Lj linking without asking

[nancylebov]

I've assumed that it's ok to link to any unlocked writing on LJ, but I've also noticed that a lot of people ask the writer if they mind if something of theirs is linked to.

Do you feel better if you get asked and/or annoyed if you're linked to without being asked? I don't feel a need to be asked, but I'd like getting told if the person doing it isn't on my friends list, just for the egoboo of knowing it happened.

Comments

[pariyal.livejournal.com]

I feel flattered when people link to me (or just mention my name, even to say that they haven't forgotten they owe me an email) but yes, if someone isn't on my friends list I'd like to know that they've done it. If they link to something I wrote we might have something in common, and that could lead to new friends.

[dglenn.livejournal.com]

I feel similarly. I'm generally flattered when people link to me (unless it's specifically to mean-spiritedly mock, but that doesn't happen much). If they're not on my friends list, I'd like -- but do not expect -- a comment or email telling me they've done so. Otherwise I don't know to feel flattered. (If they're on my friends list, I'll see it anyhow, of course.)

Likewise, I don't hesitate to link to other people's public entries, and occasionally drop them a line when I do so in a quote-of-the-day if they're so many degrees of separation from me that they're unlikely to ever be told by anyone else.

So far, if anyone's felt creeped out by being my QotD, they haven't said so to me.

I've also asked for permission to quote from locked entries (and more often than not, either gotten permission or wound up having them unlock the entry).

[madfilkentist]

If something's available on the Web, it's of general interest, and there are no indications to the contrary, I assume it's available to be linked to. I wouldn't link to something of a private nature without permission, though. People often forget that anyone can read their pages, but that doesn't mean I should compound their blunders.

Out-of-context links are a different matter; I wouldn't link to an image or frame within a page without specific permission, or include someone else's page within a frameset.

[cellio]

What he said.

[nwhyte]

I certainly agree that it's OK to link to any unlocked writing anywhere on-line. In my experience people who ask if they can link to something I've written are usually really fishing after a reciprocal link.

I also neurotically track everything on-line about me or any of my websites using technorati!

[nancylebov.livejournal.com]

Do you find that Technorati is reliable? I just read Teresa Nielsen Hayden's detailed account of how Technorati isn't working for her. It's the June 06, 2005, 07:49 PM comment.

[nwhyte]

Oh, I agree with all her gripes; but I don't know of anything better, and I know a couple that are even less satisfactory (eg Feedster).

What I've done is set up technorati feeds syndicated to lj, nhw_watchlist1 to nhw_watchlist7 and it appears on my friendslist if and when someone puts a relevant link in their blog. The two annoying things are 1) when you first set it up your friends list is snowed under (as is the case with most new lj syndicated feeds) and 2) it sometimes repeats old posts if the blog in question has a hiccup during its end-of-month archiving. But it keeps me happy.

[rysmiel.livejournal.com]

I'm entirely happy to be linked to, but being asked's kind of a compliment.

[firecat]

If I'm passing on a link from elsewhere with a bit of commentary, I don't expect to be asked or informed, and I'm usually not asked or informed.

If it's an original post, then I don't expect to be asked, but like you I prefer being informed (for the egoboo and so I can make a point of tracking comments).

[bradhicks.livejournal.com]

I'm all in favor of people both reading and linking to my stuff, and always feel a little silly when people ask me for permission. Hello, it's on the Web, bookmarking and linking have been integral features since Mosaic version 0.1. If people are going to link and comment, I appreciate a link in my comments, just because I'm curious what people say, but I don't pretend to think I'm entitled to that as a matter of courtesy.

The one thing I do tend to put my foot down about is when people ask if they can print out copies and sell them "just for the copying cost;" unless it fits soundly under the Fair Use doctrine, if somebody's selling my stuff I want to get paid.

[nancylebov.livejournal.com]

I'd want to get paid, too, but I'd still feel flattered if someone thought there was that much of a market for what I write.

[solri.livejournal.com]

I feel the same. Links are nice.

[malkingrey.livejournal.com]

Linking is integral to the nature of the web. Putting something up and then getting all bent out of shape when somebody else links to it is . . . perverse.

Friends-locked lj posts, or posts in password-protected private areas, shouldn't be linked to, of course, because there's no way for unfriended or passwordless people to get to them. And reposting something from an area where there's an explicit policy that posts made within that area are private to that area is wrong under the "violation of the social contract" heading -- but all such policies should be stated up front in clear language, because relying on everybody in the group sharing the same definitions of public and private space, and of what's confidential and what's not, is a fast road to disaster.

[avram]

I find it annoying, because the assumption that one needs to ask permission undermines a fundamental strength of the web, that anyone can link to anything without asking permission. If the practice of asking permission becomes sufficiently widespread, people might start to get offended at linking without permission. And since the legal issues around what some people call "deep linking" (and most of us just call "linking") are still muddy, we don't need public sympathy shifting over to the dark side.

[sciamanna.livejournal.com]

I agree with you entirely. Linking is what the Web is about, and I don't feel any need to be asked; knowing it's happening is a nice egoboo.

[nitebytes.livejournal.com]

Hmmm, not sure I've ever been linked to.
My way of thinking is that if it's unlocked, go ahead and link to it, if you tell me you've done it that's a bonus (and polite), but it's not a requirement.

[chatworthy.livejournal.com]

I just linked to your LJ (the top page) last Saturday, giving you credit for pointing me to the Frank Lloyd Wright Zombie post.

I don't link to locked messages, or even discuss them publicly.

If I put something on the web, feel free to link to it. Deep links will probably break, but a link to any of my home pages will work for as long as I can maintain it. I'm going through that right now: my ISP is folding in July, so I've been busy re-pointing domains.

[thespian.livejournal.com]

I like to know, afterwards, because I'm a whore, and love getting linked to. Lots and lots. But I fully expect, if I post something publically, people will just link to it, or not.

[redbird]

Like rysmiel, I'd find it flattering to be asked; given that LJ doesn't support a trackback feature, I'd also be pleased to be informed, especially if the person isn't on my friends list (if they are, I'd see the link) or is linking from outside LJ.

Unlike rysmiel, I sometimes post friends-only entries. I would be somewhere between annoyed and furious, depending on the specifics, if someone quoted those without specific permission. I do periodic "here are some comments I left elsewhere" posts in my journal--when one of those comments was a reply to a locked post, I asked the poster whether they wanted to be identified, and then decided that it was best not to even though I'd gotten that okay, and just left it at something like "in response to a locked post about thus-and-such topic..."

[akicif.livejournal.com]

Well, you can fake a trackback feature if you've access to a server and logs - just stick in a wee picture in each post (I've discovered my pictures of Lemon Jelly turning up all over the place).

Of course, when Evial Spammers do this we call it a Web-bug and a Bad Thing....

But answering the main question: linking is the heart and sole of the web - if someone doesn't want their material linked to, they should never have put it up there (naturally, I exclude bandwidth-stealing image rustlers: I've not yet given in to the temptation to replace a "borrowed" image with one of the the same name and dimensions but significantly different content).

[sturgeonslawyer.livejournal.com]

Well, I guess I'm a media whore: I approve of anyone linking to anything I've written anywhere on the Web, at any time, for any reason. I do appreciate it when someone tells me, and I've made some good LJ friends that way. If I don't want links I'll friendslock the post (something I have yet to do, actually) and say so in the post.

I also assume that it's available for quoting unless I stick a copyright notice on it and say "do not copy" - though I do believe that "courtesy (at least) to living authors" demands that such copying be accompanied with proper attribution.

[kressel.livejournal.com]

I like to be asked for the egoboo, but I don't mind it happening without my knowing it. It could be a nice surprise later on.

[jodawi.livejournal.com]

Unlocked entries implicitly give approval for linking, IMO.

[mneme]

I'm actually rather pleased and surprised to find that I've been linked to without being asked. Mind, I get the pleasure and surprise sooner if I am, but...

[cathyr19355.livejournal.com]

I mostly agree with you, Nancy. The only other caveat I'd make is that I would be annoyed if they linked my writing to something I found philosophically repugnant, such as a Nazi propaganda site.

[madfilkentist]

There's a page on my site titled "In defense of hate speech." A previous ISP (but not my current one) let me get at hit counts for every page on my site, and I noticed that was one of the most frequently read ones for a while. I worried that people with philosophies I find repugnant -- but whose free speech rights I defended with that article -- might be the ones linking to it. But even so, if the link exposed their readers to some better thoughts than they'd otherwise have seen, it's a win for me.

[cathyr19355.livejournal.com]

That's one way to look at it. :-)

I would be more concerned that somebody with an agenda I disapproved uf would misinterpret something I might say as supportive and link to me for that reason. However, I would not refuse to let them link for that reason--I'd be more likely to write and post my own refutation of whatever aspect of their message I found offensive.

[thette.livejournal.com]

As so many have said above, I think links are what the web is about.

And, if people appear out of nowhere, trolling a post I've made, I can always lock it. (That has happened, yes. Furry trolls showed up at an entry I didn't find controversial, but they apparently did, and they took their disagreements from the linking entry to mine. Those two are they only people I've banned.)