Comments on: Today’s Miscellaneous Local Links

By: Gary

Gary — Fri, 27 Jan 2006 15:25:22 +0000

Who cares what window opens where. Let’s get back to the nudism. Good article.

By: Chul

Chul — Fri, 27 Jan 2006 04:39:05 +0000

The author of the Rake article gave the ‘Norsemen’ the invention of the sauna. Grandma Rhauha is rolling over in her grave…

By: mike s

mike s — Fri, 27 Jan 2006 01:43:08 +0000

Apropos of nothing, the STrib has a brilliant headline right now: Hamas victory snarls Mideast peace picture.

First, how does one snarl a picture? Second, what is this alleged "peace picture"?! Wouldn't it be more accurate to write something like "Hamas victory makes Mideast only slightly more fucked"?

By: ry4an

ry4an — Fri, 27 Jan 2006 01:09:05 +0000

I'm sure you're right that "this is a separate site" is part of it, but I don't doubt that the top online editors are quite aware that keeping people on their site is good for their site and let that factor into their decision as well. Additionally, media sites consider most of their content to be in their site and the links are just gravy. Aggregator sites like mnspeak have a link in almost every story and usually the bulk of the content is there.

I'd say the best argument for using a new window on a site like mnspeak is so that after the person has read the article they've still got a browser window (or tab) open to the comment form so they can contribute. That might be reason enough to force the decision rather than leaving it up to readers.

I know 95% of the time I use the middle-click on the links on MN speak so I can easily comment if there's something I want to say. The 5% of the time I try to actually leave mnspeak by clicking on a link and going to the target URL's site, and it doesn't work, I just swear at you mentally and forget about it. It couldn't be less of a big deal.

By: rex

rex — Fri, 27 Jan 2006 00:57:10 +0000

No, I don't think that's true. In my experience with a lot of online media companies, the people who make these kinds of decisions are top online editors -- people who went to J School. Their rationale is ethical, not financial. New windows are supposedly a signifier that you are exiting the journalistic credibility of the source site.

Regardless of whether those assumption are right or wrong (are people that dumb? what is credibility?), I don't think it's an advert impression issue, especially since using the "back" button would invoke another impression that target=_blank wouldn't.

(For the record, MNspeak doesn't currently count ad impressions, so the point doesn't apply here.)

By: ry4an

ry4an — Fri, 27 Jan 2006 00:48:47 +0000

Rex, I’d say it’s not about media vs. application but mostly about advertising vs. non-advertised, with search engines being the exception because they’re all about sending you somewhere else.

And I think “people need to stay here and look at our adds” is a perfectly valid reason to new new window pop-ups, despite the majority of users likely prefering having the option left up to them. If less ad revenue means less mnspeak, I’m all for whatever keeps people here to boost the #s.

By: rex

rex — Fri, 27 Jan 2006 00:40:59 +0000

ry4an, I disagree on the "most sites" point. This is almost exclusively not true for media sites, from nytimes.com to cnn.com to pretty much whatever you name. However, you're right that it's true for most sites that are also applications. I suppose it is arguable if mnspeak is more application or more media.

By: ry4an

ry4an — Fri, 27 Jan 2006 00:37:33 +0000

Thanks, s4xton. Difference is, I put the number there legally. Let’s just say that when dorky and rebellious intersect one ends up with extraneous digits in one’s name. It only gets harder and harder to justify with each passing year.

As for the grenade. I almost certainly bought one of those for $5 at an army surplus store when I was young. I give the lady full points for understanding what’s cool to young boy and wonder at her lack of understanding about how the world is now.

By: s4xton

s4xton — Fri, 27 Jan 2006 00:34:24 +0000

ry4an-

Whew, that was fun.

You can call me Aaron by the way. I must say you’ve got great style to have a 4 in your name.

…anyway, about the grenade…

-Aaron

By: ry4an

ry4an — Fri, 27 Jan 2006 00:21:55 +0000

I suspect that Aaron/s4xton is correct that most people (if they understood the question and cared enough to even bother answering) would prefer to have the new-window behavior left up to them (option-click, middle-click, etc.) vs. have no way to open-in-same-window without a copy/paste. I know that on the net at large the only sites one sees that pop up a new window for all links are those which know they've got novice users and those trying to keep eyeballs for hit counts for add revenue. I think google even has a preference wherein one can request that all the links on search results open in new windows (which might be the best solution but likely isn't worth the effort), but they certainly don't do it by default.

That said, it's absolutely not a big deal. Someone who really cared could easily write a greasemonkey script to fix it themselves.

I certainly don't care enough to, and recognize that this diversion has bored most people 5 messages ago.