Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

mr_lebowski

(33,643 posts)
Mon Jan 28, 2019, 11:50 PM Jan 2019

Man, the lack of knowledge on how to properly post links on DU really gets under my skin, sorry ...

Respected Friends ... if you're posting a link, and there's a ? mark character it it ... then the ? mark, and everything to the right of it ... is totally extraneous, and should be removed before posting the link.

Unless, you REALLY want the outlet from which you copied the link to get $$$ for everyone following the link from DU.

Apologies to the member who just posted this, no offense, cause almost everyone does this.

Compare these two links:
https://www.nj.com/politics/2019/01/a-republican-nj-lawmaker-just-switched-parties-heres-why-shes-now-a-democrat.html?utm_campaign=njdotcom_sf&utm_content=nj_twitter_njdotcom&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter

https://www.nj.com/politics/2019/01/a-republican-nj-lawmaker-just-switched-parties-heres-why-shes-now-a-democrat.html

Note that both of these links 'work' exactly the same (although your address bar shows different info when you reach the site). However, the FORMER ... makes money for Twitter when we use it here on DU. The latter ... does not.

I'm not saying Twitter gets paid instead of DU, cause in fact it doesn't look like DU makes any attempt to get paid for click-thru's from what I can tell, but there's really no need for Twitter to get paid, is there?

This also applies in cases where you post JPG/PNG/GIF files, or Youtube videos, or whatever. In those cases you get a bunch of crap characters showing up after the picture or video on DU, and it just looks ugly, and adds nothing.

Everything that's in a link, from the question mark to the right of it ... if there is a ?, is EXTRANEOUS, and should be removed IMHO, when posting links. That is information coming from (wherever you copied it from) ... trying to get paid when their links are shared.

Also, for the Love of Dog, if your link says 'Google' in it ... you're almost surely doing it way wrong.


10 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
Am I just totally annoyingly anal, or
6 (60%)
Does this bug at least some other people?
4 (40%)
Show usernames
Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll
24 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Man, the lack of knowledge on how to properly post links on DU really gets under my skin, sorry ... (Original Post) mr_lebowski Jan 2019 OP
ppl who own twitter stock might frizz out but the rest of us thank you lol nt msongs Jan 2019 #1
What looks ugly to me is a link from Twitter that has 2, 3, or even more of the same tweet. Hoyt Jan 2019 #2
My guess on that one is a bug in the DU software, not something that the poster of the link has mr_lebowski Jan 2019 #8
Thanks. I wondered what caused it. Hoyt Jan 2019 #9
That happens when someone posts the links to *replies* to an original tweet.. Princess Turandot Jan 2019 #12
Yes that's it. Thanks. Seeing losers like that once, is more than enough. Hoyt Jan 2019 #15
Learned something new Midnightwalk Jan 2019 #3
Yay :) mr_lebowski Jan 2019 #6
Dumb question Midnightwalk Jan 2019 #10
Logical question ... Youtube is apparently a 'special case' to the DU software ... mr_lebowski Jan 2019 #11
I know that only because I know simple html markup. lunatica Jan 2019 #4
That's just, like, your opinion, man. LakeSuperiorView Jan 2019 #5
Jesus ... (nt) mr_lebowski Jan 2019 #7
lolololol obamanut2012 Jan 2019 #13
LOL! fleur-de-lisa Jan 2019 #22
Also the "utm" stuff is Facebook Recursion Jan 2019 #14
Thank you for this. WeekiWater Jan 2019 #16
thanks for the lesson 912gdm Jan 2019 #17
Thanks for this tip. I've noticed lately that when I post a video it does that. Autumn Jan 2019 #18
Look at all those votes for annoying. SMH. DontBooVote Jan 2019 #19
Catch more flies with honey? The message was actually helpful, the headline was not - so maybe seaglass Jan 2019 #20
I am perfectly willing to accept the assessment that I'm being annoying anal :) mr_lebowski Jan 2019 #21
Those URL strings don't "pay" Twitter. It's tracking code the publication uses. jpljr77 Jan 2019 #23
This is true, and yes, I posted a simplified explanation of the situation mr_lebowski Jan 2019 #24
 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
2. What looks ugly to me is a link from Twitter that has 2, 3, or even more of the same tweet.
Mon Jan 28, 2019, 11:59 PM
Jan 2019

What’s up with that?

 

mr_lebowski

(33,643 posts)
8. My guess on that one is a bug in the DU software, not something that the poster of the link has
Tue Jan 29, 2019, 12:30 AM
Jan 2019

any control over.

It is pretty annoying, agreed.

Princess Turandot

(4,794 posts)
12. That happens when someone posts the links to *replies* to an original tweet..
Tue Jan 29, 2019, 06:46 AM
Jan 2019

Below is an original tweet, followed by the links to two individual replies. Twitter doesn't have a feature that copies an entire thread sequentially. I assume that's because some tweets generate thousands of replies.






Midnightwalk

(3,131 posts)
3. Learned something new
Tue Jan 29, 2019, 12:02 AM
Jan 2019

I've noticed short vs long versions of equivalent links. Didn't know everything after the ? could be stripped.

 

mr_lebowski

(33,643 posts)
6. Yay :)
Tue Jan 29, 2019, 12:19 AM
Jan 2019

There actually are SOME cases where what's after the question mark COULD be useful, if DU's software worked differently. It's not ALWAYS a 'bad thing', but our software here doesn't leverage it ... in those useful cases.

For example, if I try to share a Youtube vid, forwarded to the 193 second mark ... a "?t=193" is appended to the URL created by Youtube, which denotes to the Youtube server to 'start at 193 seconds', but the DU software will not support it, and will instead show the "?t=193" mark (which denotes a list of 'parameters' being passed the web server, in case you're interested ) as text, but does not 'pass it' to YouTube when you (as a DU user) click the video.

Which is why, if you click the below video, it will start at the beginning, instead of at 193 seconds ... like I was hoping when I created the link. And IS what would happen if you copy/pasted the actual link I pasted below ... into your address bar. That "?t=193" there ... is extraneous, rather than 'useful', due to how DU works.

?t=193

Midnightwalk

(3,131 posts)
10. Dumb question
Tue Jan 29, 2019, 01:13 AM
Jan 2019

First thanks for the lesson. Everything after the ? are parms and for YouTube t=n means start at n seconds.

If DU doesn't pass the parms for the t=193 case, does it also not pass them for the case in your post with the twitter reference? Still good to learn how to trim a link.

 

mr_lebowski

(33,643 posts)
11. Logical question ... Youtube is apparently a 'special case' to the DU software ...
Tue Jan 29, 2019, 01:26 AM
Jan 2019

You can see however by clicking the first link (sj.com) above that the 'parameters' are passed to the server in that case (hence the content of the address bar when you arrive at the newspaper site), and that is most definitely *normally* 'the case' with DU ... except in what I believe are 'custom-handled' URL's ... like those that point at Youtube in it's various formations.

Very logical question though



lunatica

(53,410 posts)
4. I know that only because I know simple html markup.
Tue Jan 29, 2019, 12:03 AM
Jan 2019

But not everyone does, so good luck with this. I would do something I could control, such as deal with my own frustration.

I know what you mean though.

Autumn

(45,120 posts)
18. Thanks for this tip. I've noticed lately that when I post a video it does that.
Tue Jan 29, 2019, 11:09 AM
Jan 2019

I didn't remember it happening previously and just thought it was a new software thing or something my chrome book that replaced my Toshiba was doing .

seaglass

(8,173 posts)
20. Catch more flies with honey? The message was actually helpful, the headline was not - so maybe
Tue Jan 29, 2019, 12:04 PM
Jan 2019

that's why people chose annoying.

 

mr_lebowski

(33,643 posts)
21. I am perfectly willing to accept the assessment that I'm being annoying anal :)
Tue Jan 29, 2019, 01:15 PM
Jan 2019

My being bugged was what spurred me to post, just being honest ...

jpljr77

(1,004 posts)
23. Those URL strings don't "pay" Twitter. It's tracking code the publication uses.
Tue Jan 29, 2019, 01:54 PM
Jan 2019

In this particular case, the folks at NJ.com are using Google's UTM tracking code to determine where their traffic is coming from. It's a 100% certainty that they posted this story themselves on Twitter, in their free account, and they are trying to see how effective that was (vs. Facebook vs. Instagram vs. clicking from their home page vs. emails, etc.).

And it should be noted: The publication creates this code, not Twitter.

Twitter does have paid placements, of course, but that would almost always be noted in the Campaign field of the tracking code. This campaign, "njdotcom," is probably just their marker for everyday news posts (after all, ALL media outlets post articles to Twitter on a daily basis).

Now, copying that URL as is and posting it somewhere else, like Democratic Underground, WILL skew the numbers for the NJ.com marketing team. It will appear as if more traffic is coming from Twitter because each time someone from DU clicks it, it will count the same way.

But in this case, and in most cases involving media sites, there is no money being exchanged. They're just trying to track where their readers are.

 

mr_lebowski

(33,643 posts)
24. This is true, and yes, I posted a simplified explanation of the situation
Tue Jan 29, 2019, 02:07 PM
Jan 2019

In order to determine whether or not someone like twitter is ACTUALLY going to get paid requires a level of sophistication that I didn't feel like getting into for the purpose of this post.

At a minimum, by posting the link with everything after the question mark, you are often going to be skewing the numbers that the publication receives and tracks, and with many outfits, this a very important statistic to them. It can lead to business decisions being made, such as to LATER pay for placement on Twitter ... because they believe it's more effective than it really is. You're giving the news outfit inaccurate data, essentially.

And you MAY, unless you really understand how to read what comes after the ? mark, be contributing to them getting paid, when they don't actually deserve it.

Fair enough?

Kick in to the DU tip jar?

This week we're running a special pop-up mini fund drive. From Monday through Friday we're going ad-free for all registered members, and we're asking you to kick in to the DU tip jar to support the site and keep us financially healthy.

As a bonus, making a contribution will allow you to leave kudos for another DU member, and at the end of the week we'll recognize the DUers who you think make this community great.

Tell me more...

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Man, the lack of knowledg...