[theforum] Vote re: nofollow tags in articles

[Elfur Logadóttir]

.:| From: Paul Waring
.:| 
.:| On Mon, Oct 22, 2007 at 04:44:26PM -0400, David Kaufman wrote:
.:| > b) people were ignoring the thread, and unaware that a
.:| >    vote was called, or
.:| 
.:| That's what I did, because it seemed to basically be a discussion
.:| between two people. 

Yeah, me too.

Up until I read this:

.:| My personal opinion is that relevant 
.:| links within an
.:| article posted to evolt.org should be left untouched (i.e. 
.:| *not* adding
.:| nofollow), including a link to the author's website because 
.:| that's about
.:| the only way (other than exposure for their article) that 
.:| we can give
.:| them.

I was going to vote yes to nofollow - but now I need to think for a second
or two... 
[no comments on the smoky cloud above my brain, please]

Now I think I will vote no to adding the nofollow attribute.
Because, as Paul said, it's reward for writing - but other means need to be
used to address SEO spamming (or whatever it's called). Makes me wonder
wether such articles should be published at all and also if the nofollow
filter could be added to comments only?

.:| I'm also unimpressed with:
.:| 
.:| 'However, the discussion took place on IRC'
.:| 
.:| I think that discussion about a change like this should be 
.:| out in the
.:| open on a mailing list, where people can see it (I'm often 
.:| on IRC, but I
.:| obviously miss anything which is said whilst I'm not there, 
.:| which isn't
.:| the case for email).

I kind'of agree with that as well.
But then Dean spoke in another mail and kind'of changed my mind

Man I'm flaky tonight :)

elfur