Web Hosting Talk : Other Forums : WHT Announcements, Feedback and Questions : Links in Sigs

[SI-Chris]

I wish WHT would re-allow active URL links in signatures. I understand the reasons for wanting to tone down the "flash" in signatures (it was getting out of hand there before the last round of rules updating). I also understand that your sig is not meant for advertising, it's supposed to be contact information. However...

Without an active link it's impossible to track traffic that comes from WHT. It also makes it more burdensome for a person that wants to take a look at a member's site; they either have to open a new browser window and copy and paste, or open your profile then click your link.

As WHT allows URL in signatures, I don't see why they can't be active links, with the following caveats: 1) the link must be to your home page (no links to hosting plans pages, etc.); 2) the link text must be the URL (i.e., if the link is to http://www.domain.com the sig must say http://www.domain.com, and not something like, "World's greatest host, click here!!!").

I realize that's more RULES, but I personally find it annoying to have to do the cut and paste routine when I want to visit a member's site, and I'm also dissapointed when I can't track where a visitor came from.

And hey, this is the WWW, hypertext is supposed to be job one!

[XTStrike]

Hi, we have the capability to goto a link by using the "WWW" button below the sig, this means members of WHT dont really need to have a link to their site in the sig, wouldnt you agree?

[AlaskanWolf]

for many members, they dont even have a website linked to their website button...so yes, its somewhat cumbersome that you have to copy and paste a url just to view it

[XTStrike]

I feel that maybe if they dont have a web site linked to their WWW button they should first utilise that particular feature of the forum before having to create links in their sigs, for example, if we enabled links in the sig then "intelligenthosting.com" would be linked TWICE from the same section of screen, thus duplicating what is already available in the WWW button.

I understand that it would be alot easier for you to have links especially if you have 3-4 URL's in your sig.

[Eagle]

nah...
Just make the signature vB Code compatible
I mean, who really clicks that www button?

[Lonny]

I agree.. and there is no extra bandwidth involved..

well.. maybe besides that a href code..

[XTStrike]

Hey, I see a pattern emerging, everyone posting here has a URL in their sig advertising something, lol

I feel this suggestion may not be carried out simply because of the following reasons:

1) VB Code = colours, etc... - this takes us back to the days where the bottom of every post by a host looked similar to a banner advert, I dont think the members (non hosts) or other moderators would allow the forum to turn into a huge advert again.

2) people accidentally clicking on a link, simply because of the huge amount of links created by some people.

3) the WWW facility is already available and you may put a line in your sig saying "Please Click the WWW Buton Below To Visit Our Site" it is small, easy to use and administer and its your choice to use it or not.

[MattF]

Webhostingtalk is not for your commercial gain.

If people want to visit your site they can click www or simply paste or the type the url in the address bar, this way they don't stand out as ads and there is no chance of people accidentally clicking the url.

Hide the reasons as much as you will but ultimately *I believe* you want more free advertising

[Walter]

Indeed, enabling vb coding and colors will bring us back to a less readable forum. Just my 2c.

[AlaskanWolf]

Why bother have a suggestions area when you guys are just going to shoot down each suggestion

Its clear that WHT is "my way or the highway"

[SI-Chris]

Originally posted by MattF
Webhostingtalk is not for your commercial gain.

If people want to visit your site they can click www or simply paste or the type the url in the address bar, this way they don't stand out as ads and there is no chance of people accidentally clicking the url.

Hide the reasons as much as you will but ultimately *I believe* you want more free advertising

I don't want more free advertising (not from WHT anyway). My URL is in my sig, that's fair enough for me. What I want is: 1) to look at my server logs and know where the traffic is coming from; 2) not to have to do the cut and paste routine when I want to visit someone's site. But thanks for implying that my motives are self serving and underhanded (the rolleyes smilie was a nice touch). I'm not sure I understand the fear of people accidentally clicking URLs though (mentioned by both Matt and xStrike); is this really a significant problem?

I'm not that familiar with vBulletin so I don't know if you can just turn on URL linking for sigs and not all the colors and other stuff. If that's not possible, then I agree that leaving Vbcode off in sigs is the best thing for the greater good.

[teck]

Not all suggestions will be implemented but they will be heard.

[i am a]

<sarcasm class="badly formed">

well i'd like to see the mods personally give me a cup of coffee each morning, chicken can do monday, kunal can handle tuesday, teck... wednesday? xtstrike, how about thursday, and bc... friday?

since Matt's the owner perhaps he should pay for my coffee fund...

and if this gets shot down i'm outta here!

</sarcasm>

[kickster]

I agree lets have the active links back... I am honest I just want the extra traffic Is that a sin?

[SoftWareRevue]

Me?? I'm not a host.
I don't mind one way or the other.
Active links?. . . . fine.
Not?........fine.
I don't see where it makes much difference to most people