I use their service all the time. For link Obfuscation esepecially. My postings and email signature which will obviously appear on mailing list archives as well as generally any email link it is great to at least proviced one degree of separation if possible from evil bots.
On Sat, 5 Mar 2005 13:16:49 -0800, Todd Walton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 05 Mar 2005 12:14:17 -0500, RBW1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > http://tinyurl.com/3kkma > > It's probably just me, but the use of tinyurl and ilk kinda bugs me. > The point is to make a > http://long.complicated.url?slkj23434lsl.asp?unnecessary=yes&morecrapjusttoconfuseyou=yes > shorter, right? Excellent motive, I say. The TinyURL service is > handy and, just as importantly, apparently reliable. But aren't there > any informal netiquette rules governing its use? > > I've seen people use it when the URL they were referring to was > completely within reason. It was as if they were just trying to hide > the real thing. TinyURL themselves actually condone this. From their > front page: > > "Hide your affiliate URLs > > "Are you posting something that you don't want people to know what the > URL is because it might give away that it's an affiliate link. Then > you can enter a URL into TinyURL, and your affiliate link will be > hidden from the visitor, only the tinyurl.com address and the ending > address will be visible to your visitors." > > ?dirty=yes > Nothing wrong with that. If the subject interests you why not. Certainly there are limits to this though, and while there's probably a gray area I think criticism for use should come from a usuability standpoint as opposed to disdain for profit for the sake of it. > The other beef I have with TinyURL use is the reliability of the > TinyURL service. They've been around since at least February of 2002. > That's three whole years. But what happens when, say, 20 years from > now they're gone? What if somebody else buys the domain name and > starts cashing in on all those dormant tinyurl hyperlinks out there? > What about the freaking page I wanted to link to?!?? > Well if 9 year advance notions of consipracy theory drive your daily decisions I suppose that's great. I dont' think it's meant as a permanent solution. Obviously when you are putting information into a small field, or the behavior of long URLs is problamatic you're able to effectively communicate your intention. Nobody is saying it's for the national archives. > Proposal: > > I think that when a TinyURL is employed, the real link should also be > included. Plain and simple. If the real, long URL gets mucked up, so > be it. But at least it's there, and a person can see where they're > being taken before they follow the link, as well as the actual > Internet address being referred to being available for posterity's > sake. > If you feel decieved don't go to that website again. I personally think it's great, but if you feel that tinyurl is being used for a bad purpose that's pretty indicative of a site to avoid and an easy apparent barometer, -T -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
