Timeline for What is our stance on pad.lv URLs?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 7, 2018 at 12:39 | comment | added | Dan |
Ah, I see where you were heading with this. The quote in my answer is exclusive to the pad.lv vs original Launchpad links. Sorry for the confusion, I do not mean it in any way as a general rule for all other URL-shorteners. IMHO URL shorteners, in general, should be banned for a whole set of other reasons. But that should already be covered somewhere on Meta Stack Exchange.
|
|
| Mar 7, 2018 at 12:18 | comment | added | Andrea Lazzarotto | ... and neither of those links you mentioned show what they are about, because they do not contain the question title. We might agree or not agree on banning third party url shorteners or redirections, however we need to provide a reason that makes sense. | |
| Mar 7, 2018 at 8:45 | comment | added | Dan |
@AndreaLazzarotto That's not a fair comparison. Launchpad is a big platform in a sense that there is a lot of stuff to link (and which can be shortened by pad.lv). For instance: projects, bugs, user profiles, packages, code, answers, and a lot more. In the case of SE, there are only 2 kinds of shortened links, answers or questions. An in both cases, you can know if it is linking to a question or to an answer. Example: A question has a q in the URL https://meta.askubuntu.com/q/17696/8698 while an answer has an a in the URL https://meta.askubuntu.com/a/17707/8698.
|
|
| Mar 6, 2018 at 13:20 | comment | added | Andrea Lazzarotto | The argument you quoted does not make much sense, because then you would also want to ban official SE links like this one: meta.askubuntu.com/a/17707/271 | |
| Feb 26, 2018 at 14:36 | history | answered | Dan | CC BY-SA 3.0 |