Comment by wizzwizz4

Comment by wizzwizz4 11 days ago

9 replies

It's the way you've done it: not suitable for people, but (nofollow aside) a good format for PageRank. It's kinda crass.

If you put "Technology blog" and "Real estate portfolio" (for example) before those two spammy-looking links, it'd make it less viscerally offensive.

cabinguy 11 days ago

[edit] @wizzwizz4 Is it crass to edit your comment multiple times (with no declaration) to address a reply to your comment?

Lol. Thats how the site works. It asks you for a URL and a title for the link. It’s my page, my account, so I linked to my site when trying it out. C’mon. I’m not going to argue about it anymore. Y’all can keep downvoting me if you want to.

  • wizzwizz4 11 days ago

    That would indeed be crass; but I thought my edits came in before your reply. I apologise if they didn't.

    To actually address your comment: "my page" and "my account" are irrelevant. (You're not entitled to anything on someone else's server, except in special cases.) If you're linking those pages because you would like those they're relevant to to visit them, perception matters. If not… well, the perception of "spam" can lead people to treat your site as spammy. (Related: https://www.kjartan.co.uk/.)

    • cabinguy 11 days ago

      I know I said I was done, but, let me get this straight. If I sign up for a website that was created for people to sign up to save links, and in doing so it requires you to submit a URL and a title for the link - and I use the page title as the title for the link: 1) I’m not entitled to do that and 2) It means my website is similar to a geocities page?

      Interesting.

      • clan 11 days ago

        Interesting, really! Yes. And I should not step into a bar fight! ;-)

        You are both right!

        I love that you posted the link. You made it easy for me to get the point of the site as I did not want to use my mail. You effectively lowered my barrier of entry and I thank you for that.

        Buuut. You did do the equivalent of just hitting "asdf" on the keyboard. I just put in "my own site". That was not clear to me up front either. I "felt" it "spammy" as well.

        While disclaimers are often overused this would however had been nice. "Here you go (just dumb links to my own site)". That would actually have encouraged me even more to visit you.

        Someone on the Internet was wrong. Please, no knives :-D

      • wizzwizz4 11 days ago

        You've generalised in a direction that erases the distinctions I'm trying to highlight. I'm talking about perception (specifically, perceived spamminess), and you're talking about what is permitted. If you don't care about the perception, then that's fine and you can safely ignore me.

        1) I'm entitled to pour custard on my head. Doesn't mean that will achieve my goals if I do it in an investor meeting. 2) Sadly, I'm not comparing your page to the positive aspects of Kjartan Poskitt's homepage. Look at the bottom row of links, and the analogy should become clearer.