@Chad - Thanks for your comments and feedback! :) I just see some of
the link publishers a bit miffed that their links are going to Digg
now instead of their site like intended. If it was clear at the
beginning then fair enough, but to do it after the fact is a bit nasty
IMHO. ;)

On Jul 20, 2:58 am, Chad Etzel <jazzyc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Honestly I was shocked that the digg short urls didn't just go to digg
> from day one. Anyone who thought that a short url service tacked onto
> a site that already has a separate purpose would do anything other
> than drive traffic to the main site was fooling themselves.
> cutting my rant short here.
> -Chad
> On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 4:45 AM, Vision Jinx<vjn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Just wanted to give an FYI to the devs here that if your planning on
> > or using Digg in your apps they are now hijacking your links to direct
> > traffic to their site. You can read a story on it here
> >http://mashable.com/2009/07/19/digg-twitter-links/Sure enough I
> > clicked a digg short url and was redirected to their site instead of
> > where the link was intended to point to.
> > I am very glad Twitter does not have the API restrictions on it like
> > the Google API's do, as I did include a preview link option for bit.ly
> > and tiny url links (to check where the links points to) and with
> > biy.ly I'm sure there is a way to check the destination URL (eg. JSONP
> > API Call) and use that in your source code where Digg links now I will
> > need to add a visitor/user warning that they may now link to digg
> > instead.
> > I just hate the way some services have to quickly follow trends and
> > does this mean other short url services are going to port all traffic
> > to their sites now and force people to sign up and create accounts
> > there? (and increase the number of ads they are serving)
> > Man I can't believe this! Your thoughts?

Reply via email to