A new Rool

July 10, 2014 • 5:20 am

I’d like to add one more Rool to “da Roolz” list, and one that isn’t onerous. In fact it’s quite simple: please do not make any comments that consist only of a link.  That is often puzzling, because we don’t know why you’re putting up such a link.  Is it because you agree with it, because it demonstrates a phenomenon we’re discussing, or do you just want to amuse us?

And do read Da Roolz (rules for commenting) if you haven’t before. They’re on the sidebar, or here. They’re de rigueur for new readers who want to join the discussion.

I’ve added the new one.

Thanks,
THE MANAGEMENT

11 thoughts on “A new Rool

    1. “Da Roolz” are a parody of the old Saturday Night Live skit “The Superfans” about a group of obese Chicago sports fans who talk in the local argot. They’d always talk about “Da Bullz,” the local basketball team (The Chicago Bulls),or Da Bearz (“The Bears”) for “Da” is often a local pronounciation for “the”.

      You can see an episode of this hilarious skit here:

      https://screen.yahoo.com/da-bears-bill-swerski-superfans-snl-skits/

      .

  1. I tend to just ignore links with no explanation for why I should invest my time, but they are irritating.

  2. I like this rool. My personal style when posting links is to try to include:

    1. One sentence about why it is relevant to the current topic.

    2. A few sentences summarizing the content at the link to let the reader evaluate if clicking the link would interest them.

    3. The link itself.

    I just went through a similar discussion in the context of training materials. The authors I am working with wanted a “further reading” section that had a list of links. I convinced them that every link had to have a one-sentence summary at a minimum.

    1. It’s not just a question of whether the content might interest me. I’d also like some advance warning if the site is going to abuse my attention with obnoxious popup ads, NSFW imagery, eye-hurting fonts or color schemes, annoying music, etc.

      All of the above goes double for shortened or obfuscated links, where you really have no clue from the bare URL what you’re getting into.

      1. All of the above goes double for shortened or obfuscated links, where you really have no clue from the bare URL what you’re getting into.

        Ah, Goatse ; where would the internet be without you?
        BTW – goatse.cx is now a straight-up email provider. I use them myself form time to time, just for badness.

      2. “All of the above goes double for shortened or obfuscated links…”

        With advance apologies for the usage–THIS!

        Some people’s cleverness is other people’s severe irritation, esp. when one’s DSL is in slow mode. I always run my cursor over embedded links to try to get an idea of the destination, and it’s frustrating to only get a bitly or tinyurl. I realize shortened links can be desirable (tho doesn’t WordPress automatically shorten long links anyway?) but then some explanation in the post of what the link is about would be most welcome.

  3. I have read the roolz, but I’m not sure why none of my comments ever appear. Clarification would be nice. But I guess maybe I just keep slipping through the email cracks 🙁

Leave a Reply to Dominic Cancel reply