The problem with returning a generic error message for the user is a User Experience (UX) matter. A legitimate user might feel confused with the generic messages, thus making it hard for them to use the application, and might after several retries, leave the application because of its complexity. The decision to return a generic error message can be determined based on the criticality of the application and its data. For example, for critical applications, the team can decide that under the failure scenario, a user will always be redirected to the support page and a generic error message will be returned.

I've just experienced the same issue with confirmation links being executed in a sent email before the user has received them and invalidating the link. I got around the issue by modifying the page the URL links to. I've added a Confirm button on the page which the user has to click to confirm their email and this works nicely.

If the link you are trying to send is just some kind of harmless confirmation link (e.g. subscribe/unsubscribe from a newsletter), then at least use a form inside the web page to do the actual confirmation through a POST request (possibly also using a CSRF token), otherwise you will unequivocally end up with false positives.

Getting the EPP/Auth code of your own domain should be instantaneous. I know of no other registrar, besides Network Solutions, that makes the process so painful. It's a multi-step process to make the request, during which they wave both carrot and stick at you to try and stop you going ahead… and when you do forge ahead, they make you wait 3 days for the code, as if to punish you for daring to ask for the right to transfer your own domain name. What are these guys smoking if they think that's how you keep customers?!

Network Solutions basically does not want to provide EPP code. On website it says requesting EPP would take 3 days to get approved (which doesn't make any sense), and in fact they never send out any EPP code. Instead, you will have to call them and ask for EPP code in person. They claimed that their system had some problems sending those emails, however do you really believe that? I don't think it is indeed a "problem" if it's been there for over one year.

Network solutions is awful. They behave like mobsters. If you make changes on your account such as changing the e-mail, they very conveniently lock your domain so it cannot be transfered for 60 days. They say that block it's for 'your security'.

What’s worse, their login process is infuriating. It took me 10 minutes just to get into my account.

4) Don’t make people log in to unsubscribe.Your subscriber is already overwhelmed by his inbox. He probably spends about 28% of his workday just managing email, according to a McKinsey Global Institute report. So don’t make it any harder by forcing him to log into an account he probably doesn’t remember creating before he can unsubscribe.

I am being told my Login Keyring Password "no longer matches" my login. I am confused - I provided a password as I was setting this up, and so I don't know what this is about and how I can fix it. Thanks for the help.

While Microsoft is entirely in the right by reminding people of the terms they agreed to, many users are taking issue with the fact that they hadn’t been warned about the limit in the eight years it’s been in place, and many people are now being told they are over the limit after years of being over.

But now Chromium is no more available as deb, so what to expect ?

It took faaaaaaaaaaaaar too long to signup at this site to reply to you. This site rejected the real address I use for amazon, username.place@cocaine.ninja so I created an email address that I'll never check again just to signup here. I have zero tolerance for spam.

no post edit, eh?Fine.

I wonder if it's worth archiving the repository (while leaving the site running) with a message that we're transitioning the content to MDN (so folks don't get the wrong idea and a bad experience when filing issues).

Just let the user fill in some fields, submit it to the server and if there are any errors notify them and let the user start over again. Is that a good approach? The answer is no, you don't want users to get frustrated waiting for a server round trip to get some form validation result.

In fact, developers often tend to forget a simple, almost elementary fact: if users want to close the application or leave a site, they will — doesn’t matter which obstacles are placed on their path to the exit-button. The more obstacles there are the more negative the user experience will be.

Users also don’t like to deal with dozens of opened tabs and some visitors tend to become quickly angry with the disabled back button. Furthermore, some visitors may not even realize that a new window was opened and hit the back-button mercilessly — without any result. That’s not user-friendly, and that’s not a good user experience we, web designers, strive for.

Robots are currently suffering extreme discrimination due to a few false assumptions, mainly that they’re distinctly separate actors from humans. My point of view is that robots and humans often need to behave in the same way, so it’s a fruitless and pointless endeavour to try distinguishing them.

For years, the most used solution was to add an ugly captcha to the form, with some hard to read letters, numbers etc on an image. The user had to type these in an input field. The spambots have a hard time reading these images: problem solved!But this solution is not very user-friendly: it’s ugly, and annoys users so much you might lose conversions.