Posted on 04/14/2012 6:36:52 AM PDT by JohnPierce
Personally, not that my opinion matters, I feel that a well written blog with original content has a right to be excerpted. What annoys me are blog posts that contain YouTube videos (where a direct link would suffice) or has a ton of advertisement and tracking cookies.
As far as blog posts are concern I don’t like a small teasers, I want the choice to read more (if well written), but also to be able to discern context and reasoning of the author without having to click if I feel lazy. Freerepublic is for selfless promotion of conservative ideas, not personal gain. Provide more content and at the end say visit my blog to help me promote it. If your content has value and Freepers enjoy your style they will be more than happy to support you.
The request is not to do away with the post. But rather for the post to include the text, not an excerpt.
It is a request. Some do some don’t. Some attract unwanted attention, some don’t.
From the Admin Moderator Lecture Series
A Suggestion for Bloggers Who Post at FR
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2776537/posts
1 posted on 09/10/2011 2:43:21 PM PDT by Admin Moderator
Your contributions are appreciated but many here correctly assume that when you post an excerpt to your blog that you’re looking for hits for financial gain, especially those of you who rarely comment.
A suggestion from this moderator: Post full text from you blog and ask nicely for a hit to your link.
Freepers will treat you much more kindly if you heed this advice.
The final hearing on the permanent stay is May 23rd and I expect a ruling on the permanent stay by late June. Once we see whether or not Judge Legg is going to grant the stay, then we will know whether or not it is time to send in those apps.
The good news is that I think the appeal will lose. Ultimately, I think Maryland may be forced to issue permits on a more even keel.
Humblegunner, please understand that my respect for you is not at all diminished by my invitation for you to bite me.
The requirement, by you, for me to explain jack squat will go entirely unfulfilled.
If Mr. Robinson wished to clarify his position, up to and including a slap-down of anything I have had to say, I will quietly submit. You have no say in the matter— unless he says so.
I would appreciate a ruling on this as well. The last thing I want to do is violate your rules and I will uncomplainingly comply with whatever your wishes are in this matter
- - - - -
If you would have read the post by Jim Robinson linked at #18 your question would have already been answered. His closing paragraph from that post is below:
Furthermore, Im not big on rules. You wont see me posting rules for bloggers. The rules for bloggers on FR are the same as the rules for everyone else. If you are a good conservative activist and are willing to work with US on OUR goals and causes and not against US, then youre welcome to post to FR. But unless we say otherwise your blog material should be posted to our bloggers forum and it would be best if you do not excerpt your own material and if you would actually join in on the discussion here on FR. Were not really that interested in driving OUR traffic to YOUR blog. But if our readers see that you post useful information then they might start reading your site and thats fine by me.
So you really can’t explain how wanting the full content posted is causing butthurt to yourself or to the blogger.
I posted a link to Jim’s opinion on the matter.
If you are unable to understand his words I suggest some remedial English classes.
You have yourself a fine day.
My appologies, post #8, not #18.
What’s a PITA?
Pocket bread.
Which can be a pain in the ass to open sometimes.
“and ask nicely for a hit to your link.”
Most link sites will kill your account if you “ask” for hits, especially AdSense.
Very bad form and usually forbidden in the TOS.
That’s why they have to lure you in without directly asking.
[and some of the tracking cookies I mentioned won’t delete...I’m going to have go digging for them in my browser and kill them off manually....thanks a bunch, bloggers]
The words below the link are the Admin Moderators.
I was being lazy with no HTML codes.
Cheers
There’s a “Maryland” sidebar on the home page if you’ve put your state on your profile page.
This issue has been on there for weeks.
Here is the full-text of my latest article. The only part not included is the PDF of the letter from the MD State Police which is embedded via Google Docs. If you like the article, please consider giving me a visit and reading it and my other work:
I wrote last week about Marylands appeal in the Woollard v. Sheridan case. I also noted that Judge Legg had issued a temporary stay of the ruling pending a May 23rd final hearing on whether or not a permanent stay should be issued until the appeal is heard or rejected.
Today, I was emailed a copy of the following letter. It was received by one of the many people who had submitted applications to the state of Maryland after the original ruling struck down the requirement that an applicant have a good and substantial reason to receive a handgun permit. One would surmise that a similar letter has been sent to all of the hundreds of applicants who did likewise.
[LETTER EMBEDDED IN GOOGLE DOCS IN ORIGINAL ARTICLE]
The person who sent me the email asked if it would be possible to seek a writ of mandamus forcing the state to process the application. However, if one reads the letter very carefully, you see that Maryland is not actually refusing to process the application. Rather, they are advising the applicants that, absent the good and substantial reason language that is once again required until either the stay is lifted or the appeals court rules, the application will almost certainly be denied.
I am of course deeply disappointed with the state of Maryland for having this requirement to begin with and for appealing Judge Leggs original ruling striking it down. However, given these facts, I am rather pleasantly surprised that Maryland chose to return the applications along with the accompanying fees rather than simply denying them. They could just as easily have kept the fees and summarily denied the applications,. Based upon the history of political bias against gun owners in Maryland, I would not have been surprised at all if that were the approach they had taken.
But there may be a reason for this act of unexpected generosity by the state of Maryland. Despite the bravado with which the state is defending their decision to appeal, many legal scholars expect Maryland to lose and they may simply not want to face the flood of lawsuits that would arise from denied applicants in such an eventuality.
I should also note that there is another potential up-side for the applicants. On their permit applications, some states ask whether you have ever been denied a permit in another jurisdiction. By not being denied in Maryland, these applicants will not have to answer Yes to such a question if they apply in another state in the future.
Bloggers is very wily.
Like that?
I was just “politely pinging you” to the comment since it sort of involved you.
:)
Yeah.
And the infernal Google trackers are a bitch to get rid of.
[Google mail? Aw crud...not *that* one again. Here comes the spam]
“He did the work, he’s earned ‘em.”
Has he paid FR for those hits? Then he hasn’t “earned” them. He is stealing from FR.
Okay; got it. Thanks.
I was not criticizing the work. My suggestion and by others is if you want to use the member-funded Free Republic to promote your web site, at least have the courtesy to bring the text if reasonable length to FR.
Not trying to chase you away, but some of us don't donate to Free Republic to promote your web site. But if you have something useful to contribute, most will welcome your work and link back to read more.
my 2¢, nothing more and worth even less.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.