On 18 January 2012 18:20, Dan Collins <dcollin1(a)stevens.edu> wrote:
Michael,
As was mentioned here, a 503 would be the most appropriate HTTP response
code to serve. It would also prevent non-js users and text-only users from
bypassing, it would avoid the flicker effect, and would cause search
engines to correctly "back off" trying to index our pages. It would also
correctly shut down all editing (if the site can not be read, why do you
need "emergency" edit rights anyway?) I have no idea why this ineffective
kludge was effected instead.
I don't understand why it was done this way either... the consensus
was for a full blackout, so why not just set all the squids to
redirect to a page with the banner and explanation along with a 503
status code and be done with it?
I was rather concerned by people thinking we need to allow "emergency
access" - what kind of emergencies are going to mean people need
Wikipedia? And is everyone having such an emergency going to have read
the FAQ and know how to get around the blackout?