How would that help me?

IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO

1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User

Welcome to IWETHEY!

Post #313,419 by drook 9/2/09 8:23:36 AM Reply	How would that help me? -- Drew
Post #313,423 by folkert 9/2/09 8:42:43 AM Reply	Re: How would that help me? For blogs other than yours? You have to admit: cooklikeyourgrandmother.com is a LOT hard to type and get right than: clygm.com And given the Tweets/SMS/IM character limits, shorter is always better. I know you aren't going after the IM/SMS crowd, but it never hurts to plan ahead in case you NEED it. Considering the price per year... $1/month or less, is it really NOT worth having it at least reserved? (or owned but not used)
Post #313,429 by drook 9/2/09 9:43:36 AM Reply	It's got to be pronounceable Dave Weiner over at scripting.com has been doing a lot of work lately on URL shortening services. The problem is that if one of them goes down a large number of links go dead. His solution is that you have to own your own short names. Having the short URL for my own links would solve that problem, but at the expense of having to set up a 301 redirect for every hit to it, pointing to the corresponding long URL. My URLs are pretty long after the domain anyway, so it's not really saving that much. My site isn't really conducive to reading on a phone anyway, unless you've got enough screen space to be using email instead of SMS anyway, so I'm not terribly worried about the short URLs. Bottom line is I can say "cook like your grandmother dot com" and people get it right. "see el why gee em" won't stick more than 30 seconds for most people. -- Drew
Post #313,440 by folkert 9/2/09 12:27:52 PM Reply	The 301 is a single re-write rule in Apache. As for the pronounceable short URLs... I think you are missing the point in the first place. But I can see your point, stinking in the brain is important. cooklygm.com `greg@maxime:~ [0] $ whois -H cooklygm.com Whois Server Version 2.0 No match for "COOKLYGM.COM". >>> Last update of whois database: Wed, 02 Sep 2009 16:19:57 UTC <<<` And the Redirect would be something like: `RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} blog.cooklygm.com$ [OR] RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} cooklygm.com$ RewriteRule ^/$ http://blog.cooklikeyourgrandmother.com/ [R=301,L]`

Any way to see if ISPs are blocking my domain? - (drook) - (29) - Sept. 1, 2009, 09:26:19 AM EDT

not that way - (boxley) - (14) - Sept. 1, 2009, 09:40:55 AM EDT

Symptoms suggest a block, not DNS - (drook) - (13) - Sept. 1, 2009, 09:48:33 AM EDT

maybe a corporate ban? - (boxley) - (12) - Sept. 1, 2009, 11:16:43 AM EDT

Yup, sounds like a problem at the user's end. -NT - (Andrew Grygus) - (11) - Sept. 1, 2009, 11:54:39 AM EDT

That's what I thought until I got the second report - (drook) - (10) - Sept. 2, 2009, 02:29:34 AM EDT

More Like Cache Poisoning. - (folkert) - (9) - Sept. 2, 2009, 07:09:07 AM EDT

looks like that "shortcut" domain might be available. - (folkert) - (4) - Sept. 2, 2009, 08:21:44 AM EDT

How would that help me? -NT - (drook) - (3) - Sept. 2, 2009, 08:23:36 AM EDT

Re: How would that help me? - (folkert) - (2) - Sept. 2, 2009, 08:42:43 AM EDT

It's got to be pronounceable - (drook) - (1) - Sept. 2, 2009, 09:43:36 AM EDT

The 301 is a single re-write rule in Apache. - (folkert) - Sept. 2, 2009, 12:27:52 PM EDT

Dammit, just got another report it's not coming up - (drook) - (3) - Sept. 4, 2009, 09:29:51 AM EDT

What is comes down to I think... - (folkert) - (2) - Sept. 4, 2009, 03:47:49 PM EDT

How about "ns1.aplus.net"? -NT - (drook) - (1) - Sept. 4, 2009, 04:57:02 PM EDT

Sweet! - (folkert) - Sept. 4, 2009, 07:24:39 PM EDT

pro2.abac.com == 66.226.64.3 == cooklikeyourgrandmother.com - (folkert) - (13) - Sept. 1, 2009, 06:49:39 PM EDT

one more, you've got *NO* SPF/DKIM/SenderIP records... - (folkert) - (12) - Sept. 1, 2009, 07:05:18 PM EDT

I dont have DKIM senderid spf and Im not blocked :-) - (boxley) - (2) - Sept. 1, 2009, 07:38:42 PM EDT

Yes, I understand that Bill. - (folkert) - (1) - Sept. 1, 2009, 07:55:37 PM EDT

Re: Yes, I understand that Bill. - (boxley) - Sept. 1, 2009, 08:27:33 PM EDT

Bleurgh ... gotta do some reading - (drook) - (8) - Sept. 1, 2009, 08:41:39 PM EDT

I find all this stuff rather scary, myself. - (Another Scott) - (3) - Sept. 1, 2009, 08:57:25 PM EDT

I guess it's a noble effort. - (static) - (2) - Sept. 1, 2009, 09:04:49 PM EDT

I've been thinking about going the OTHER way. - (folkert) - (1) - Sept. 1, 2009, 10:50:45 PM EDT

That's the direction I've been going - (drook) - Sept. 2, 2009, 12:46:47 AM EDT

here ya go - (boxley) - (3) - Sept. 1, 2009, 10:44:13 PM EDT

Are you serious? - (drook) - (2) - Sept. 2, 2009, 12:38:31 AM EDT

stuff like that interests me, but I understand it - (boxley) - (1) - Sept. 2, 2009, 08:05:31 AM EDT

Speaking of sausage, You see the recent... - (folkert) - Sept. 2, 2009, 08:34:25 AM EDT

Many of the dead have finished being dead without the assistance of medical staff or fancy equipment. It would be good if people could help with the swift opening of bags that are wiggling and/or noisy.
123 ms