----- "Ashar Voultoiz" <[email protected]> wrote:
> The '140 characters only' blogging platforms could probably implements
> their own short syntax to support popular sites.
Obviously, yes, however that misses the main point of short links from the pov
of the owner of the shortening service. If you control the link then you get
the numbers of users, etc. and can make decisions based on that ("What's Hot",
for example) which you cannot do if you do not control that link.
Also, if a bit.ly go.to or myqurl.com link heads to a wiki{p|m}edia page there
is no evidence of that to the reader before they click on the link, losing
mindshare and any benefits of keeping our name in front of people. By offering
our own service (and, frankly, the shorter the better; none of this 'en.' or
'de.' stuff making it large again) we keep control of both the information of
what people are interested in and make it clear that the link is trustworthy
and to one of our projects. We would win in every direction.
Alison
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
