Why must I "Temporarily allow all this page" REPEATEDLY?

[Thrawn]

NoScript has become overwrought and extremely burdensome. If I indicate that "allow all this page" it should not be necessary to hunt for elements that Noscript is still blocking and then allow them one by one--each time needing to wait for the page to reload . In the beginning it was a really good program. Now it is just too much to be bothered with. Too bad.

Strange statement, since 'Allow all this page' is a convenience feature that I doubt was in the original release. NoScript 1.0 probably required you to manually allow each domain. So the latest version is in fact easier to use.

[GµårÐïåñ]

@Thrawn, you would be correct. This feature was added to appease the ones who didn't want to make any decisions and wanted to "just go" and it was controversial at that time to begin with but the majority of the user base simply ignores it or does what the menu editing allows and removes it from even appearing, at least I do. So no matter what you do, there will always be a class of people who will whine about something, no matter what you do to make it easier for them. I and many professionals call them the "lazy set-it-and-forget-it-ers" who want to think they have security but not actually do anything to make sure.

[Guest]

Apparently, you think "Lieutenant Colonel GUARDIAN" is less 'anonymous' than "guest". Thanks for the laugh !! (but then ,perhaps guardian is your real name?? yeah right.
I doubt seriously that you have any idea what the majority of the user base does. I am sure they are not professionals (as you jokingly see yourself)
They are everyday people who do not deserve to be condescended to
and called lazy. You are supposed to be a teacher, of sorts, and you do a disservice to the people in this forum because you have a complete lack of respect for the
very people who are looking for answers and explanations. You come on too strong, you are full of yourself (among other things). Whoever is in charge should replace you with someone who has some "people skills"
The people that come here are not a bunch of "grunts",

If NOSCRIPT says >ALLOW ALL THIS PAGE> <or>' Whitelisted' then there should not be a lot of elements and objects that continue to be blocked . This could be a flaw in the software or in the way that it is presented.
That has nothing to do with LAZINESS or WHINING.
As for the coffee offer-your sarcasm is noted. I already have sufficient ways to waste time.. .

[Thrawn]

@Guest: I could just ignore your comment and let Guardian erase it as a violation of forum rules, but I'll make a few points:

'Lieutenant Colonel' is a title that Giorgio granted to him as a mark of respect for his contributions to the forum. 'Guardian' is certainly a pseudonym, but it's one that he uses regularly, so he's still putting his reputation on the line with everything that he says here. It's far from anonymous.

Whether or not Guardian is in touch with the majority of users, he is in touch with Giorgio, and understands what NoScript can and should do. You may not like how he shoots from the hip, but he shoots accurately. If he is critical, then it's because he honestly believes that what people are doing is harmful.

I can see that 'Allow all this page' could be misleading wording. The actual meaning is 'Allow everything that currently appears on the menu'. Would you like to suggest a better way to express it in just a few words? That would be helpful.

[Guest]

@thrawn
There is a big difference between "Allow all this page: and "Allow all this menu".
If it is not allowing all the scripts/objects on the displayed web-Page then what exactly is it allowing on the menu?
When that's made clear, i will be glad to offer a suggestion on how to express it.
--
Perhaps Guardian could write a help file for NoScript/Firefox.
Then we can all understand,as he does, what NoScript can and should do.

regards.

[therube]

> If it is not allowing all the scripts/objects on the displayed web-Page

It is.
At the point in time when you opened the menu, ALL scripts are shown & if you TAA, then all are allowed.
It is not unit after you have TAA, that more scripts may (or may not) appear.
They did not exist before then.

Now if it were to recursively reload the page, who would know when or if it would ever end, much less what would be allowed.

And if you really get stuck, you could Allow Globally, once, the page would reload once, & ALL scripts would be allowed. But you would want to be sure to Forbid Globally too because every page opened after Allow Globally would be affected. (And if doing something like that, you would want to set the pref for Allow Globally to not refresh ALL pages ...). There was this [feature request] Allow globally this tab only which to me makes more sense.

[GµårÐïåñ]

Apparently, you think "Lieutenant Colonel GUARDIAN" is less 'anonymous' than "guest". Thanks for the laugh !! (but then ,perhaps guardian is your real name?? yeah right.

You can laugh all you want, idiot is what idiot does, not my concern. But the fact that I have used it for all the years I have been around and you can click on my blog link to get my personal page where you would know my name is Michael and if you wish, as I said before, getting out of what you consider anonymity and come down to LA to see me, I would give you my address and you can find me and we can chat face to face, I have nothing to hide. Others who seem to know and understand better have replied to you and your lack of understanding is overwhelming, so I am not going to waste more time on you.

I doubt seriously that you have any idea what the majority of the user base does. I am sure they are not professionals (as you jokingly see yourself)
They are everyday people who do not deserve to be condescended to
and called lazy. You are supposed to be a teacher, of sorts, and you do a disservice to the people in this forum because you have a complete lack of respect for the
very people who are looking for answers and explanations. You come on too strong, you are full of yourself (among other things). Whoever is in charge should replace you with someone who has some "people skills"
The people that come here are not a bunch of "grunts",

20+ years in the field, I have seen it all and so yeah I have earned the right to make such a statement, you? I don't condescend, I tell it like it is and I don't kid glove anyone, if you can't handle that, you might need to mature a bit. If you read the forum, you would know that you are not the first person to post this subject, you won't be the last and since we explain repeatedly and you don't get it, yeah that gives us the right to be a bit short with you. I mean you know how to search right?

If NOSCRIPT says >ALLOW ALL THIS PAGE> <or>' Whitelisted' then there should not be a lot of elements and objects that continue to be blocked . This could be a flaw in the software or in the way that it is presented.
That has nothing to do with LAZINESS or WHINING.
As for the coffee offer-your sarcasm is noted. I already have sufficient ways to waste time.. .

It does as it should, if you understood ANYTHING about computing you would know that NS is not a mind reader, it allows the resources available to it when it shows up, how would you in your infinite wisdom suggest that it allow things that are not there yet, so you, being indeed lazy, clicking on allow all would get the same effect as globally allow which is also available to you. The more you speak, the more you show why we, or I should speak for myself and say _I_, consider you lazy and ignorant. Maybe instead of having so much ways to waste your time, you could learn something instead. Insults such as yours are par for the course when dealing with the less educated and those who don't understand how things work, so I don't mind it but if you don't want the truth, you came to the wrong place, you can go where they blow sunshine and feel happy but we tell it like how it is, you can take it or leave it. Simple as that. The fact that you keep insisting on showing how little you know, now that's something to laugh about. There are guides all over the place for people like you, the problem is that you are lazy and don't bother reading it.

The offer for coffee wasn't sarcasm, and anytime you feel you have grown the necessary organ to come and see me, let me know and I will give you my address. How is that for not being anonymous?

[Guest]

You just illustrated my point very nicely.
Do you feel better now? ..
Good for you.

[Guest]

Therube, Thank you for your explanation. Now that I understand where the additional blocks are coming from
I can enjoy using NOSCRIPT again.

[GµårÐïåñ]

You just illustrated my point very nicely.
Do you feel better now? ..
Good for you.

Rubber and Glue, I made my point and you helped, cheers.

[GµårÐïåñ]

Due to constant spamming to this topic, it has been locked.

[barbaz]

I think it should be mentioned here that since v 2.6.8.36, NS has had a "Cascading Permissions" mode, such that any top-level site's permission is inherited by everything else it calls...
For reference, that option is
NoScript Options > Advanced > Trusted > Cascade top document's permissions to 3rd party scripts
(also about:config > noscript.cascadePermissions)

However, while I'm mentioning that, I should also mention the footnote of http://noscript.net/faq#qa1_11...

Not sure if that should be edited into the OP or not...