As pointed out before, it originall designed to foward the use to website locations that have changed. I believe there are two main ways to do this:
Meta tag:
<META HTTP-EQUIV="refresh" CONTENT="0;url=http://thenewurl.com">
(whereas the “0” is seconds delay in the refresh)
Java script:
<script language="JavaScript"><!--
top.location = "http://www.sky-boston.com";
// --></script>
If anybody wants to see it in action, try going to http://www.digital.com
I had to implement this “trick” on one of the sites I did recently. the way the directories worked out, it was easier if everything was in a folder. So instead of making people go to www.mysite.com/foldername I just made www.mysite.com/index.html redirect to /foldername. Sucks for you I guess if you’re quickly surfing around for firefighter equipment, but it was the quickest way for me to get it done. I apologize in advance 
PS I don’t need a bunch of advice on how I could have done it differently, thanks. I just wanted to post an example of how not ALL Webmasters are out to get you! 
I had to implement this “trick” on one of the sites I did recently. the way the directories worked out, it was easier if everything was in a folder. So instead of making people go to www.mysite.com/foldername I just made www.mysite.com/index.html redirect to /foldername. Sucks for you I guess if you’re quickly surfing around for firefighter equipment, but it was the quickest way for me to get it done. I apologize in advance
PS I don’t need a bunch of advice on how I could have done it differently, thanks. I just wanted to post an example of how not ALL Webmasters are out to get you!
Really? The Web didn’t exist back then.
1988? Really!?!?
You quit doing this on the web in 1988?
Wow!
Umm…
It was a top secret project me and my friends over at NCSA had going…? :o
The Web came out of CERN, not NCSA:
Eleusis, as you seem to be in the know about adult sites, could you explain to me exactly how the horrible redirect trick “increases revenue”. My first reaction (and that of most web users I know) when faced with this sort of deviousness is to shut the whole window down (or the whole browser, if needs be to avoid new windows being spawned) and start again on a different site.
Are you seriously trying to tell me that people think “Darn, that Back button won’t work. Ah well, might as well stay here now that I’m trapped. Might even get the ol’ Visa card out while I’m here…”?
I’m with r_k; I can’t understand how this trick can increase revenue. My instinctive reaction to any site that tries to “trap” me is to get out of it immediately. Usually, I never go back. I wouldn’t even think about giving my credit card number to such a site.
If you change the 0 to a 5, or even a 2, then it’s much more likely for the double-click feature to work, because the browser will linger on the intermediate page long enough for you to get past it. Just a tip for everyone using this thread as a resource.
r__k and Diceman: I’ve seen this technique (known as “circle jerking”) cited in a few articles – such as this old Salon piece – as one of the more successful ways to force surfers to pay up. Not because they want to, but generally because they’re naive or worried their parents/teachers/boss will see them stuck on this website if they don’t. It’s not about resignation, it’s about fear. It also (in the early days at least) provided guaranteed click-through revenue for blind links leading in a circle.
I would question how effective it is nowadays given the suspicion with which credit card companies treat porn and gambling websites, and their resultant readiness to refund without too much fuss.
[
Yes, I’m serious. Think about it. Once somebody clicks the back button, you’ve already lost them, right? Well in this case, maybe they happen to be an ass man instead of a tit man. They aren’t so much into Mellon Land, so they click back to go back from whence they came. “Oh hey, what’s this? Petite Teen Asses! Now this is more my style - where is my wallet?”
It can increase increase signup ratios and thus revenue in pay sites by a few percent.
I agree with everybody who said it’s a dirty trick, and I still don’t like it. This has been a hotbed of debate along with other misleading practices such as blind links and circle jerk sites - things that do work and will make money for the site owner, but IMO poorly affect the image of the industry as a whole and result in lower revenues across the board. (haha internet pornography’s pristine image has been tarnished - very funny)
This is what you sick suckers get for going to porn sites in the first place.
“Petite Teen Asses”??? Where?
Peace,
mangeorge
Yeah, I know you meant that sarcastically, and fair enough. Because of what it is, why should it have a good image to begin with? But even ignoring the fact that it’s pornography, and that it’s an internet site, you have to admit that internet porn has a serious reputation of employing these sleazy tricks, and disrespecting their potential clientele. Only warez sites even come close.