Is this a self-link?

October 10, 2002 5:29 AM

Is linking to your employer's site within a post a self-link?
posted by i_cola to Etiquette/Policy at 5:29 AM (38 comments total)

Depends if you're trying to get a raise ...
posted by feelinglistless at 5:41 AM on October 10, 2002

I can see why it would be, but I think it depends on the context or relevance -- and whether it's the focus of the post. In this case, I think it's OK -- as the poster points out the story is about a rival animation company.
posted by feelinglistless at 5:43 AM on October 10, 2002

i_cola, I can see where you are coming from, but I disagree it's a self link. Some background:

- I work on a contract basis for Aardman.

- I've freelanced for many different companies in the past 6 or so years, if I was banned from posting anything to do with past or present employers I'd be pretty quiet.

- Aardman were mentioned within the original BBC article, from which the post text was directly taken.

- The only addition to the post was pointing out Bolex brothers connection.

- Bolex brothers are Aardmans direct competitors.

- Aardman are a triple Oscar winning animation studio and one of the only British Animation studios to release a successful feature film in the last few decades. It's pretty hard to mention animation, without mentioning them.

- The Aardman site gets 100's of thousands of visits a day and is linked from many, national, international and personal sites. A Metafilter post would do little to boost their profile.

- Lastly, if it was a self link, I'd link to my own site, which gets around 5 visits a day
posted by MintSauce at 5:46 AM on October 10, 2002

oh .. and there's lots of stuff I'd like to promote on the Aardman site if it was allowed. But have resisted doing so far *cough*
posted by MintSauce at 5:49 AM on October 10, 2002

Self-linking doesn't only happen when you link to the least-trafficked sites that you are associated with...

The success of the site receiving the link and the fact that they don't really need the traffic has no effect whatsoever on whether or not it's a self-link.

Linking to a competitor within a story does not nullify a self-link.

The fact that you're a contract employee also has little (ok, well, nothing) to do with whether this is a self-link.

Many people here have worked in many places in the last 6 or so years, and manage to post great (arms-length) links with astonishing consistency.

posted by websavvy at 6:04 AM on October 10, 2002

Um, uh--good post and all, MintSauce!--I'm interested now. But it's good Metiquette to avoid para-breaks. maybe a (br), if you really need it, would do the trick.

Now look at me--I'm turning into MediaReport, only too wimpy and polite. Aargh! ; )
posted by Shane at 6:12 AM on October 10, 2002

I think the post could have been better constructed with the link to the beeb story, Bolex & some Magic Roundabout links. Then you could have posted a link to Chicken Run as the first comment with a disclaimer that you are working for Aardman.

I don't think that you're linking for nefarious reasons but it tends to be frowned upon...
posted by i_cola at 6:13 AM on October 10, 2002

It seems like a pretty clear self-link to me -- a person could easily have something to gain by sending traffic to an employer.

When you consider that undisclosed conflict of interest and the promotional tone of the post ("confident it will rival the success of the animated film Chicken Run, which earned £30m"), it's a pretty subpar link.
posted by rcade at 6:14 AM on October 10, 2002

(I guess I should also clarify that a para-break on MeFi resilts in a triple-space, not double.)
posted by Shane at 6:15 AM on October 10, 2002

In related MetaTalk news: how many angels CAN dance on the head of a pin?
posted by briank at 6:16 AM on October 10, 2002

Dressmaker's pin or drawing pin?
posted by Grangousier at 6:30 AM on October 10, 2002

MetaTalk discussions pretty quickly turn into 'yes you did, no you didnt' discussions so this will be my last post regarding the subject. I'll leave the rest to Matt.

Websavvy:
The fact that you're a contract employee also has little (ok, well, nothing) to do with whether this is a self-link.
I've worked, or am working for, Reuters, PA, BBC, ITV, Dreamworks and Universal among others. Not allowing me to post to anything regarding them is kinda restrictive.

rcade
a person could easily have something to gain by sending traffic to an employer.
I gain nothing from those links. As i stated in my reply, there's plenty of sites I could of sent you to if I wanted to gain anything.

Promotional tone of the post
Was direct from the BBC article, not me.

Shane
But it's good Metiquette to avoid para-breaks.
The para-breaking looks fine on my screen, what am I doing wrong? :o)
posted by MintSauce at 6:54 AM on October 10, 2002

I think a full disclosure bit at the bottom of the post would have made everyone happy. Well, most everyone.
posted by PrinceValium at 6:56 AM on October 10, 2002

MintSauce, you don't see this as a slippery slope in any way, shape or form?
posted by machaus at 6:57 AM on October 10, 2002

MintSauce: No one is accusing you of gaining anything from the link. Linking to an employer is suspect, as a general rule, because of the obvious potential for personal benefit. We've had instances in the past where an employer encouraged someone to promote the business here.

As for the idea that it's "restrictive" to be unable to link to employers, so what? I don't see how that's a problem any more than the "kinda restrictive" rule that keeps me from linking to that great Internet site Cruel.com.
posted by rcade at 7:35 AM on October 10, 2002

In the same vein, and b/c I don't think this meris another thread, how do we feel about putting a trackback to your blog in a post that you made, before anybody else has commented in it? We've fortunately not had to deal with abuse of trackbacks yet, but this may be the first example (that I've seen). Thanks to dash_slot for pointing it out.
posted by Ufez Jones at 7:40 AM on October 10, 2002

The para-breaking looks fine on my screen, what am I doing wrong? :o)

Guess I goofed when I said triple--I see two line spaces between each para instead of one. Maybe it's my browser, or the size of my window.

But, anyway, usually para-breaks will get people bitching on MeTa. Some people, including owner/bartender/host of MetaPlace (Matt), object to these because people tend to think each para is a separate post, creating momentary confusion as people read the front page.

I had trouble with avoiding separate para's at first because I'm kind of anal about grammar. People, even people who have been on MeFi and know about the fuss, still use para's, of course--but they are frowned upon. Even (br)s are often frowned upon, though, and sometimes all of this frowning is just futile. So have a happy day!

Me, I need to get out more.
posted by Shane at 7:43 AM on October 10, 2002

i was wondering why this thread wasn't called out as an obvious self-link.
posted by modge at 7:50 AM on October 10, 2002

Self-linking aside, I just don't see why the item is post-worthy. Maybe I'm missing something ... Robbie Williams is going to do the voice work for an animated kids show, and I should care why?

I think that if the topic of the post had been less obscure and mundane, no one would care if it were a remote self-link or not. The fact that the topic has little to do with anything means that most people will wonder why it was posted in the first place. The fact that you have financial ties to the topic is the most likely excuse for the post.
posted by crunchland at 7:52 AM on October 10, 2002

modge .. while it's hosted on cam's site, I don't think cam produced it. He's only providing a place for us to view it which is, in itself, fine.
posted by crunchland at 7:54 AM on October 10, 2002

Moral of the Story: Do anything remotely approaching self-linkage and you may as well start a MeTaThread defending yourself before everyone else does. Best to avoid the situation altogether when possible.
posted by Shane at 8:03 AM on October 10, 2002

Crunchland: Not so fast.
posted by rcade at 8:06 AM on October 10, 2002

sub-standard post + questionable self promotion = gone.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 8:22 AM on October 10, 2002

rcade, I thought the exact same thing. If we're getting rid of a minor self-link like MintSauce's, we should be bagging Cam's, too.
posted by me3dia at 8:45 AM on October 10, 2002

Ho hum, Matt has spoken and I accept his viewpoint.

I disagree that the post was sub-standard, perhaps more relevant to UK readers, but not substandard. I also find it difficult how we are meant to apply the 'self linking' rules to freelancers and small industries, i.e. who else is gonna post about the UK animation industry ...

but hey .. can't win 'em all :)
posted by MintSauce at 8:53 AM on October 10, 2002

MintSauce: *ahem*
posted by i_cola at 9:09 AM on October 10, 2002

Now look at me--I'm turning into MediaReport, only too wimpy and polite.

Will someone please RELEASE THOSE GODDAMN FLYING MONKEYS ALREADY!?
posted by mediareport at 9:10 AM on October 10, 2002

Not so fast.

Ok, rcade. You win. I notice that the link mentioned in that thread was deleted, but I don't see any indication of why it was. I suspect it was because the link was weak, not because it was hosted on the writer's website.

But you are right, according to that thread, if Cam could have found another location for the listserv email, he probably should have. And since Cam's link had no links referring back to stuff he produced, I think we can all agree that there's no harm in that.
posted by crunchland at 9:20 AM on October 10, 2002

...but Cam's post was more at home on a mailing list "can you guys help me with this problem?" than metafilter. I should have deleted it at the time.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 9:37 AM on October 10, 2002

crunchland, steve_at_linnwood emailed matt and asked him to delete it.
posted by modge at 9:38 AM on October 10, 2002

Minty, it's cool when people work somewhere and have insider info on stuff and post about it, but you do risk being impartial. That said, most people posting stuff of that nature do it in a nice way that doesn't seem promotional.

But your post (at least to me, an ugly american) is totally uninteresting. A couple disposable pop stars doing voices for a remake of something I've never heard of? And it's supposed to make lots and lots of money? And that's worth reading the links and talking about because...?

I would put every "oh my god N*SYNC star blah blah blah is going to be in the next star wars!" post in the same pile. The bit about how it would make money I think tipped people off. That's usally the least interesting part of movies: how much money they make.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 9:45 AM on October 10, 2002

so then there's no good reason for linking something on your own server - either for mirror purposes, or because the item isn't available online, or what have you?
posted by crunchland at 9:45 AM on October 10, 2002

so then there's no good reason for linking something on your own server

No, if there's no other location for it, and it's amazing (see post from a year ago or so, where CNN misplaced european countries on their world map, on air, a screencap of which was unavailable anywhere but the person's site that made the post), it's cool.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 10:01 AM on October 10, 2002

That's usally the least interesting part of movies: how much money they make.

I agree. I wish someone would tell the media.
posted by timeistight at 10:12 AM on October 10, 2002

Matt: In the case of the Magic Roundabout you really do want to hear about it, but the UK original not the remake.

One of those kids progs that was just too good for kids...
posted by i_cola at 11:10 AM on October 10, 2002

Zebedee arrived...
cultural translation service
It's kinda like if Pixar were to do a feature length Gumby movie, with JLo and PDiddy on voices.

Source material is maybe not a super-nutritious post in itself, but good starting material for meta-cultural discussion (old wine in new skins etc). i_cola, I'd say it's a good show for kids of all ages. Well referenced links here. I think the Frenglish redub angle is pretty interesting too (third para here).
posted by stinglessbee at 12:44 PM on October 10, 2002

see post from a year ago or so, where CNN misplaced european countries on their world map

But Matt - that wasn't on MetaFilter; that was on the legendary MetaFiles.

(Dusted off specially from The Really Old Joke Department)
posted by MiguelCardoso at 1:04 PM on October 10, 2002

I, er, wasn't all that smart, Ufez: it seemed really odd, and I kinda fished around till I made sense of it (took all of 3 mins, I think). A worthy post in itself, surely, but ever -so-slightly tarnished by that action, in my opinion.
posted by dash_slot- at 8:01 PM on October 10, 2002