SciFi and Fantasy Book Club discussion
All About Goodreads
>
Linking outside Goodreads disabled
date
newest »
newest »
message 51:
by
Amy (Other Amy)
(new)
Sep 28, 2021 07:51AM
72 hours ago(ish), they banned unformatted links as well. We are now back to the original situation. Sorry that was unclear from my post.
reply
|
flag
Yes, for a short while you couldn't post links at all, but thankfully we at least have those back. Maybe that was their tactic, take away everything, and we'll be grateful for what we originally hated?
Maybe so! (It failed though; I still want my pretty links back.)
I posted this in one of my other groups, so I just copied and pasted it here. (Too lazy to type it again). Why haven't they done this?"Do you know what would be really helpful? Instead of these ridiculous surprise changes that are done without announcement, why don't they have a pop-up screen once someone logs in which tells of implemented changes? Kind of like with software versions. A pop-up box outlines the changes made in the latest version. That way we are all kept abreast of changes in a timely fashion."
I don't think being informed promptly of their shitty changes would improve my opinion all that much though tbh. Still lousy no matter which way you slice it.As a painful coincidence, it was just as I was making my first post in a while, with an embedded hyperlink, that I was thinking about the elegant simplicity of it. How it reminded me of the double-readings of Japanese 'ateji' - leading to more information but without interrupting the flow of a sentence. And then: ERROR! Ugh.
The opinion might not improve, but in the case of the changed privacy settings they really, really needed to do it. Most people have no idea their settings have changed and won't be getting their group newsletters as a result.The formatted links are just so much nicer! and they provide a nice moment for intertextuality too.
Yeah you're right. When trying to link, there is at least the ERROR feedback, but in the case of changed privacy settings, it results in blocked communication that users won't even know they missed until too late.
I didn't reply earlier because I've been away from the laptop and didn't feel like typing a longer post on my phone while curled into a ball under the blankets.Michelle, I very much agree with you. One of the first things I contacted support about after I joined Goodreads was "Can you please have a Known Issues thread in Feedback?!" They never started one, but the Help thingy now has one. The few times I've gone and looked at it, the issue I've been interested in has never been listed. A site this size would save so much in support contacts if they just informed us of things that are about to be fixed. And definitely inform us about deliberate changes, please!
This link issue is quite annoying and apparently there aren't ways around it.
Tomas wrote: "Worse, it won't stop those bots with links to p0rn and other dubious places in their profile from spam-liking your updates.I wish they dealt with that, or with fake ratings/reviews"
Me too.
How often do you suppose the porn people are bots, vs. people trying to drum up business for their XXX site, vs. real people whose Goodreads account has been hacked? I have occasionally told those who I think are regular people (maybe pic, friends, regular book ratings) and notified them to change their password.
Bonnie wrote: "How often do you suppose the porn people are bots, vs. people trying to drum up business for their XXX site, vs. real people whose Goodreads account has been hacked?"Sorry for the late reply... I don't have notifications for this thread.
Pretty much all cases I've personally seen had the same message, differences may've been in the link itself, which I didn't open, obviously. So it's highly likely the messages are botted. That said, the bots are very likely to use hacked profiles rather than create new ones, for more authenticity.
People who'd want to genuinely direct other people to their XXX site would use better places for it.
That said, they seem to have changed their approach - the link is no more in their profile info but as a comment way down on their profile. So it's quite a bad place to be seen. However, that fact makes it way easier to report so when I get a suspicious like, I go right down to that section and report that message, instead of going through the major fuss it takes to report someone's profile.
Agreed, Anna. The cure is worse than the disease. Example: The GR Beta Group exists for readers to offer their services to writers. If a writer tries to respond by direct message to a reader soliciting their work, the response will be: Sorry, this person isn't accepting messages (though in reality, this person wants the message).
That person has clearly changed their settings so that people can't message them, and can easily change to accept if they want to do so?
Yes and no. This began a year or so ago. Previously, DMs by default were not blocked. GR made the change without notification, and even the moderators of the Beta Group were blocked. At the time, the moderators could not find a solution, and GR was unresponsive. Before posting my first comment here, I checked Beta and found two of the three free beta readers blocked (I thought the third might be a GR friend, and I believe I could DM GR friends). My need to DM beta readers tapered off after the new year, so admittedly I haven't been tracking the situation. GR has never notified me that DMs are blocked by default, or provided any information on changing the settings (Profile settings?). I'd bet that new beta readers who post solicitations aren't aware that DMs are blocked by default. What I found with links was that GR truncated or distorted links, so that if I DM'd a GR friend, the link would take them to an unintended address.
True, but people can change their settings back. We can't flip a switch to make links work. Both changes were made to combat spammers, one makes sense to me, the other doesn't. I do agree that Goodreads isn't very good at informing people about changes, or communication in general.(Please note that I shouldn't be able to tell who is an author outside of the Authors' folder.)
Your rule of thumb is noted.
Idk why am I here in 2024.Mine seems work. Seems
