[WikiEN-l] Why aren't *all* wikia.com links restricted under nofollow?

[Jeff Raymond]

Rich Holton wrote:

> I still don't understand the resistance to making all non-Foundation 
> sites no-follow. The fact that people disagree with the idea, but are 
> providing no rational reason, only encourages the perception that there 
> *is* conflict of interest in the current situation.

I have no real issue if it's done to all non-Wikipedia.org/Wikimedia.org 
sites.  I still disagree with it because I consider it awfully rude to 
use these sites as references and not provide them with the proper link 
weight, although we get it in return.  Even with it turned on on all 
Wikipedia/Wikimedia sites, it's still us artificially driving down 
outbound links and promoting links that are making the Foundation money, 
re: Answers.com.  So Answers.com, which does nothing except act as a 
secondary replicator of Wikipedia content (and does so in a less than 
great way, mind you), gets boosted in the rankings, drops down other 
more useful links that we ourselves use in our article writing, and then 
we take a cut of the Answers.com profits.
> 
> Let me emphasize: perception is important in this issue.

Yes, and the reality is what drives this perception away from "loony 
spam enablers" to something more vile.

-Jeff


-- 
Name: Jeff Raymond
E-mail: jeff.raymond at internationalhouseofbacon.com
WWW: http://www.internationalhouseofbacon.com
IM: badlydrawnjeff
Quote: "I was always a fan of Lisa Loeb, particularly
	because you kind of get the impression she
	sang every song either about or to her cats.
	They seem to be the driving force in most of
	her creative process."     - Chuck Klosterman