SAM Hunter$
join:2001-05-11
USA
|  Think you guys supplied enough links?
DSLR staff Dudes! Your one paragraph lead for this story has six links alone. If you go to each of them they pull up a page that offers another gaggle of links. There must nearly 40 or 50 links to this story. When I've got two hours to read the content of where they all go, then I'll cut and paste to Word so I can read the complete coherent story and decide whether or not to try comment on what it all says.
My current complaint aside, you folks at DSLR overall do a great job everywhere, including in preparing and posting good articles for the News Forum.
--
Just because its factual and accurate doesn't mean its true. |
|
MrBradTX
join:2001-05-23
Carrollton, TX
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| said by Lost in Space:
Your one paragraph lead for this story has six links alone. If you go to each of them they pull up a page that offers another gaggle of links. There must nearly 40 or 50 links to this story.
The reason that typing "scientology" in a Google search always brings up a, well, a google of links to the Official Church of Scientology, and virtually none to critical sites: the official site links to several dozen other sites on different domain names, which all link back to the official site and to each other. All the sites are shills for the church.
This cleverly exploits Google's "democratic process" of ranking sites by the number of links from other sites. The number of these nepotistic links far outnumbers the number of links to and from critical sites, which tend to be independent. So the critical sites tend to appear somewhat further south in the list.
For the "DLSR Staff Dudes" to create a similar "link nest" was subtle poerty in motion, a great inside joke. Bravo. |
|
SAM Hunter$
join:2001-05-11
USA
edited
| said by MrBradTX:
For the "DLSR Staff Dudes" to create a similar "link nest" was subtle poerty in motion, a great inside joke. Bravo.
Inside joke? Brad, I'm sorry you aren't feeling well. I hope you get better soon. Only kidding! But your theory or explanation seems really lame to me. (No personal insult intended.) I can't tell if your are serious or just kidding around. It just seems like poor organization of the article by DSLR for posting in the News Forum.--
Just because its factual and accurate doesn't mean its true.
[text was edited by author 2002-04-14 17:47:30] |
|
birdfeedr
Premium
join:2001-08-11
Warwick, RI
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·Speakeasy
| reply to SAM Hunter$
said by Lost in Space:
Your one paragraph lead for this story has six links alone....
I think the multiple links concept is better. When I have an hour or so to browse the forest of links (the pro *and* the con), I can make a better informed opinion. The multi-link style is often used at »www.memepool.com, my second favorite place on the web. |
|
