| 2:06 am on Jul 27, 2005 (gmt 0)|
You need to create a redirect in your web server, so that whatever you chose to be, with www or without would be the only one location to any request.
| 2:11 am on Jul 27, 2005 (gmt 0)|
But the problem is this is a free blog . . .I don't think I can create a 301 redirect.
| 2:15 am on Jul 27, 2005 (gmt 0)|
You get what you pay for. ;) On hosted services like this, you won't get the control over such things as redirects, so you're going to have to depend on simply getting more inbound links with your chosen version of the URL and hoping that Google can work out the canonical URL for your site.
| 2:18 am on Jul 27, 2005 (gmt 0)|
ooh, I see, you know what, I found it very strange that those blogs hosts didn't care about this redirection.
Everybody take cares about this, I mean, MOST people care about this. I do it for all my sites, i.e. I redirect from non-www to the www version, since most people will be adding darn www to the domain name anyway in links.
May be you should try to let them know this, and they might be wishful to fix it. I think must be another people affected by this problem.
| 2:51 am on Jul 27, 2005 (gmt 0)|
>>>You get what you pay for
Bingo. You say this is the second time this has happened to you. This is fixable (albeit it takes a bit) with a redirect, as mentioned, but you can't do that on a "free site". Best thing you can learn from this, aside from seeing if Google can work this out itself as mentioned, is that if a site's ranks in google have any value to you whatsoever, then treat them as if they do and give the site a real domain and a real hosting plan.
| 9:57 pm on Jul 27, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|MOST people care about this |
Not really - only SEOs care about this. Ordinary "true" bloggers (and that is what this product is aimed at) only care that their cat photos show up whether they type the www in or not. As the provider doesn't know (or care) which URL version the end user wants, they let both be available.