Traffic wise, it'll be a few hundred hits.
Actually, I get thousands anytime Whedonesque links to anything on my site.
People there probably didn't focus on the quote marks, because Nilly is a Buffista. I think it makes sense that Buffistas comment on it. Others don't know her. Buffistas do.
I don't think linking something from Whedonesque is in any way dodgy
It's jacked with our usage levels -- that's why we're usually cited indirectly.
CantStopTheSignal.co.uk is running at 9000 hits from Whedonesque this month, but that was a link for the DVD information.. It really depends on the potential interest for a story, I doubt it'll be much traffic in this case (not meaning to dismiss the quality of the work because I think Nillys review is excellent - it deserved being read by people, but there have been many reviews).
Yes, but regardless of what you think about how much traffic it will get (and you certainly have more experience with that than I do, since I have...none), shrift is a Buffista, and shriftweb is her site, and there's a lot of stuff for Buffistas and the fandom at large on that site. It just would have been nice to ask.
I hope a brazilian people read Nilly's review, because I think it's lovely. I don't hope shrift takes that bandwidth hit.
But hey, there's a reason we s/slashdotted/whedonesqued/g around here.
Dana - I had no idea what shiftweb was, is the thing.
Allyson, it was somebody here who suggested it should be put in front of JW's nose. If somebody doesn't want something putting on the internet, they probably shouldn't put it on the internet.
But here, we're polite.
I'd be interested to know if Nilly is remotely bothered by any of this.
I wouldn't dream of speaking for Nilly, ordinarily, but if experience tells me anything, it is that Nilly will say this is all her fault.
Curse wee Nilly for being brilliant!
Going home soon, will check bandwidth after I watch CSI... the show, not the Hodgeberries.
In general, I'm a fan of the "look, if you post it publically on the Internet it's gonna get linked and forwarded to your Great-Aunt Ethel" argument. In this case, though, b.org has specific negative history with being linked to on Whedonesque--didn't they crash us a couple of times?--so we try to avoid advertising our existence in that way. Just one of those cultural things.