Comments on: BurnURL Should Burn in Hell

By: URL Shorteners That Frame Websites Hijack Your Content | SEMClubHouse - Key Relevance Blog

Tue, 14 Apr 2009 17:40:10 +0000

[...] BurnUrl: Another Steaming Pile [...]

By: Michael VanDeMar

Michael VanDeMar — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 13:45:44 +0000

Greg, he’s saying that it’s not “jumping on the bandwagon” if they did it first, which based on the date of their blog post announcing it (March 2nd), they did. Looks like Digg ripped off the concept from them, not the other way around.

So, instead of ripping into them for being followers of a dangerous trend, you should be kicking their ass for starting one.

By: Greg

Greg — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 05:30:18 +0000

I would reply, but I’m not quite sure what it is you are trying to say…

By: john

john — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 05:17:37 +0000

“… “up-and-coming” services who have decided to jump on the “justifiable framing bandwagon.”

Funny that you pin the bandwagon here. I think BurnURL was the first time I saw the frame up there, and pleasantly enjoyed it.

By: Greg

Greg — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 05:15:05 +0000

I won’t argue the title issue. Of course I wrote it the way I did in an attempt to generate NATURAL ORGANIC DISTRIBUTION.

You are certainly free to think that it is some kind of personal promotion stunt, but I can tell you that having been in this business longer than most, I’m fortunate enough to not have to rely on blogging to gain attention.

At the end of the day, I want to draw attention to the issue because I still believe that what makes the web great is the fact that small people with big ideas can do amazing things.

Unfortunately, we are going through a period where big people with very small ideas are fucking things up for everyone else because the best they can do in terms of original thought is to be a parasite.

Six months ago, no one new what a url shortener was. (even though they have been around forever) The only reason sites like Burn exist is because everyone is sitting around trying to figure out how to sponge off of Twitter’s success.

By: Mike

Mike — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 04:51:41 +0000

Greg,

The fact you’re playing the “I’m helping the community” card is pretty laughable as well. You’re not helping the community, you’re attempting to push forward your name and increase links back to you. If you were just looking to help the community, the title wouldn’t be what it is. It was designed to get retweets and bring more people here.

I mean, you are an SEO guru…

By: Chris

Chris — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 02:26:18 +0000

here here Greg.

By: Greg

Greg — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 01:21:20 +0000

Completely agree that it is up to the publisher. Which is why I’m going to do all I can to makes sure publishers understand that the harm you cause dramatically outweighs any potential value.

The web as a whole has done a fine job sharing urls without services like yours. (It’s called copy and paste) And the web will continue to function fine once you are gone.

By: Drew Olanoff

Drew Olanoff — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 01:05:30 +0000

It is the publishers decision whether to allow frames or not. The bulk of the feedback that we’ve received on BurnURL has been positive, but we take any and all feedback to heart.

Thank you!

By: Li Evans

Li Evans — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 01:02:11 +0000

Found this via @fatonmaster!

Totally agree with you here, and found another particularly annoying service like this too. Ow.Ly – and is branded somehow by Hoot Suite. Does the same annoying framing… just utterly annoying!

Great post