Skip to main content
Claudio González
Legend
February 4, 2009
Question

Short and long links

  • February 4, 2009
  • 35 replies
  • 3742 views
This post of mine

Claudio González, "Report spam or inappropriate posts here" #16, 3 Feb 2009 2:54 am

started an interesting discussion on the pros and cons of posting shortened links. In an attempt of trying to keep the Spam forum for what it is, I am suggestiong that any furhter discussion be moved here.

Thank you.
    This topic has been closed for replies.

    35 replies

    Known Participant
    February 5, 2009
    I think the NNTP users get whiny when we make short text links.
    Claudio González
    Legend
    February 5, 2009
    Thanks, r, that's the way I use in my Mac and couldn't recall, and I think it was you who suggested it years ago. My problem was that I only wanted to have messages #16 through #25 displayed, and I don't know if I could do it using this method.

    However, my biggest concern is:

    is it really unsafe to post/open shortened links?

    If so, how dangerous it is, and what are the real risks? I am absolutely ignorant in the matter, and what has been posted is not very clear for me.

    Thank you in advance.
    Participating Frequently
    February 5, 2009
    > Or just do it like this:
     
    Short, descriptive text
     
    Forum Editing Tips

    Your copy&paste will just copy the selected text, not the underlying links. The post actually read like this:

    Or just do it like this:

    <a href=" long URL"> Short, descriptive text</a>

    Forum Editing Tips
    Known Participant
    February 5, 2009
    To prevent extended drift in the Spam thread, I just want to tell Claudio here that I didn't see this thread until after I posted in the other. My and Dave's quips extended the thread by two short lines, and neither were the type that would cause a host to close the thread. The five or six posted thereafter merely extended the drift (although again, little chance of causing a closure, since everything was polite and reasonable.)
    Claudio González
    Legend
    February 5, 2009
    Perhaps replicating here the original discussion may promote further discussions on the subject. Main question for me: is it really unsafe to post shortened URLs?

    What follows has been copied and pasted from the "Spam" thread:

    Claudio González - 2:54am Feb 3, 09 PST (#16 of 33) Edited: 03-Feb-2009 at 03:02am

    Link to a website offering extremely cheap software:

    http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/webforums/forum/messageview.cfm?forumid=39&catid=220&threadid=1422055&enterthread=y

    (sorry, I'm not using my Mac, and I don't have here the instructions for shortening links).

    Addition: there message is actually duplicated...

    Post Reply | Bookmark

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Neil Keller - 6:31am Feb 3, 09 PST (#17 of 33)

    Claudio,

    Mac or Win, to use a shortened URL, go to http://tinyurl.com, and follow the simple instructions.

    Neil

    Post Reply | Bookmark

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Phos±four dots - 9:45am Feb 3, 09 PST (#18 of 33)

    Or:
    http://metamark.net/

    or:
    http://tr.im/

    or any of a whole bunch of other URL shortening services:
    http://mashable.com/2008/01/08/url-shortening-services/

    Post Reply | Bookmark

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Mike Kazlow - 9:49am Feb 3, 09 PST (#19 of 33)

    I understand the desire for shortened urls, but personally I prefer the
    longer true url. Anyone that would click on an encoded url in this
    modern day is truly asking for a problem---even in this thread were
    regulars post. We have seen enough impersonation take place that a fast
    click on an encoded url can land one's computer were the sun doesn't shine.

    Just my 2 cents...Mike


    Post Reply | Bookmark

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    John T Smith - 10:41am Feb 3, 09 PST (#20 of 33)

    What Mike said... I won't click on any link that is shrouded

    An infection could be as "simple" as a computer being turned into a Zombie Bot to become part of a spammer's network... or it could be spyware that steals your login and password so the program's writer is then able to clean out your bank account

    Post Reply | Bookmark

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Neil Keller - 11:00am Feb 3, 09 PST (#21 of 33)

    tinyurl.com offers the option of a preview.

    Neil

    Post Reply | Bookmark

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    pjonesCET - 11:06am Feb 3, 09 PST (#22 of 33)

    A problem with long URL's That Mozilla products don't seem to have, it that the URL is not recognized as something unique and therefor after 72 or 84 characters in length a linefeed or return is inserted.

    With Mozilla products a URL could be the true length of pi and it stays on one line. Mozilla products (SeaMonkey/Firefox/Thunderbird) are to when they se a URL such as a Mailto: http/https:, or FTP: that is treated as a unique item and therefore ever character in the URL remains on one line and does not switch back over until if see a return or linefeed. IE is notorious for mangling URL's.

    Thus the need for a system small URLs.

    Post Reply | Bookmark

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Phos±four dots - 11:25am Feb 3, 09 PST (#23 of 33)

    Firefox 3.x wraps long URLs.

    Post Reply | Bookmark

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    r_harvey - 5:06pm Feb 3, 09 PST (#24 of 33) Edited: 03-Feb-2009 at 05:10pm

    Or just do it like this:

    Short, descriptive text

    Forum Editing Tips

    Post Reply | Bookmark

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Claudio González - 5:32pm Feb 3, 09 PST (#25 of 33) Edited: 03-Feb-2009 at 05:40pm

    OK, OK, I got the messages. All I was saying is that I didn't know how to do it on a Win machine.

    By the way, I have noticed that the issue has some (to me) unexpected derivations which I think deserve further discussion. Should we take this to a new thread and keep this channel clean?

    Addition: new thread opened here:

    http://www.adobeforums.com/webx/.59b7c633