OT: Bezeqint made me "poof... he's gone"

[Dotan Cohen]

> I see. Well, in one case, it wasn't possible, because my account at the
> Technion's undergraduate students server got terminated without a redirect
> being set up after I graduated from the Technion.

That's basa. Did you ask one of the Danys from Taub to reinstate the
site for a a year?


> In one case, I set up a
> redirect from http://perl-begin.berlios.de/ (which is still there) to
> http://perl-begin.org/ and still lost a lot of page rank (or at least it
> seemed to have been the case).
>

Google makes it's decision based on a lot of things, but in a general
sense a 301 redirect is accepted as the safe way to move a domain.


>> > Yes, and I don't want bots to find anything on sf.org except for a link
>> > to www.shlomifish.org. As far as I'm concerned sf.org should not exist.
>>
>> Why not? What if I want to download your site to read offline on the
>> train?
>
> If you try to download sf.org without following links to other hostnames,
> you'll get only one page, which should raise your suspicions. (You are testing
> the web-sites you download, right?). If you download
> http://www.shlomifish.org/ , you should get the whole enchilada. This is also
> the case for following links from sf.org to www.shlomifish.org.
>

I personally don't download sites to read, but I tried to present a
valid use case.


>> What if some new search engine wants to rank you?
>
> He shouldn't rank sf.org. It only has a link to www.shlomifish.org and most
> links I know point to www.sf.org.
>

I mentioned that because it appeared to me that you implied that the
reason for your decision is to prevent bots from crawling the site.


>> And what
>> about the real malicious bots, that fake the IE UA anyway?
>
> What about them?
>

The point being that your approach does nothing to stop malicious bots.


>> This choice only confuses users. What advantage does Atom give the user?
>>
>
> Well, see for example this bug:
>
> https://rt.cpan.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=44899
>
> Essentially, XML::Feed works the best if all feeds are Atom or all feeds are
> RSS. And there may be similar bugs in other programs. Two links - one to Atom
> and one to RSS, does not hurt. Most people are clueful enough to make a choice
> between them. And if they aren't, they probably won't enjoy my homesite.
>
> I know many sites and blog services that publicse <link tags to both RSS and
> Atom.
>
>> >> No, you _don't_ want different content on www.sf.org as on sf.org!
>> >> Either serve the same content (and thus have the pagerank divided
>> >> between two pages) or 301 one to the other.
>> >
>> > I want only http://www.shlomifish.org/ to exist. I want nothing on
>> > sf.org, and so far it seems to work. I don't get many hits to sf.org.
>>
>> Then redirect it. People are going to link to it anyway, and people
>> are going to type it into their browsers.
>
> If they type it into their browsers then they'll end up at a single link to
> www.shlomifish.org , which they can follow. And with the awesome bar of
> Firefox and similar browsers, typing shlomifish.org will suggest
> http://www.shlomifish.org/ (while only a portion is typed). I didn't notice
> any people linking to it. I believe most people copy-and-paste the link from
> their browsers after browsing to the appropriate site.
>
> I feel like we're arguing in circles, but it's still an interesting
> discussion.
>

I did not even feel that we were arguing, just discussing. I am not
pushing you to make a change to your site, but rather I want to
understand your perspective and show you mine. I question your
decisions to understand why they were made, not to change them. And I
do find the subject interesting, like you, that's why we are
discussing it!

-- 
Dotan Cohen

http://what-is-what.com
http://gibberish.co.il