Should new threads be started with only a link and no text from OP? (1 Viewer)

[TonyD]

NY times is a sub based web site.
Can you provide a little info on what is in that article instead of just posting a link.

 

[JohnRice]

Besides, it’s a violation of HTF rules to start a thread with nothing but a link. You have to contribute some input of your own.


EDIT: Flog Him!!!!

 

[Tino]

Besides, it’s a violation of HTF rules to start a thread with nothing but a link. You have to contribute some input of your own.

I only wish that were enforced. Check out countless threads and posts in the Movies section. When challenged some members have actually stated they don’t have the time to post anything more than a link. “The info is in the link” they’ve said.

 

[TonyD]

Tino. Htf sadly has never enforced this and it’s made more aggravating when one of our esteemed Admins does it over and over.

I’ve asked him out right not to do it and he said “the info is in the link”.

 

[Wayne_j]

I didn't even know there was a rule, but I usually write something about it anyway.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Besides, it’s a violation of HTF rules to start a thread with nothing but a link. You have to contribute some input of your own.

Unless I'm having a senior moment, we don't currently have such a rule in our posting guidelines. We do not allow the following:

12. No quoting entire articles. We do not allow the copying and pasting of entire articles from other sites or publications, even if proper credit is given, unless you have express permission from the copyright holder. Please quote only relevant excerpts, and provide a link back to the original in its entirety.

 

[Cranston37+]

I have also never heard of HTF having such a rule.

Why would you not want people to post as much information as possible?

I found the first post with the link to be much more useful, on-topic, and conducive to good discussion than all the subsequent posts complaining about it, which ultimately only derailed the thread.

 

[JohnRice]

Unless I'm having a senior moment, we don't currently have such a rule in our posting guidelines. We do not allow the following:

I'll defer to you, Cdaddy, but I could have sworn there was a rule against starting a thread with nothing but a link. I confess to not double checking it.

 

[TonyD]

After thinking about it I don’t think there was ever a rule but pretty sure it was frowned upon at one time.

Im all for links to information but not without additional info in the post offering why we should click through the link.

I’m not fond of clicking links.
Also this is a discussion board not a post links board or so I thought.

 

[Sam Posten]

Besides, it’s a violation of HTF rules to start a thread with nothing but a link. You have to contribute some input of your own.

There is no such rule, never has been. I do it all the time

 

[Sam Posten]

I’ve asked him out right not to do it and he said “the info is in the link”.

Guilty

 

[TonyD]

Guilty

I know.

 

[Tino]

I just feel as though it requires little effort to add a bit of text to what the link is. I too don’t like to click on links without knowing what I’m clicking on.

 

[Cranston37+]

Im all for links to information but not without additional info in the post offering why we should click through the link.

I just feel as though it requires little effort to add a bit of text to what the link is. I too don’t like to click on links without knowing what I’m clicking on.

The thread title doesn't accomplish that?

 

[Robert Crawford]

The thread title doesn't accomplish that?

It does to me.

 

[JQuintana]

I agree, out of common courtesy, I'd like to at least see a small write up followed by the link.

Another pet peeve of mine is RIP threads for a lot of times really obscure people and the OP doesn't post at least a picture of the person followed by a bit of info about the person vs. just posting for example "R.I.P. Tom Smith". Many times I'm saying, who the heck is Tom Smith??

 

[Mysto]

If posting a link without some text works then perhaps we can post links to movies without writing reviews.
Just sayin'...

I do like to know what I am clicking on and when I don't I usually pass. Also many times (not always here) the links require registration or some other hoops to jump thru before reading.

 

[Cranston37+]

I agree, out of common courtesy, I'd like to at least see a small write up followed by the link.

I'm sure that would be very nice, but making it an actual rule is ridiculous, especially when the thread title often summarizes the article by itself.

Think of the unintended consequences of requiring that - if I find an article that I think might be of interest to HTF members, but I know I'm going to have to do a write-up of the article in order to post it, I'm just not going to bother.

I will say this - having multiple posts dumping on a guy for not posting in your preferred format is much more detrimental to a well run forum than posting a link without an executive summary beforehand.

 

[Cranston37+]

I do like to know what I am clicking on and when I don't I usually pass.

As I said above, how can you not know what the link you are clicking on is about just by reading the title of the thread?

 

[Sam Posten]

For the record, if the thread title and/or the link itself say what the theme of the linked page is going to talk about I am not and never will post a repeat saying that in text form. You can mouse over every link in existence and see what the full link is.

If you hate my posts because of that you are welcome to put me on ignore but I am not going to change. Thanks for coming to my TED talk.