[Vision2020] Hmmm

[Kenneth Marcy]

On Friday 18 December 2009 17:51:08 Paul Rumelhart wrote:
> Agreed.  I'd also like to point out that if you're not texting or
> tweeting, the use of url shortening should be considered unwise. 
> This is a good example of why that is.  I like to know where I'm
> going when I click a link.

Which do you consider preferable -- a non-shortened URL in excess of 
one message line length, perhaps 100 or 150 or 200 or more characters 
long, which you can read, or a shortened URL which may, or may not, 
give you a clue as to the link's destination?

Is any consideration to be given for the e-mail readers' ease in using 
a URL, given that longer, line-wrapped URLs are more cumbersome?


Ken