently I've noticed that often the forums now extend past the browser window, so that I have to scroll to read threads. Whenever this happens I see a long string of javascript code in someone's posting. Is this related to the skimlinks discussed here, or is my problem unique? I'm using firefox 3.53 on a Mac and a PC.

As far as I know, it's not a skimlink issue. What you described had been happening before the "beta" implementation of skimlinks. This page carries the same problem but has no javascript code in any posts.

I have exactly the same setup and problem. In Safari, the text dosn't extend past the window, but the ads don't display correctly (comparing the same page in both browsers).

Is the IBB dude still on vacation?

Must be a great place to work, so much vacation time! Where can I submit my resume?

The problem I've described is clearly a javascript issue, appears to to be related to ads that appear in threads. If I turn javascript off, the problem disappears. This runs the browsing experience at other websites. I want to turn off javascript only for flyertalk.com, right now the "too wide for the screen" problem is making flyertalk almost unusable.

If you are using firefox, I highly suggest ....... plus, and using the directions from earlier on in the thread to eliminate the skimlinks javascript.

You can selectively decide what to eliminate, and by doing it as described it will improve your FT experience (in both speed and the knowledge you are not being skimmed).

+1 to ElmhurstNick's last.

Are they still around?

Having problems today finding a URL that redirects via Skimlinks.

deleted

Either way, *fantastic* communication from IB on this issue. ^

<Deleted - Err>

I think the deafening silence IS your answer.

I'm really confused by this skimlinks discussion. Does this mean FT essentially steals any cashback link I click on? Let's say, I have FT open in one tab, and Fatwallet cashback in another, I click to purchase something (from the Fatwallet tab), and FT somehow "skims" the revenue? Or does this only pertain to clicks that originate directly from the FT tab? Thanks for explaining!

If Skimlinks have an affiliate partnership with a website that you click on a link from Flyertalk, then the clickthrough is tracked and any transaction you perform may end up giving affiliate revenue to Internet Brands.

This could also include transactions done much later on that site.

Now if you click a link from Fatwallet, then a different cookie will be set and you should earn the affiliate revenue. However, if you clicked on the link from FT later than the FW one, then you may have the revenue going to IB.

So Skimlinks doesn't steal your clicks (ie, clicking a link from FW won't magically get stolen by Skimlinks). But when you have different affiliate links being used, it can cause problems with getting correct cashbacks. It is also another reason why you should clear cookies for particular websites when attempting to use affiliate links.

Hope that helps explain things.

Any updates on this????