1 minute read

[ Greg Reinacker @ 01/31/2003 04:29 PM](http://rateyourmusic.com/yaccs/commentsn?blog_id=90000007200&blog_entry_id=179#4401835). _What do you think of the http://www.newsgator.com/referrers?usersite=www.rassoc.com/gregr/weblog/ idea, similar to what Aggie and Radio do?_ > >

I guess I have mixed feelings about this: my first thought is that it is still appealing to the aggregator author’s desire to get people to their site. That said, however, it does distinguish between real referrers and these pseudo-referrer link-backs. If I were to look in my logs and discover that I was getting 24 hits each day for my RSS feed from a particular site that didn’t appear to link to me, this might be confusing.

I think this means that the referrer page ought to be one that says something to the effect of “you’re here because I read your feed and you’re checking your referrers”. With this in mind, I think I am in favour because it relieves the reader from having to create such a page.

So, the options appear (to me) to be one of:

  • Don’t send a referrer
  • Send a referrer of a custom page that explains why it is being used as a referrer
  • Send an aggregator specific page only when the URL includes a link to the reader