Blind hot links -=- annoying?

Yes, I concur Nigel, in fact have just about stopped doing the blind-links above because I don't trust what will be coming. This traveler loves new experiences but not all new experiences. That said, have you any news of Norway Airlines fares? Rumor and more seems to think US airlines are ready to get congress to ban them from the skies here. Well competition once was thought good so will see. Happy Christmas!

I'm glad to know your opinion on this. For years I only knew how to cut and paste a link in. Then I figured out how to make it blue, and finally how to put in words other than the web address. Since I was behind the times, I figured that was the more modern way. Now I'll go back to just the web address. Who needs that fancy new wave stuff?

And from now on, I'll be sure to consider whether my posts pass the Nigel sniff test. (Said with a smile and not a snark!)

Check this out:
The ultimate blind hot Link

Sheepishly agree with Nigel, especially since I know I've done this once or twice. However, will say I forward useful link(s). Links which I've perused and decreed to be helpful. In all honesty my posting of links has occurred in a response to a question which gave me the impression the poster hadn't done an iota of research. Over the years I've taken exception to such inertness. In the New Year maybe I'll accept the reality that some posters prefer the Cliff Notes version of traveling.

Ho Ho Ho!

I only dislike the posts where it says, hey look at this or something along those lines. It is better if the poster at least writes something about the link so I don't waste time looking at a website or link that is not of real interest. If it is from a poster that is new, I don't bother clicking it.

Take a minute or two and describe why you are posting the link. Is it for discussion? Pro or con? Has anyone heard of this before?

As a fan of pork products in general, and American barbecue in particular, when I saw "hot links" in Nigel's message title, my first reaction was this had something to do with spicy, smoked sausages. Realizing the forum post was probably involving something Web-related, I figured my initial thoughts were probably not what his post was referring to.

A blind link posted without some context is suspicious, indeed.

Now, what about some barbecued Burnt Ends? :-)

I agree, Nigel, it annoys me, too. If it's such a great article, tell me why - or at least tell me what it's about so I don't waste time on something I'm not interested in. I don't have a problem with links posted in answer to a question (unless that's all the answer is), only with the provocative title/link only post.

I have always taken the position that one of the big strengths of this board is that most posters post what they know from experience and not what they know from searching the internet. Many will remember the time when "he who is not to be named" was a master at finding internet information and then passing it along as his first hand knowledge. Of course, without the actual experience he could not recognize when the internet (that is never wrong) was wrong.

I kind of agree with Nigel on this point in that I am seeing a couple of recent posters who tend to throw "information" found on the internet out as new information. Sometimes it is out of date, inappropriate, or just in error, and the blind links adds to that. It is very rare for me click on blind links simply because of the potential security risks.

Again, it comes back to experience. I think it is best to posting what you know from experience rather than what you think you have learned from reading this site, guidebooks, or the internet. If an internet link supports your experience or expands it a bit, then cite the link with the complete address so someone can judge if they want to open that link.

Well said Frank.

Thanks for the Christmas gift, Nigel and Frank. I couldn't agree more. I also sincerely believe the posters are trying to be helpful, but links need context to be helpful to me.

As usual, Michael has the hottest links of all. I will occasionally link to an article and am sensitive to not linking to obscure sites, since in my experience that's where trouble can lie. As has been stated, providing some context and explaining why one feels it's worthy of sharing, as well as giving an opinion on the content is critical to the goal of the Forums.
I will also sometimes provide a link to a photograph on my photo site, hosted by SmugMug, which as far as I can tell is a safe, bona fide site.

Thanks Nigel for a good topic and a good reminder.

Nigel, thanks for posting this. I agree wholeheartedly. I rarely click on links in Forum posts [I know, I'm a dinosaur], and never if the poster has not provided any context or explanation. I am sure I miss out on a lot of good information, but it just makes me nervous. I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who resists!

Nigel,

I frequently use "hot links", but I try to provide some idea of the content with them. Hopefully I'm not one of the offenders, but I'll try to provide a more concise and easily understood description in future.

I never click on a link in an e-mail or post unless it's coming from someone I trust. Or unless it's my teeth clicking on one of Cyn's barbecue products! :-)

But I've never had a bad experience with a link on this board, perhaps because I stick to those from Nigel, Ken, and the other trustworthy folks I appreciate so much. And, yes, it does help to have a context for the link, to understand why it's sent and what it's about.

Those blind hot links, though -- just can't be as tasty as the ones made from the sighted critters who scrambled around awhile before their barbecue destiny..... ;-)

Even information on the internet can't always be trusted.

A little over a year ago, there was an article on the Huffington Post on how the new Brandenburg Airport was a boon to Berlin tourism. It went on and on how the airport was new and convenient.

Only one problem as most posters here know....the airport hasn't opened. Sure, it was supposed to open a few years ago but now is scheduled for 2017.

It took nearly a day for the above article to be removed.

I don't mind links if the information it links to is useful. But the poster should at least write a sentence or two about what will be found on the other side of the link.

Michael that's hilarious!!!!

I have learned to trust Michael Scheider's links. Well done!

I hope you are not including someone posting a link to the Bahn website, or an RVO bus schedule, or the Rhein-Mosel metro district (VRM), or Neuschwanstein tours) for someone looking for information, as "blind hot links". Sometimes some people just need to be pointed in the right direction.

"Give a man a fish, you feed him for a day. Teach him to fish, you feed him for a lifetime".

Many of you posting in this thread have pointed the rest of us to useful websites, I.e. seatguru, flyertalk , man in seat61, etc..using links. And, we trust the links you post because we trust you. However, I prefer personal advice as opposed to following some link to an article from,say, USA Today.

I obviously know what a link is, but I'm not sure what makes it blind. Is putting a title on it, like German Rail Query Page, still blind? After all, there is no way you will know without clicking on it that it will take you where it says it will. Maybe all links are blind. Maybe the only solution is to just post the URL, as reiseauskunft.bahn.de/bin/query2.exe/en, and let the reader cut and paste.

BTW, this website is filled with links. You only got to this page by clicking on the "Blind hot links" link on General Europe.

Thanks to all for their input.

I'd like to clarify for those with questions.

What concerns me is not knowing where I am going when I am asked to click on a link.

Before I click on any link in a post I look at the linked URL(the full address of the link) when I hover over the link. Redirects can take you where you don't expect to go, but if the URL looks straightforward, like nationalrail.co.uk or tfl.gov.uk or sbb.ch or bahn.com then I can be pretty confident that I am going where I want and not to a phishing site.

One liner posts consisting of nothing but a link and maybe a "look at this" really have me wondering why the poster doesn't want to introduce the piece and explain what is on the other side of the rabbit hole.

If the URL is very long with lots of miscellaneous characters I have to look at a long address to decide if I like the look of it. That takes me time and energy which I don't want to waste.

Sometimes people will use a website like TinyUrl which shortens the URL to many fewer characters. I really have to make a value judgement then as if I trust that post. It is rare that I will click on such a link. I can go to the website that made it or LongUrl and expand it so that I can see the original address, but I'm unlikely to.

To quote the LongUrl website:
"TinyURL and other like services solved a problem brought on by the advent of micro-blogging—limited message length. They do this by taking (sometimes incredibly long) URLs and creating a small compact one that redirects to the original.

"Solving one problem, though, created another one: obfuscation. There's no way to tell (for sure) where a shortened link goes by just looking at it. So, then, I could send you this link http://is.gd/2kz and tell you to check out the photos from my recent trip, when in fact I'm sending you to a video of Rick Astley singing "Never Gonna Give You Up". This is bad for users."

Now, on the other side of the coin, occasionally I wish to contribute a link which is very long and I will use a TinyUrl. If I do insert that link I always try to provide the long link in an open way to paint the context for readers.

My goal is to remove obfuscation and provide clarity for readers...

Does that make it clearer?

To Nigel
Thank you for your answer of 12/27/2014. I hover over links also to see where they will take me.

{Add-on . . . I will be more careful how I use these links in the future.}

I apologize for assuming that the simple question was a mockery of the original question especially since the question contained a hidden link and came from a very frequent use of the hidden link technique. Nigel raised a legitimate concern.

The best Hot Links I ever had were at a barbecue place in Austin Texas. Wish I could remember the name ..................

To Frank
I accept your apology.

I do not trust the blind (blue) links for the reasons stated by Nigel---one cannot see what website they lead to, and cannot screen for legitimacy. For that reason I have never learned to use them; instead I post a link to the actual website or specific page.

Nor do I click on such links in emails sent to me by even my best friends. If I cannot see the actual web address, I do not click. I am sure they are sent in good faith, but several of my friends have acquired pesky viruses by clicking on links from friends.

Hello everyone,

In case this might help clarify anything (particularly the jargon being used), I'm chiming in from the standpoint of someone who works with links as part of his profession. I'll use some examples.

This is an example of a URL: https://www.ricksteves.com/watch-read-listen/video/tv-show
URL stands for Uniform Resource Locator. I like to think of a URL as an address at which you can find a web page which is why I frequently call URLs "web addresses." It's just easier for non-tech folk to understand that way.

This is just a link to the same URL as above (you can hover your mouse over the link to see the URL in the corner of your browser). A link takes you to a particular place as indicated by the URL in the source code of the page. This is not a blind link.

While I recognize that "blind links" is a term used out there on the internets, I don't personally use it. When you indicate that you want to go to a particular URL, but you are taken to a different URL, this uses a redirect. Here is an example of a URL that has a redirect applied to it (it points to the same Rick Steves TV Shows page I linked to above): https://www.ricksteves.com/tv

You can call that URL or this a "blind link" if you'd like. I tend to think of them as redirects. I suppose that's just personal preference, but thinking of them as redirects takes some of the sense of mystery away from the equation. :)

We use redirects quite a lot here for a variety of reasons. Sometimes you need a shorter URL. Sometimes a page is moved to a new URL and you want everyone out there to find the page at its new location. We use them for good. Others use them for bad. Yes, I'm aware of my poor use of grammar there. It's for effect. But I digress...

Actually, I'm done. I'll let you all hash out the best way to figure out and/or trust the URL you are going to.

Thanks, Andrew.

Blind Link Definition
A blind link is a link to another website that does not clearly indicate where the link goes.
Source: http://itlaw.wikia.com/wiki/Blind_link

If I am commenting on Delta Airlines & type in context, "This is their homepage, I do not consider it a blind link.

Sentences similar to, "I had a wonderful trip recently to see the Aurora Borealis" make me think I am clicking on a pic of the Northern Lights. WRONG! This is a blind link.

Nigel already said how one can determine where a link is going. Just point your cursor at the link (or place the cursor on the link) & a small box should pop up on your computer. Mine opens up in the lower left corner of my monitor - a very thin box.

This forum is set up to allow what I will call mini-links. I plan to continue to use them as well as some newbies who PM'd me.

My last post to this thread!

Thanks Webmaster Andrew!
Thanks Colette!