Criteria For Links

I have decided to yank some of the links to other blogs and sources. The reason for that is that I am not inclined to advertize sites that I think could do more to be user friendly. I’m referring specifically to the allowance or not of reader feedback via comments sections. If we can’t comment, that’s fine, but I wont send others your way. Some sites may be more amenable to that than others. I will try to determine whether a site (that I’m thinking of linking to) that doesn’t allow visitor comments can be forgiven for that.

That ban includes sites that disallow all but Facebook users to join in the conversation. You besmirch your progressive credentials, in my view, when you do that.

The links that were on my site and that I’ve yanked do not indicate that I have a low opinion of the site or it’s owner(s). Other than the ‘mainstream media’ section of my links, sites that I’ve linked to, whether or not I have removed some of them, are all sites that I think are good.

There are sites I would have linked to but for some issue that keeps me from doing so. Sites that fall into that category are sites that I would like to support, but they are too busy or confusing in some way. One site that I’m thinking of carries articles whose authors are hard to determine, not because no names are appended to the posts, but because the site’s owner signs the post as well. Who is the author of the post? And the name affixed to the post is not a proper name. So is that a handle for an individual or the name of the website?