4 ms·
blogspam? I personally curate articles that I think are interesting and add some commentary sometimes. If providing a summary and a link to the original article
by gdltec 13y ago
blogspam? I personally curate articles that I think are interesting and add some commentary sometimes. If providing a summary and a link to the original article is blogspam then I guess hackernews also qualifies as one - based on your poor point of view.
- JazCE 13y agoThis is blogspam, you're trying to pull people to your personal blog, where you've written a paragraph (least amount of effort) with a copy and paste of a few paragraphs from the original article.
- gdltec 13y agoCorrect. So most online blogs that "recap" news do the same correct? Would you agree then that Marco and Daring Fireball are spam as well? if not, please tell what is different?
- JazCE 13y ago(disclaimer, I work for a news agency) I would agree that anything that recaps a news article/press release without adding significant analysis would just be blogspam. By all means link to your blog if you're adding more than a paragraph of thought on the original subject, if not, link to the original article. But hey, HN is a democratic site, so y'know, whatevs.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- manicdee 13y agoShow me where Mr Gruber (Daring Fireball) simply quotes the entirety of an article rather than making a (short) comment about it, perhaps quoting an interesting paragraph or two and linking to the article in its original location? DF certainly does not run the entire article. You may also want to re-read the dictionary definition of "recap" and understand the difference between "recap" and "republish." What you are doing is on the same level as Huffington Post: quote the entire article so people come to your site, view the ads on your site, and never need to visit the source (though at least you link to the source unlike HP).
- gdltec 13y agoSeriously, think of techmeme as well... doing exactly the same - blogspam? http://www.techmeme.com/ http://www.techmeme.com/
- profquail 13y agoI don't know about the rest of your site, but in this particular case, nearly all of the content you provided on your site related to this article was lifted directly from the article itself. If you'd written a thorough analysis of the article, perhaps using data to back up/refute it's claims, that would merit reading on it's own merits. That's not the case here though, so I'd prefer to read the article itself.