Timeline for Ban Well-Known URL Shortner Links
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 19, 2011 at 5:39 | comment | added | artifex | A heads up, that link will crash the stock browser on a samsung galaxy s2. | |
| Aug 17, 2011 at 22:01 | comment | added | Zoredache | @John Gardeniers, length really isn't the issue. But there are valid links that confuse the markdown parser when using the syntax for inline URLs that is required in the comments/chat. For example links to many wikipedia articles don't work because of the (. A person can manually urlencode these, but that is a bit painful. | |
| Aug 17, 2011 at 21:50 | comment | added | John Gardeniers | Ignoring for a moment that fact that you were simply having a bit of fun, I'd suggest being more intelligent about constructing the link in the first place. There is absolutely no reason for any legitimate link to be anywhere near that long, so it follows that there is no legitimate reason to use a URL shortener, other than an attempt to obfuscate it. | |
| Aug 16, 2011 at 2:26 | comment | added | Chris S |
Finally, a use for hugeurl.
|
|
| Aug 15, 2011 at 22:12 | comment | added | Zoredache | @vortaq7, the globe-with-arrow doesn't work in comments. But honestly, I don't care much, I mostly just wanted to post a really long url. | |
| Aug 15, 2011 at 21:56 | comment | added | voretaq7 | But... there's a "globe-with-arrow" symbol to make linkable text! AND if you just put somewhere.com in an answer it's pretty good about figuring it out, no? (case in point - that was "h t t p : / / w w w . s o m e w h e r e . c o m" above) | |
| Aug 15, 2011 at 21:39 | comment | added | Nixphoe | URL lengtheners?? | |
| Aug 15, 2011 at 21:28 | comment | added | Wesley | I clicked it. I lol'd. | |
| Aug 15, 2011 at 21:18 | history | edited | Zoredache | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 68 characters in body
|
| Aug 15, 2011 at 21:13 | history | answered | Zoredache | CC BY-SA 3.0 |