Joomla Templates Club 406,261 posts

[SHoggard Friend SHoggardJoin date: October 2006Posts: 290Downloads:5Uploads:21 Thanks: 26 Thanked: 7 times in 1 posts]

#144417

I’d like to voice concern about the use of re-routing Comments & Social Network bookmarks via 3-rd party sites.

I tested the Bookmarks today it takes me to addthis.com, the url below includes joomlart (see below)

http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?v=200&winname=addthis&pub=joomlart&source=men-200&lng=en&s=facebook&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.packwebasia.com….. etc

For “JAComments” See also this thread here: http://www.joomlart.com/forums/topic/moderation-in-and-presentation-of-the-comment-plugin/

My concern is
– control over my Intellectual Property (with regard to JAComments”)
– long-term reliability of a service I’d never heard of (yes Scotty, “It’s 25 year old owner recently turned down an offer of $200,000,000” but he’s trading on my traffic
– impact on Google ratings, as I understand it they rate sites on both in-bound and OUT bound links, from the url above it looks like the out-bound link is to http://www.addthis.com …. the Facebook link is from http://www.addthis.com – from where I stand http://www.addthis.com therefore gets both incoming & outgoing links from my users while I get none.

and how/why does joomlart get included in the url from my site

I did a who-is on both IntenseDebate & addthis.com and they’re both Godaddy accounts

Sure there are plenty of free social bookmark extensions on the JED, which I’ll use instead of these.

My question is really Why does JA need to use these re-routing sites when there are plenty of free social bookmark extensions on the JED – why not just do a deal with those free extension developers?

[scotty Friend scottyJoin date: March 2008Posts: 2339Downloads:0Uploads:13 Thanks: 76 Thanked: 827 times in 595 posts]

#317927

SHoggard;145417Why is JA using 3-rd party ‘re route’ sites on Bookmrks & Comment

Because they are a hundred time better than anything available on in the JED. Simple as that.

No one is forcing you to use it. Jeez….

[Phill Moderator PhillJoin date: February 2014Posts: 7013Downloads:40Uploads:77 Thanks: 917 Thanked: 2206 times in 1818 posts]

#317930

In addition, why give you something that you can easily add from the JED anyway? JA are giving you something that is not easy to add yourself so now you get the best of both worlds.

[SHoggard Friend SHoggardJoin date: October 2006Posts: 290Downloads:5Uploads:21 Thanks: 26 Thanked: 7 times in 1 posts]

#317952

Don’t get me wrong here, I’m simply asking for the purposes of clarification

[cgc0202 Friend cgc0202Join date: August 2007Posts: 2244Downloads:0Uploads:3 Thanks: 206 Thanked: 262 times in 1 posts]

#318141

I have already shared my thoughts and requests on this in another thread:

Moderation in and Presentation of the Comment Plugin
http://www.joomlart.com/forums/topic/moderation-in-and-presentation-of-the-comment-plugin/

so let me just respond to the responses. It is valid request, so we should not villify members for sharing their thoughts and suggestions.

True, the “commercial Comments” extensions choices are good, but the concerns should not be ignored because you felt otherwise. To some users, like myself, the price to pay — for such good commercial Comments extensions choices — is just too much (see my original post and responses in the linked thread). Otherwise, I would not have wasted my time sharing my own concerns.

I have wanted such a comments system for a long time since I started using Joomla. But all along, my own preference was an in-house Comments extension, similar to the simple Comments feature used by commercial papers, e.g., the New York Times. It took me forever to find a good one from among the choices from Joomla. Eventually however, I decided to remove the Comment extension I used, for reasons I already outlined in my other responses in the above link.

I was quite delighted therefore that in the “preview” prior to the release of the Teline III beta, one of the cited features would be a Comment extension. My enthusiasm was quashed when I found that the choices provided by Joomlart were all choices that required reliance on third party administration.

I was hoping that one of the choices would have been a Joomlart customized version of an in-house Comments extension.

As it stands now, as much as I wanted a Comments feature, I am going to remove the Comments extensions provided in Teline III.

As far as I am concerned, the price to pay — for using such good Comments extensions choices — is just too high.

Cornelio

N.B. And no, it is not just a simple case of “installing” another extension, to add a Comment extension or any other extension for that matter. There are so many factors to consider, as I already outlined in my responses in the link given above. Moreover, if something goes awry, or a conflict arises, it is a nightmare finding out what went wrong. This issue alone is a prime reason why I try to avoid too many integration.

[scotty Friend scottyJoin date: March 2008Posts: 2339Downloads:0Uploads:13 Thanks: 76 Thanked: 827 times in 595 posts]

#318144

I can’t see the problem.

I presume those of you who oppose intense debate also stay well clear of gmail and other such services and of course, also host your sites on a local server?

[Phill Moderator PhillJoin date: February 2014Posts: 7013Downloads:40Uploads:77 Thanks: 917 Thanked: 2206 times in 1818 posts]

#318148

<em>@cgc0202 145715 wrote:</em><blockquote>N.B. And no, it is not just a simple case of “installing” another extension, to add a Comment extension or any other extension for that matter. There are so many factors to consider, as I already outlined in my responses in the link given above. Moreover, if something goes awry, or a conflict arises, it is a nightmare finding out what went wrong. This issue alone is a prime reason why I try to avoid too many integration.</blockquote>

I’ve just installed Jom-Comment on my Teline III testbed, it took five mins max. One of the existing templates for Jom-Comment fits Teline III nicely.

I currently have no use for Teline III so this was just an experiment to see how well it works. I do like the choices that JA have made too and I am sure most users will.

Developing yet another comments system is probably a bit of a waste with many good ones around already and with plans to include one in J1.6, doubly so.

[cgc0202 Friend cgc0202Join date: August 2007Posts: 2244Downloads:0Uploads:3 Thanks: 206 Thanked: 262 times in 1 posts]

#318158

<em>@scotty 145718 wrote:</em><blockquote>I can’t see the problem. </blockquote>

Scotty,

That’s the whole point.

People may view the same idea, innovation or policy differently. I am a firm believer in the message conveyed in Henrik Ibsen’s “An Enemy of the People”. To paraphrase: “What is popular may not be true. What is true may not be popular.” The difficulty lies in deciding what is “correct and incorrect”, “right from wrong”, or “truth from falsehood”; and who ought to make the verdict.

As such, it is not always the case (or not alway clearcut) that one perspective is more valid than the others. For this reason, it is not because you do not see the point, those of others who have perspectives different from yours are wroing or incorrect?

Obviously, what goes into any Joomlart product would ultimately be largely decided by Joomlart. This has nothing to do with being the best choice (decision) or not. As consumers, we can suggest alternatives, and eventually decide whether what is offered are consistent with our needs and perspectives.

My interest in creating websites has been motivated partly by my concern about the “monetization of personal information” that has become the bedrock foundation of most “internet” business plans. I am not the only one having such concerns; although based from the tide, it is almost a Sisyphean undertaking. This crusade may be just that, Quixotic, but this is no reason to quit fighting.

<em>@scotty 145718 wrote:</em><blockquote>
I presume those of you who oppose intense debate also stay well clear of gmail and other such services and of course, also host your sites on a local server?</blockquote>

And yes, I do not use gmail mainly because of Google policies on privacy and other Google policies. I also do not use Amazon, Ebay, etc., for some related reasons. For other reasons, I tend to buy books, and other goods locally, even with extra taxes or even if the price is slightly higher. It is better for the local economy.

Does this mean I am totally opposed to using such related internet services? Not really. I use Google search for example, and I use Google books. I also use Yahoo email, but it was a bargain I made awhile back, before I had access to other more private emails.

What I wanted to avoid are situations where I expose my visitors to stuff that they might not be fully aware of. Take a look at this issue for example:

Times Site Was Victim of a Malicious Ad Swap

Many NYT readers thought that they would not be subjected to such, but they were. Supposedly, the New York Times would not have admitted it, had it not been first reported by a competing newspaper. It is for this reason why I have not considered including “Google ads” or any ads in my sites so far, even if that would have been one way of ensuring partial payments of the cost to maintain a website.

And yeah, if I am very rich, which I am not — especially after the two major market downturns, in 1999-2002 and 2008 — I would have preferred to use dedicated servers for all my sites. Right now, I have to content using webhosting sites where I have “almost full control” of what is to be included in my websites — at least within the bounds of the “Terms of Service” of the webhosting company. This is in issue for me also because US webhosting companies are subject to local and federal laws. During the previous administration, all webhosting companies have been subject to almost “totalitarian” policies because of the aftermath of the tragedy here in 2001.

Cornelio

1 user says Thank You to cgc0202 for this useful post

1. wombat1

[omar_ali Friend omar_aliJoin date: August 2008Posts: 31Downloads:0Uploads:6 Thanks: 9]

#318269

I see nothing wrong with SHoggard’s concerns, since when is a concern a problem for those who arrogantly tries to refute those concerns?

I’ve used both systems (intensedebate and disqus) and I can tell you from EXPERIENCE, that darn things broke at times when it was CRITICAL for our discussions!

Are we to DEPEND on systems that are being USED BY other thousands of sites simply because they are? Where has the common sense gone? The more people use a system, the more it’s overloaded. We’re talking thousands of sites here!

I don’t see ANY problem whatsoever to have a choice. For those who want to use intensedebate and disqus, knock yourself out, go ahead and use it. For others who don’t want to, then at least an option such as joomcomments or chronoengine.com etc.

[Author]

Posts