Lack of interest Display Link Reputation: 'more about this website...'

This suggestion has been closed automatically because it did not receive enough votes over an extended period of time. If you wish to see this, please search for an open suggestion and, if you don't find any, post a new one.

Alpha1

Well-known member
In forum discussions, arguments are often referenced with external links to provide credence. To give the reader perspective about a posted link, its useful to have a function that displays information about the website that is linked to.
For example there is a difference between the reliability of a scientific study on pubmed and a blog on infowars. It adds value to our communities to show some tidbits of information. This is what Facebook displays when you click onthe info icon on an unfurled link:

Screenshot_2019-07-13 Facebook.png
 
Upvote 1
This suggestion has been closed. Votes are no longer accepted.
This is one thing I dilike about site information.

It's implying that TED (assuming for the moment that it's not well known) has authority because it was registered more than 10 years ago.

While TED has always been registered and used as we know it today, what's stopping me from purchasing a 10 year old domain on the aftermarket and changing its original use in order to deceive being an authoritative figure?

My main forum was registered 10 years ago, and shows as such on FB, but I acquired it in early 2018, retaining the 10 year "registration date" that's prominently displayed on Facebook under site info, and changing it to a forum.
 
Neither age of domain nor how long you register the domain for matters at all in Google ranking.


Additionally, domain authority is not a ranking factor. It's a concept invented by Moz.

 
Last edited:
Neither age of domain nor how long you register the domain for matters at all in Google ranking.

In this case, ranking and SEO need not apply.

You can buy an old domain and post links on Facebook from it, as a newly created site, and the site info shown to users somewhat implies that it's a trustworthy source because it's 10 years old, and not 10 days.
 
The point about the age of the domain is to avoid spoof domains. i.e. if someone would register xenforo.co today and host fake xenforo news on it, then it would be easy to miss when a link is posted an unfurled. The domain age details helps with noticing scams like that.

Here are some good examples of sites mimicking the url of real news outlets:
 
The point about the age of the domain is to avoid spoof domains. i.e. if someone would register xenforo.co today and host fake xenforo news on it, then it would be easy to miss when a link is posted an unfurled. The domain age details helps with noticing scams like that.

Here are some good examples of sites mimicking the url of real news outlets:
While that may be true, I think that it also gives the impression of authoritative content to older domains that really only existed for a year. I would generally think that more people are smarter than that... but, you never know. Whereas more people are statistical and see X years, thus see it as an authoritative source.

This seems more like an addon and expanding the unfurl system to me, though. However, not because we have a differering opinion. It's because 1 unmentioned site charges over 500 API JSON queries to gather that data while another starts at $2 per 1000. I'm sure that even big boards don't post over a thousand or so unique domains per month, so it shouldn't be a costly endeavor, but it is one above and beyond that a site owner has to accept (much like Amazon SES for email).

The other option, for more advanced users, is installing a command-line whois program to get the information. Though, the drawback with this is most have 1 dedicated IP and whois servers throttle requests so you may need to unfurl and shove them in a queue, displaying the registration dates later.

Either way, they could be cached (500 free or 1000 for $2) and re-ran each month to ensure the domains still exist with a whitelist of obvious (Yahoo, etc.) and stored locally to save money.

The negatives of the implementation outweigh the positives, in your case, trickery with a domain when we have moderators and other community members who should pick up on that and delete and/or edit or report the post.
 
Top Bottom