"Question about image posting etiquette on TMP" Topic

I have noticed that a lot of posts to show pictures of something seem to have a couple of teaser pics and then a link to an offsite blog or other something with a much larger number of images.

I could see it being a good practice to avoid immediately flooding the bandwidth of everyone that investigates the post. On the other hand, following links to different site entails a certain amount of trust in the poster that the other site is clean of malware or annoying tracking cookies, etc.

Is this the expected norm for TMP? I didn't see it listed as a rule in the FAQ, but that doesn't mean it isn't a respected local custom.

[edit]Apologies for the multiple posts[/edit]

I think it's a common compromise across wargaming sites. Bloggers wanting traffic and not having to repeat themselves post a teaser on forums to encourage readers to click through. Those who only post a link often generate a negative response, in my experience.

So it is more for driving traffic to blogs than about being bandwidth conscious? Not being a blogger (or a poster in many forums), I wondered whether just inlining more than a couple of images in a post might be considered bad practice.

I like the teaser way then the link, probably not go to but a small percentage but if I like the teaser will see the rest of the blog. I like it better when the blogger is posti ng for sure.

I concur with citizen sade. I'm a blogger myself, and have probably created hundreds of threads here at TMP with links to hundreds of my own blog posts. I usually post at least several pics here, but far less than the total number at my linked blog post. For me this choice is driven by multiple reasons. First is the simple matter of the time and effort needed to create "illustrated" posts here on TMP, which in my experience often requires at least some time-consuming "editing" to make sure the images actually appear, rather than just url links. Second is the aforementioned desire to encourage -- aka: "drive" -- interested parties to visit my blog, where they can read more text on the topic and see more images. As citizen sade says, this is a somewhat common "compromise" practice.

Speaking for myself, I don't worry that clicking through to a gamer's blog post will leave me open to infection by malware or annoying cookies. After more than a decade spent clicking on links to personal blogs posted by fellow hobbyists here on TMP, I don't think that's ever happened. The worst I've experienced is visiting someone's blog that's been "monetized" to feature paid ads, which some may find annoying to look at, but don't carry any threat of spreading computer viruses, at least that I know of.

Over on LAF (the Lead Adventure Forum) the "local custom" is slightly different, with users starting a thread then adding to it over and over again as time, and the project in question, go on, often over the course of many years.

Here on TMP people put up a post, others comment, sometimes the original poster replies, then the post generally slips away into the vault of the past. I suppose the up side of this is more new and timely topics at the top of the "feed", but the down side is that awesome topics can slip away and be forgotten very fast, especially if for whatever reason they don't prove to be popular with the membership.

I can't speak for anyone else, but "bandwidth consciousness" never had anything to do with my decisions re: thread content here. On occasion I have created threads here on TMP with several dozen photos of terrain, troops, and games, and never had a problem with them.

OK thanks. I don't have a blog, and was mainly concerned that if I put too many images in a post, it might not be well-received. Re: bad links etc--some forums actively discourage linking to external sites, whether it is a real danger or not is a different issue. Just trying to "do as the Romans do" but wasn't sure what that was. Seems as though flexibility is the order of the day.

OMG!

If you really are worried, either upgrade your computer/phone/tablet security, OR don't click on the links.

Will Bill now be required to "certify" that every link to a post is clean, in addition to providing the citations for where the post link originates from (like he's been doing to pacify other complainers here)?

I certainly hope NOT, since I suspect he has a lot of other better things to do to keep the site running.

Not worried, just wanting to do the right thing, according to local practices. My concerns are about what I post, not about reading other people's posts.

Don't mind the locals they're harmless.

But for gods sake, don't feed them after dark!

Or get them wet!

I find that including links to my Blog is the best process for me. I am aware that there are some who don't like this practice but they have the right NOT TO CLICK on the link. For me the thought of copying everything over on to TMP from the Blog just defeats the objective of the Blog…..

I do try to at least include an image or a teaser in the TMP message but fully understand that they don't have to.

I'm at a loss at to what complainers want – my main aim is to keep MY blog updated with regular content and not just be a TMP poster.

Tony
Click if you want to…..
dampfpanzerwagon.blogspot.com