5 ms·
I get the gist of your idea, from your other comments, now. People surf the internet at an incredibly rapid and random rate. It'd be more than annoying to see
by kyro 19y ago
I get the gist of your idea, from your other comments, now.
People surf the internet at an incredibly rapid and random rate. It'd be more than annoying to see link after link posted by the millisecond. I'd also bet that most of the time, sites where your friends contribute are sites that will probably appeal the most to you and have some sort of value. Even if you limit to specific sites, sure that's narrowing it down, but you're narrowing it down from millions of sites to hundreds, which is still pretty inconvenient for me to follow, considering I am an extremely extremely popular person and have an innumerable amount of friends. You get the point.
- amichail 19y agoYou could rank URLs higher that have been browsed by more of your friends in the last 30 minutes, etc.
- kyro 19y agoThat doesn't necessarily mean that those links are of more value. Say I got rickrolled, and my friend sees that in my history, and clicks through only to be rickrolled, and so forth. Next thing you know, I've ultimately rickrolled my entire social circle (I'd love that). Replace rickroll with porn and you get a worse (or better) situation. Trust in your links will wane.