Urban Art Association

Strange, seems to be working... try again now!

Is this why I didn’t win the POW lottery Dappy?

That’s really strange, I’m getting fine on my laptop and phone... I’ll have my developer look into it. Sorry for the inconvenience.

can you let me know what device you are using and which link you used to get there? (i.e. where is the link you clicked to get to the site or did you type it in etc)

Thanks

Works fine on windows using Chrome and Firefox.

Can you all try this link and let me know if it works?

Http://www.stormfinearts.com

Same error for me

Using iPhone

But works on pc

Version of Watership Down on the Al Murphy website is the unsigned unlimited giclee. The version we had (now sold) was the larger (70x50) signed original edition of 100 screenprint by AM from 2010.  

The rolling stones edition sold out in 2011. It is typical of POW to add 10 more copies without any appreciation 6 years later as one final F*&* you to people like me (and frankly any independent collector as well). FYI, the print was actually more expensive when it was released (£75) so this completely proves my point.

If dealers were all lucky enough to be able to deal in entirely exclusive editions (exclusive to one gallery only) on the primary market from great artists, we might be in a situation to offer prints at these kinds of prices. Just like a private collector, our pieces appreciate in value and our job is to buy works which we believe will accrue value, monetary or otherwise, over time. I don't like flipping unless I am specifically sourcing for a client and even then I don't always make money on it. 

On the private side of my life i collect many things, not just art, and collecting something you can enjoy AND that appreciates in value at the same time is a very rewarding thing and certainly not new. 

I'm not an enemy and I'm certainly not in this to rip people off. If you want to buy a copy of Rolling Stones from POW, I would! 

Thanks all, cant seem to recreate the problem consistently. Everyone at our end is a bit confused!

personally no, and my developer is away until Monday.  

I'd have thought this would be difficult to diagnose without reading them. Especially as it seems to be only affecting some traffic.

What's going on is something like this:

If a browser requests a specific file - i.e. www.stormfinearts.com/index.html (in which case the browser is asking for the file index.html in the root directory of the server - and the server can't find it, then it will generally serve a 404 file not found error.

However, if the browser asks for a directory without specifying a particular file - i.e. www.stormfinearts.com/ (in which case the browser has asked for the site's root directory) - the way the server will respond will depend on:

1. How it's configured and

2. What the requested directory contains.

Generally, the server will be set up to look for a default file, usually called something like index.html, index.htm, index.php or some other variant, and if it finds such a file, to serve it up in response to the directory request.

If the server doesn't find such a default file, then depending on how it's configured it will either serve up a list of all the files contained in the requested directory or, more usually, an error such as the 403.14 error under discussion if directory listings are disabled.

(Listings are usually disabled for security reasons, i.e. so hackers can't browse the contents of a directory and open files that aren't specifically linked to.)

In this case it would appear that some requests for the root directory are being interpreted as directory listing requests while others aren't. You need to figure out why.

One thing I can tell you is that your server doesn't seem to have any of the standard default index files in place as listed above, which is kind of asking for trouble. Usually even if the site's configured to serve up dynamic content, it's standard practice to put an index.html or index.php in place to handle unusual/unexpected requests.

still not working for me

No problem.
Unfortunately the sarcasm in the first post, and the second, led me to believe your reason for posting was not benevolent. Correct me if I’m wrong.

Furthermore, POW have a history of being anarchic/anti-establishment. That was the only point I was making.