http://www.blogstorm.co.uk/greedy-bbc-blocks-external-links/1478/
Greedy BBC Blocks External Links
In an outrageous act of selfishness and greed the
BBChttp://news.bbc.co.uk/ has
decided to stop giving real links to the websites featured in the Related
Internet Links section on the right hand
Brian,
http://www.blogstorm.co.uk/greedy-bbc-blocks-external-links/1478/
Greedy BBC Blocks External Links
In an outrageous act of selfishness and greed the BBChttp://news.bbc.co.uk/
has
decided to stop giving real links to the websites featured in the Related
Internet Links section on the
Brian Butterworth wrote:
http://www.blogstorm.co.uk/greedy-bbc-blocks-external-links/1478/
Greedy BBC Blocks External Links
In an outrageous act of selfishness and greed the BBC
http://news.bbc.co.uk/ has decided to stop giving real links to the
websites featured in the Related Internet Links
Keep it all server-side is what I say J.
Won't affect the SEO, and won't limit users without JS.
However the OnClick would almost achieve the same I guess ...
Gavin Pearce | Web Developer | TBS
The Columbia Centre, Market Street, Bracknell, RG12 1JG, United Kingdom
Direct: +44 (0) 1344
I might be being a bit blond here, but why even the need to have
rel=nofollow at all?
It is supposed to be there to stop automatic and commercial links
polluting search engine rankings.
** Sorry I meant within the BBC related links section specifically. My
bad for not making it clear.
Gavin Pearce wrote:
** Sorry I meant within the BBC related links section specifically. My
bad for not making it clear.
Exactly Brian, I think we are on the same page … my point is why does
the BBC need to make use of JavaScript, or NoFollow tags for links to
“key” sites related to the
I like the BBC Blocks.. I don't think they're greedy. Stylish and
understated maybe...
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 10:54 AM, Gavin Pearce [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Keep it all server-side is what I say J.
Won't affect the SEO, and won't limit users without JS.
However the OnClick would almost
I might be being a bit blond here, but why even the need to have
rel=nofollow at all?
I can understand on user generated content, but when it's a link to a
relevant and respected website on the topic in hand, than that isn't a
good or valid reason to use the nofollow syntax. In fact as stated
2008/11/4 Gavin Pearce [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I might be being a bit blond here, but why even the need to have
rel=nofollow at all?
It is supposed to be there to stop automatic and commercial links polluting
search engine rankings.
I can understand on user generated content, but when it's a
2008/11/4 Gavin Pearce [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I might be being a bit blond here, but why even the need to have
rel=nofollow at all?
It is supposed to be there to stop automatic and commercial links polluting
search engine rankings.
** Sorry I meant within the BBC related links section
I don't think it is evil, and as I've pointed out on their blog and
on Sphinn, since Patrick at Blogstorm himself applies nofollow to
all outbound links it is a little rich to be complaining that the BBC
doesn't provide 'trusted' links. Interesting point about how Google
can be expected to run a
Hi all,
One of the things we missed earlier this year was social innovation camp. It
clashed with Mashed 2008 and Interesting2008. So I'm glad to say we'll be
supporting some of the future social innovation camps in 2009.
Tim Oreilly talked about the need to apply our technology to human
I keep thinking of using a bit of onclick=... with an AJAX routine to do
the testing and counting. It is a simple matter of returning a true value
to allow the link to activate. I guess if it broken you could return
false...
FWIW, adding an onclick is not the preferred way of doing this. It's
Hi all - I have a blog post going out about this tomorrow. I pulled the
short straw to respond.
Essentially, the /go/ tracking system used by the BBC to track external
links is the cause of the change, as this is being implemented across
the Journalism sites for related links.
It changes the
where bbc.co.uk is unavailable, and twitter.com is responding well.
--
Frank Wales [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
Unofficial list archive:
God bless America!http://mpelembe.blogware.com/god-bless-america
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 4:30 AM, John O'Donovan [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
Still working from here...both home page and news front page.
Obama won in case you were wondering :o)
::: John O'Donovan
::: Chief Architect, BBC FMT
Google's real time results is working well, http://election.mpelembe.net
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 4:56 AM, Alison Young [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Frank Wales wrote:
where bbc.co.uk is unavailable, and twitter.com is responding well.
bbc.co.uk seems fine from here. Know what you mean about the
Frank Wales wrote:
where bbc.co.uk is unavailable, and twitter.com is responding well.
bbc.co.uk seems fine from here. Know what you mean about the
surprisingly good twitter performance, I presume other people have
observations on the performance of other social networks.
Have spent most
It's a beautiful day! http://tinyurl.com/6necjp
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 4:59 AM, Sam Mbale [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Google's real time results is working well, http://election.mpelembe.net
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 4:56 AM, Alison Young [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
Frank Wales wrote:
where
Alison Young wrote:
Have spent most of the night cheering whenever the BBC broke out the
incredibly zoomy graphics. Fab.
Was is just a coincidence that Jeremy Vine appeared to repeatedly poke
McCain in the face as he was calling up results that were in Obama's favour?
--
Frank Wales [EMAIL
John O'Donovan wrote:
Still working from here...both home page and news front page.
I had a sustained period (about 45 mins) where nothing was working
from bbc.co.uk, yet other sites were fine. Traceroutes were
erratic, as were pings, both from here and from a couple of
other systems in distant
21 matches
Mail list logo
