Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 18.104.22.168
Forum Moderators: brett tabke
We do not all find the rules to be inconvenient
Whilst many many think the rules (on urls) are sensible (and I have not said otherwise) they are undoubtedly inconvenient - that is true whether you agree with the rules or not.
so a compromise, implemented partly by technical changes, would seem to be a sensible subject for discussion.
I find the fact that no one seems to be interested in doing do, both sad and astonishing.
Who said no one is interested in discussing it? That's what we're doing, is it not?
If a policy of no change results from this thread then it will have been an entirely pointless exercise.
Is this a forum about the worldwide web or some kind of stupid quiz show?
I think the SEO analysis threads would be much more productive if you could say "hey, check out what's going on in the SERPS for 'red widgets'! Isn't that weird?" - "Yeah, I'm seeing that in 'fuzzy green doodads' as well, let's see if we can figure out what those terms have in common..."
1. Whether to change at all, or not.
2. Change what
3. How to introduce the change
I'd support a Report Spam function also. If enough members Report Spam, the reply is nixed from public view. Mods/Admins can then clean up later. I've seen it in action and it works like a charm.
I'd say it is an all or nothing proposition. The logistics have to be far more challenging if you start cherry picking which are allowed.
Absolutely no signature links, period! You have a profile, use it to your advantage. It will outperform signature links any day.
You say "no way" because of performance issues?