External links

[gobigblue812]

Eliminating external links will actually DECREASE traffic on the free board. The less topics there are, the less posts and thus the less need to visit the site.

It's quite simple. When external links are posted, people may go to that site and read it but then they come back here to discuss it. Without those links, there's just not much to talk about. I will frequent the site less now because I know there won't be as many interesting threads.

Just one man's opinion.

 

[dallasg23]

Yeah it’s dumb. Will not do anything but send people else where

 

[ukalum1988]

I totally understand not linking paid content associated with Rivals. I can even understand not linking to competitors site. However, for items that are in the public domain, LHL, LCJ, ESPN, etc, I would hope that the powers that be at Rivals would cut some slack.

TOS is basically a ghost town with the way they’ve severely restricted non paying members to post over there. I hope Rivals doesn’t go down the same path.

 

[JRowland]

As I have told our mods, I understand both sides and some of this is over my head. On the one hand, I like folks being able to freely discuss/link. On the other hand, there has been an increasing amount of posts that are simply just linking to every other article another Kentucky site posts. In at least two cases it has been by people who I know are affiliated with other sites. Those sites do not link here.

I am not opposed to having a conversation with the people I would need to talk to about changing the policy back.....but the reason it was emphasized as important to me in the first place is because of how frequent stories were being linked. There were links to free recruiting items being linked that frankly provide zero serious information (e.g. this is how many guys have been offered here or here) or detail, or use competing sites' analysts as the exclusive source of information, etc. I understand in that context. It is still a business (which is why they don't link here).

In theory I have no problem with links to very relevant interviews or breaking news items. What I have a problem with are half the topics on the board being "Such and such was offered by Kentucky, go here," or content promoting analysts elsewhere.

 

[BigSexyCat]

I totally understand not linking paid content associated with Rivals. I can even understand not linking to competitors site. However, for items that are in the public domain, LHL, LCJ, ESPN, etc, I would hope that the powers that be at Rivals would cut some slack.

TOS is basically a ghost town with the way they’ve severely restricted non paying members to post over there. I hope Rivals doesn’t go down the same path.

This is a sound and logical approach. I could understand this.

 

[mrschwump]

This is a sound and logical approach. I could understand this.

Maybe it's just the time of year but it seems the traffic here is down. Sometimes one can cut off their nose despite their face.

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

As I have told our mods, I understand both sides and some of this is over my head. On the one hand, I like folks being able to freely discuss/link. On the other hand, there has been an increasing amount of posts that are simply just linking to every other article another Kentucky site posts. In at least two cases it has been by people who I know are affiliated with other sites. Those sites do not link here.

I am not opposed to having a conversation with the people I would need to talk to about changing the policy back.....but the reason it was emphasized as important to me in the first place is because of how frequent stories were being linked. There were links to free recruiting items being linked that frankly provide zero serious information (e.g. this is how many guys have been offered here or here) or detail, or use competing sites' analysts as the exclusive source of information, etc. I understand in that context. It is still a business (which is why they don't link here).

In theory I have no problem with links to very relevant interviews or breaking news items. What I have a problem with are half the topics on the board being "Such and such was offered by Kentucky, go here," or content promoting analysts elsewhere.

I was surprised there was so much linking to links from the competition here, its a huge no-no on the UGA board and repeaters faced getting a recess from the board for a few days. if they are linking premium info. Links to the AJC are ok because its a free site. that anyone can see. Mostly UGA stuff but it does cover some of the upper level recruits who go elsewhere.

 

[gobigblue812]

As I have told our mods, I understand both sides and some of this is over my head. On the one hand, I like folks being able to freely discuss/link. On the other hand, there has been an increasing amount of posts that are simply just linking to every other article another Kentucky site posts. In at least two cases it has been by people who I know are affiliated with other sites. Those sites do not link here.

I am not opposed to having a conversation with the people I would need to talk to about changing the policy back.....but the reason it was emphasized as important to me in the first place is because of how frequent stories were being linked. There were links to free recruiting items being linked that frankly provide zero serious information (e.g. this is how many guys have been offered here or here) or detail, or use competing sites' analysts as the exclusive source of information, etc. I understand in that context. It is still a business (which is why they don't link here).

In theory I have no problem with links to very relevant interviews or breaking news items. What I have a problem with are half the topics on the board being "Such and such was offered by Kentucky, go here," or content promoting analysts elsewhere.

I can understand both points of view. Hopefully, there is some middle ground.

 

[KapitalCat]

I can understand both points of view. Hopefully, there is some middle ground.

I hope so too. It's a corporate issue vs a CI issue and like most I can see both sides especially when posters associated with a competing side are driving traffic to their site. I'm a free market kind of guy and feel the internet should be free as should the exchange of information, but my livelihood and paycheck is not based upon that business model. As a moderator I'm going to delete the external links but not the "post" itself that reference a competing site (unless directed otherwise ). So if there is an interesting story at XYZ.com and a poster writes..."according to an article at "XYZ", Gunnar Hoak is the starting QB", I'm not going to delete the post but I will delete the direct link.

 

[Deeeefense]

OT: This hasn't come up yet, at least not that I'm aware of, but for anyone that wants to find a "work around" by posting all or substantial portions of an article from another site, don't do it, because it's most likely a copyright infringement. OK to summarize.

 

[cardkilla]

I dunno, but maybe you actually enforce the rules about linking to competitors and punish those who do it vs. trying to create a walled garden that will only reduce conversations, traffic and thus, income from ads. You can quite easily restrict 95% of links to competitive sites just with a nice algorithm that would not put a bigger burden on mods.

 

[jauk11]

I thought articles from other sites were OK as long as they weren't premium articles, are they or are they not? I also get free emails from sites like SDS etc, all free, are they restricted also?

In general I consider anything sent to me in the public domain that I don't pay for OK to link, should they only be "summarized", and what are the limitations there?

 

[BigBluePhantom]

Well....that's all just fine and dandy but do you really think a filibuster serves any useful purpose on this forum?

 

[jauk11]

Thank you, that is exactly what I have been wanting to say, but have been holding off on stating because some of the shallow readers on here are objecting to my posts being too long.

However your post does raise a large question in my mind, how in hades did you manage to post MY post word for word? You even got all the punctuation correct, quite a coincidence.

 

[ukalum1988]

I actually stopped reading this after about three sentences, but you definitely earned a like in my book with your long and thoughtful essay.

 

[Deeeefense]

Cats Illustrated forum will not be used as a place to attack Cats Illustrated. If you have an issue use the report feature or DM a mod or the publisher.

I have removed posts here this AM that fall into that category and to make it clear, the ban on links to competitor sites was a Rivals/Yahoo Decision not one that was made by Cats Illustrated.

 

[entropy13]

Cats Illustrated forum will not be used as a place to attack Cats Illustrated. If you have an issue use the report feature or DM a mod or the publisher.

I have removed posts here this AM that fall into that category and to make it clear, the ban on links to competitor sites was a Rivals/Yahoo Decision not one that was made by Cats Illustrated.

LOL, my posts were generated by an automatic complaint generator:

https://www.pakin.org/complaint/

But, carry on.

 

[ukalum1988]

Cats Illustrated forum will not be used as a place to attack Cats Illustrated. If you have an issue use the report feature or DM a mod or the publisher.

I have removed posts here this AM that fall into that category and to make it clear, the ban on links to competitor sites was a Rivals/Yahoo Decision not one that was made by Cats Illustrated.

Fair enough. Just curious what the working definition of “competitor sites” will be - Hopefully not so broad as to encompass anything that’s not Rivals/Yahoo.

 

[Deeeefense]

Fair enough. Just curious what the working definition of “competitor sites” will be - Hopefully not so broad as to encompass anything that’s not Rivals/Yahoo.

Basically it's sites that feature UK sports. Sites like the Bleacher Report or SDS that cover all or many programs would not be in that category thus you can link to them.

 

[vikingfer]

I like all the info I can get ,but I hit a free site that gave my PC the CLAP ,or that's what I told my wife

 

[Ky grandpa]

How can we talk about a subject when it hurts the feeling's of mods or rivals? So there is no such thing as a free site here anymore. It has become boring to try to find out what is going on with spring training without paying a high premium. I tried that for a few years and stoped it because it was just a fighting from all involved. I get on here to find out about the FB team and there is nothing.
To bad that the ones with all the brains run off all the good posters that use to be here, I have come to the conclusion that it all sucks, and if I want the info I have to sit here all off season and dream of what might be.
I really loved the way it use to be so I guess rivals does not want to have anyone to be here unless we pay for info that shpould be free...... IT SUCKS.........

GBB

 

[JRowland]

How can we talk about a subject when it hurts the feeling's of mods or rivals? So there is no such thing as a free site here anymore. It has become boring to try to find out what is going on with spring training without paying a high premium. I tried that for a few years and stoped it because it was just a fighting from all involved. I get on here to find out about the FB team and there is nothing.
To bad that the ones with all the brains run off all the good posters that use to be here, I have come to the conclusion that it all sucks, and if I want the info I have to sit here all off season and dream of what might be.
I really loved the way it use to be so I guess rivals does not want to have anyone to be here unless we pay for info that shpould be free...... IT SUCKS.........

GBB

The reason you see nothing is because there is no spring training going on right now. They're on spring break.

 

[vikingfer]

The reason you see nothing is because there is no spring training going on right now. They're on spring break.

I'm with Grandpa ,us old people gota wait ,I may not make it very much longer. J.R. could at the lest give a report on really BIG 8 graders that like KY or just the color Blue

 

[jauk11]

I'm with Grandpa ,us old people gota wait ,I may not make it very much longer. J.R. could at the lest give a report on really BIG 8 graders that like KY or just the color Blue

I'm with him too, and the only ones that can get in to write about anything are the ones with a license to sell the info.

On those eighth graders, shouldn't just find out if they like the color blue, need to find out if they hate puky orange and red also.

 

[RV2]

As I have told our mods, I understand both sides and some of this is over my head. On the one hand, I like folks being able to freely discuss/link. On the other hand, there has been an increasing amount of posts that are simply just linking to every other article another Kentucky site posts. In at least two cases it has been by people who I know are affiliated with other sites. Those sites do not link here....

It's not the gun, it's the shooter. IOW, ban or admonish the offenders and leave the rest alone.

 

[The-Hack]

LOL, my posts were generated by an automatic complaint generator:

So, you're saying you're married?

It's not the gun, it's the shooter. IOW, ban or admonish the offenders and leave the rest alone.

If we outlaw links to competitor's sites, only outlaws will continue to do so!