Delaney's abject thank-you for €1.4m

SectionF

Delaney toes the line...

MrJoeSoap

Is that the full article you have put up on your site? No quotes or links there.

Its just two sentences. Surely you could have posted them here.

therecklessone

MrJoeSoap wrote:

Its just two sentences. Surely you could have posted them here.

Agreed.

There's potential for a good discussion on this topic, instead its being used to increase traffic through another site.

SectionF

Does boards.ie or its mods encourage the copying of full articles? I should hope not.

The link posted is to a two-paragraph comment, openly taking a particular position, on the subject of the elevenaside article, which is a straight factual report written in a neutral tone.

Anyone interested will follow the link (which is in roughly 24 point type, and coloured bright blue) to the original piece. Others may be interested in the immediate context provided by the link to the related story. Yet others may be interested in the wider context provided by the section that refers to many similar stories, on the topic of stadium funding and the business and politics of sport. Those who have no interest need not incur the heavy toll of energy required for the mouse click.

Putting all of this on a message board would be fine, in my view, but for the fact that it would disappear in a day or two.

KdjaCL

SectionF wrote:

Does boards.ie or its mods encourage the copying of full articles? I should hope not.

Yes preface your post with [Article] or other and ensure theres a link to the site the article came from.


kdjac

MrJoeSoap

SectionF, here's how I see it, and I'm having some serious deja-vu here!

1/ You see an article that is of interest to you somewhere, and that you think others may share an interest in.
2/ You post a brief synopsis of the article on your Bohsnews site, in whatever category you feel it is best suited.
3/ You then post a thread on Boards.ie with a title relevant to the issue. The post itself, however, has no direct content. Firstly, the reader has to click the link to your site, to read your take on the issue. Then, should the reader wish to read the original article they have to click another link (which I will readily admit I missed, despite it's large font size but possibly due to the fact I thought it was merely a heading) to be redirected to the original source.

Basically, the thread title, your opinion and the actual journalistic article are on three seperate websites.

Now, here is how I do it. If I see an article of interest, I will start a thread on boards, including a link to the original article and with a quote or an extract from the text included in my post, or occasionally the entire article, depending on how relevant it may be. I will then add my personal opinion underneath the quoted text, raising whatever points I wish to discuss. It cuts out any unneccesary diversions away from boards.ie and makes the whole thing a lot smoother and pleasant.

For examples from the past few weeks...

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055026351

and

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055008011

I'm not suggesting you eliminate your links completely, far from it. Just a couple of suggestions.

SectionF

MrJoeSoap wrote:

Basically, the thread title, your opinion and the actual journalistic article are on three seperate websites.

This is true, and it is the nature of the web. Being on separate websites is not a challenge to anyone technically, and the reader can make up their own mind if they want to follow the links. However, I do take your point that it probably would have been better for me to have quoted the Bohsnews article, to give more information about the item in the first instance.

Now, here is how I do it. If I see an article of interest, I will start a thread on boards, including a link to the original article and with a quote or an extract from the text included in my post, or occasionally the entire article, depending on how relevant it may be.

Mr JoeSoap, I too have had a feeling of deja vu about this discussion, up to now. But this is a new departure. Here, you are actually advertising copyright theft, which potentially is not good for the poster, but most certainly is not good for boards.ie.

I will then add my personal opinion underneath the quoted text, raising whatever points I wish to discuss. It cuts out any unneccesary diversions away from boards.ie and makes the whole thing a lot smoother and pleasant.

That's fine if you feel that every poster on boards.ie has a duty to promote boards.ie and to keep traffic coming to it. I don't subscribe to that view.
The message board, like every other entity on the net, lives in and off the net and to try to create barriers to other texts and content is against the logic and ethos of the net. A paid writer for a website will naturally try to keep as much content local to that site, but it's pretty repressive for a MB to expect its posters to do so.
I also disagree with your assertion that links are either unnecessary or unpleasant. I think that, generally, the more links that can be put in posts the more choice you give the reader and the better informed that reader will be -- if s/he takes that choice.
Bohsnews is an openly partisan website. It does not pretend to be neutral on issues affecting Irish football. My only motivation in running the site is to promote the club and the league, because I think there is a serious deficiency of media coverage of both. If I do link to Bohsnews in the hope that more people will be directed towards relevant content aggregated there, is that such a sin?

MrJoeSoap

SectionF wrote:

Mr JoeSoap, I too have had a feeling of deja vu about this discussion, up to now. But this is a new departure. Here, you are actually advertising copyright theft, which potentially is not good for the poster, but most certainly is not good for boards.ie.

I've never seen nor heard of any problems with this, its done in every forum on this site. If anything it directs more people to the source.