De-activating links.

spiney · 28-08-2006

I've recently noticed that, links I post are increasingly de-activated, especially wiki ones to do with films.

If direct to commercial websites, i could understand it, but what's the problem with wiki (compared to other similar sites?).

If you've got to paste the link into your browser window, then that's annoying (and nothing else!), so what - exactly - is the rationale behind this?

added - if u don't want any live links, then why have the facility at all?

(I've no connection at all with wiki, and am not sponsoring it! Sometimes the entries are a bit variable, or have disclaimers. However, I find it's usually "about right" for most information, and then gives more good links if you want to follow up further. For films, it always gives the direct imdb link).

(Frankly, the imdb entries are nowhere near as good as the wiki ones!).

**Llew** · 28-08-2006

Too many live links take away members from the forum

Llew

spiney · 28-08-2006

Ah, and is that the main reason? So, it wouldn't matter what links they were?

spiney · 28-08-2006

Sorry, moderators, but I am NOT impressed!

Part of the "mystique" of any film is its cultural background and milieu, which helps in understanding - enhancing the viewing expereince - and might make you want to see it in the first place!

I don't see why such links should "take people away", any more than various other links. If people like www.satellites.co.uk (delete that one!), are they really going to start spending loadsa time at wiki instead?

Of course, if this is being insisted on by site sponsors, then fair enough, that's understandable and makes all clear!

(in any case, i have the impression I'm talking to myself, nobody reads the reviews anyway!).

**jimbo** · 28-08-2006

Spiney, the main point of this forum is that we are a community sharing in a hobby. We discuss issues and give our views, advice or whatever. If ppl have to keep going off at a tangeant to look at other web sites the general feeling is it distracts us from what we are about. Obviously the odd link here and there is necessary but over-proliferation to the pont of a Wikpedia is pointless.

This is not to criticise your input but to maybe just reign in the constant links to elsewhere.

spiney · 28-08-2006

Well, where those links are given, it's because I (who am a fair film expert) consider it important, ie, people might reasonably consider that particular info interesting. If this is not allowed, then the whole exercise becomes pointless.

I had the impression that I was "adding value" to this website, not the reverse ??!!

(am a know-it-all pedantic really annoying person, obviously, but nonetheless ,.....).

***Leee*** · 28-08-2006

it's my opinion that it's sometimes good to keep yourself out of the REFERRER_LOG on other websites

**jimbo** · 28-08-2006

Originally Posted by spiney

I had the impression that I was "adding value" to this website, not the reverse ??!!

Anyone who posts on this site and enters into discussions etc. adds value.

spiney · 28-08-2006

OK, fine Leee, yes, if we don't want a link to be "noticed" at the other end, that would be a good reason! But, is it one here?

It's admin that's created "critics' corner". Do you want that to be without any external references, even to verify something that might be thought unwise or defamatory?

In Retro Tech, would you prefer if no links are given to websites dealing with old equipment?

**gameboy** · 28-08-2006

Just tested a 'live link' and it opens in a new window.

If that is always the case then the Sats UK window will remain open.

Live links have always been an issue, I try and deactivate most links I post, it doesn't bother me.

At the end of the day if users want to see the linked page all they have to do is cut/paste.

spiney · 28-08-2006

Well, I just don't understand this at all! Somebody must know the reasons, but so far they're not explained.

If I say a film's great, and give links supporting this, then surely that encourages sales of tv reception equipment, and everyone benefits, including sponsors, who help keep this site going.

In what way is this "faulty reasoning"?

**Topper** · 28-08-2006

I was always under the impression that it was a bandwidth consideration problem was based upon a more technical consideration than personal
preference. Since we all seem to agree that the new window opens and is trackable back to the site of origin i.e. sats.co.uk then this indicates that forum bandwidth is being utilised to get to the site, thus denying other members the opportunity to connect to the forum. In my humble opinion the odd link in a thread is not a problem when links become prolific in a thread it can become a problem, but then comms/network engineers do not know everything.

**Caned Toad** · 28-08-2006

Originally Posted by Topper

I was always under the impression that it was a bandwidth consideration problem was based upon a more technical consideration than personal
preference. Since we all seem to agree that the new window opens and is trackable back to the site of origin i.e. sats.co.uk then this indicates that forum bandwidth is being utilised to get to the site, thus denying other members the opportunity to connect to the forum. In my humble opinion the odd link in a thread is not a problem when links become prolific in a thread it can become a problem, but then comms/network engineers do not know everything.

Is that a joke or have you gone mad? The referrer is sent by the browser as part of the HTTP request headers and doesn't involve any requests to the site the page with the link is on!

What can be done is a small script, as IE and Firefox only pass referrer from links, being sent to a page via a client-side script or meta refresh doesn't send referrer.

spiney · 28-08-2006

Well, the other end will log wot they want, whether it's a link or browser referrel, cgi line, environment variables, etc .....

However, the bottom line is, admin either won't or can't say what the posting rules are.

**mhku** · 28-08-2006

If I see a "dead" link and want to visit it Ctrl-C and Ctrl-V do the job.

Personally I avoid critics corner because of a new member's posts rather than any proliferation of live links (although I did post a link to wiki myself recently in there.... I'll get my coat).

**Caned Toad** · 28-08-2006

Originally Posted by spiney

Well, the other end will log wot they want, whether it's a link or browser referrel, cgi line, environment variables, etc .....

I don't think you understand, the browser has to send it, try this:

Code:

<a href="#" onClick="window.open(\\\\\\'test.htm\\\\\\',\\\\\\'\\\\\\',\\\\\\'\\\\\\');">
test.htm</a>
<a href="test.htm">test.htm</a>

The referrer sent is:
<script type="text/javascript">
document.write(document.referrer)
</script>

It needs to be called test.htm and on a server (won't send referrer locally anyway)

I assume my JS isn't too rusty to work on modern browsers.

spiney · 28-08-2006

sorry canned toad, yes of course, I meant a user browser window entry!

(obviously, some software has to follow the hyperlink!).

However, ctrl-anything doesn't seem to work from these forums, so the de-activated link becomes just normal text (the whole point, I thought!).

(Hang on, I've misunderstood again! Yes, ok, what is sent gets determined this end. Out of which, the other end may select what it likes.).

and ..... i wd hv thought bandwith throttling might be implemented, but that's a separate issue, nothing to do with this.

spiney · 28-08-2006

Anyway, I've looked at my John Betjeman post (general chat), the single link has been de-activated, and only 21 people have even looked, which is hardly "sending people away in droves".

(how many people are going to follow a poetry link?).

I'm afraid, it's entirely up to admin to explain what the rules actually are! So far, they haven't.

**rolfw** · 28-08-2006

Originally Posted by spiney

However, the bottom line is, admin either won't or can't say what the posting rules are.

We are looking for a forum hack which will mash any but internal or allowed links, but cannot find one.

The general rule is that we don't mind the odd live link here or there, but what we don't like are lists of links to one site, we are not in the business of improving wikipedia or anybody else's search engine ranking, no matter who it is, let them pay for that themselves.

I would turn off BB code for URLs completely, but unfortunately it then disables certain forum features, which are useful.

spiney · 28-08-2006

Ah, at last, thankyou!

So, a link to another site "ups" that site's rating, in hit tables?

OK, I understand now, will de-activate all links henceforth!

(phew, that was like getting blood from a stone .....).

**rolfw** · 28-08-2006

Sorry spiney, but although I was showing as online, my PC was left on the Who's onlne page while I was out racking my van.

I do when possible try and reply to questions as quickly as possible.

When you consider that we have well in excess of 1,500 unique registered members online every day and ten times that in unique visitors, a live link from this forum is worth a lot ranking wise and we have to control them.

spiney · 28-08-2006

Sorry, Rolf, I apologise.

But, it's not the response time (yes, I can imagine!), but the rather woolly answers originally given.

It does make sense, now!

Whether it's worthwhile to keep posting is another matter.

I don't have a van, but do have a "small forrest" (almost chopped off a finger, last week, easily done, you only have to let concentration wander a bit ....).

**rolfw** · 28-08-2006

Well yes, there are other reasons as well, but some are only relevant in certain circumstances.

I have asked Chris to make the default message posting option for URLs unparsed, then if you want to make them stand out, just highlight them and colour them using the BB editor, quite a quick process.

spiney · 28-08-2006

Yes, that does now seem sensible for default mode

**Analoguesat** · 28-08-2006

Originally Posted by rolfw

Sorry spiney, but although I was showing as online, my PC was left on the Who's onlne page while I was out racking my van.

Blimey did you have to move all that stuff out the back of your van? Did you find any long forgotten bits of kit at the bottom of the pile?

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)