3 ms·
> I’m a no-www advocate. I used to feel the same way. — Until the arrival of so many new TLDs. Since then I always use www, because mentioning www.alice.band
by noizejoy 4y ago
> I’m a no-www advocate.
I used to feel the same way. — Until the arrival of so many new TLDs.
Since then I always use www, because mentioning www.alice.band in a sentence is much more of a hint to a general audience as to what I’m referring to than just alice.band
- gravitate 4y agoI hear you. But a redirect is a good solution in that case.
- noizejoy 4y agoYes it is. I just redirect the other way round, so those ever rarer individuals typing in domains are also served fine on my websites. And also to automatically grab the https. I just find it's ever slightly more "honest" to have the server name I mention, also be the one that's actually being served. -- And that's also because I'm quite annoyed at URL shorteners and all kinds of redirect trickery having being weaponized over the years. So I optimize for honesty and facilitate convenience. But this pretty subtle stuff and I'm not advocating anymore. -- I don't think it's that big of a deal either way and I'm just expressing my little personal vote and priorities on the big Internet. :-) So my post wasn't intended to change your mind, but more as a bit of an alternative view and what made me get there.