I've clicked on them, but only very rarely. Usually when I am thinking, 'what was that thing that Andy linked to a while back?'. And then I fail to find it...
Yes, that was what I was about to say. Some of the titles are a bit ambiguous or figurative, and the tags generally help resolve the question of what context I should be expecting to interpret the title in.
(That's not really a criticism of the titles, either; figurative and fun titles aren't a bad thing! It's just that if the tags went, the titles might then have a greater need to pass the "yes, but what is it?" test.)
Aye, same. I don't ever click them, though might if I was hunting down a particular post. OTOH, I'd be as likely to go direct to Delicious at that point.
From the point of view of someone reading your posts, they provide more context to the links made, and indeed allow you to make a quick commentary on them.
From the point of view of my own linkposts, I find them useful for those reasons, and also so I can call out certain specifics "NSFW", "semi-NSFW", "trigger warning" "idonotagreewiththepagelinkedto" are especially relevant, but also stuff like "comment" which I tend to use to say "This is someone's opinion; I'm not saying this is how the world is"
I haven't. I might do in future. But if putting them in is onerous, I wouldn't miss them enormously. I tend to tag my own posts weeks later rather than as I post them, and the tags are (I imagine) mostly for my own reference.
Might be worth clarifying that you don't mean the links themselves. I read it that way at first, and there's currently one comment which suggests to me the commenter is also reading it that way.
I rarely click like them to give context - if the article title is 'why dogs have big ears' I like to have a context as to whether the article will be a scientific one, or whether it's a funny cartoon. I'll click or not on the link, depending on what I'm on the mood for.
See, I try to make the description informative enough that one doesn't have to work it out from tags, because I primarily bookmark stuff to share on Twitter. The above results do nothing to remove my request that it be an option on your reposter, though :P
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
(That's not really a criticism of the titles, either; figurative and fun titles aren't a bad thing! It's just that if the tags went, the titles might then have a greater need to pass the "yes, but what is it?" test.)
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
From the point of view of someone reading your posts, they provide more context to the links made, and indeed allow you to make a quick commentary on them.
From the point of view of my own linkposts, I find them useful for those reasons, and also so I can call out certain specifics "NSFW", "semi-NSFW", "trigger warning" "idonotagreewiththepagelinkedto" are especially relevant, but also stuff like "comment" which I tend to use to say "This is someone's opinion; I'm not saying this is how the world is"
no subject
When I really have a lot of time, I will link the tags in search of 'more like this' kind of thing.
no subject
no subject
:->
no subject
no subject
no subject
I usually only click on tags to find my own old posts.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
I prefer the tags, I think/feel they give me much better info than the link itself probably would.
no subject
Also note, I tend to not vote in polls, but voted in this one! :)
no subject
no subject
no subject
What I'm going to do is give people access to the template code used to produce the code, as laid out here:
http://andrewducker.livejournal.com/2558148.html
If you remove the bit of that that's to do with tags then they won't appear. Magic!
(It's not doing that _yet_, but it will do, once I get some time to make that work.)
no subject
no subject