2007 March

Monthly archive: March, 2007

Blogger.com Hates Digg

Posted on 4 March, 2007

Ever tried to add a digg button to a blogspot blog? You get a ~~thoughtless~~ error message like “HTML tag <script type=’text/javascript’> is not allowed”. Since when is JavaScript code an HTML tag? BS. <polemic mode>Why does Blogger.com allow JavaScript code made by AdSense?

Conclusion: Blogger.com hates digg.com but loves Google’s AdSense.

Did I hear Googlers encouraging link building tactics like link baiting and social bookmarking? Perhaps I just misunderstood those messages … </polemic mode>

Here is the code downtrodden by Google:

<script type="text/javascript">digg_url = ‘http://sebastianx.blogspot.com/2007/02/why-proper-error-handling-is-important.html‘;</script><script src=”http://digg.com/tools/diggthis.js” type=”text/javascript”></script>

Ok, I admit that Google ~~censors~~ filters blog posts in the best interest of noobs not knowing what a piece of JS code can achieve. However, I’m not an ignorant noob and I do want to make use of JavaScript in my blog posts.

Hey Google, please listen to my rant! Thanks.

PS: Dear Google, please don’t tell me that I can use JS within the template. I don’t think every post of mine is worth a digg button and I’m too lazy to code the conditions.

Share/bookmark this: del.icio.us • Google • ma.gnolia • Mixx • Netscape • reddit • Sphinn • Squidoo • StumbleUpon • Yahoo MyWeb
Subscribe to

Entries

Comments

All Comments

Be the first to comment Sebastian | Uncategorized

Does Adam Lasnik like Rel=Nofollow or not?

Posted on 3 March, 2007

Spotting the headline “Google’s Lasnik Wishes ‘NoFollow Didn’t Exist’” I was quite astonished. My first thought was “logic can’t explain such a reversal”. And it turned out as kinda blog hoax.

Adam’s “I wish nofollow didn’t exist” put back in context clarifies Google’s position:

“My core point […] was that it’d be really nice if nofollow wasn’t necessary. As it stands, it’s an admittedly imperfect yet important indicator that helps maintain the quality of the Web for users.

It’d be nice if there was less confusion about what nofollow does and when it’s useful. It’d be great if we could return to a more innocent time when practically all links to other sites really WERE true votes, folks clearly vouching for a site on behalf of their users.

But we don’t live in perfect, innocent times, and at Google we’re dedicated to doing what it takes to improve the signal-to-noise ratio in search quality.”

I like the “admittedly imperfect” piece