Timeline for Should app dependent answers with dead links be replaced with AppBrain's links?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
4 events
when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Jan 7, 2019 at 21:48 | comment | added | Izzy Mod | For "wouldn't bother", it's a quite detailed answer – and I agree with everything except the first sentence #D Or well, maybe rewrite it to "I wouldn't bother actively searching for such content"? But when "accidentally stumbling upon", it would be a good action. | |
Jan 7, 2019 at 14:20 | comment | added | Dan Hulme | I agree, we shouldn't be concerned by what visitors do outside our site, I just don't want to be giving users red-herring links: "You can solve your problem with this app. You can find out all about the app on appbrain link but you have to find the app yourself because it's banned/unmaintained" | |
Jan 7, 2019 at 13:21 | comment | added | Firelord Mod | Should we be concerned by what means a user is obtaining an APK? As long as we are not suggesting that illegal or unethical means be used, should it not be left for the user to decide from where to obtain the APK? My proposal of using AppBrain links is to leave a door open for some users who might be willing to search an app, no matter where it is hosted. It is just that this comes at a cost of majority visitors who won't be able to use the AppBrain information for anything. I'm looking for a justifiable tradeoff here. | |
Jan 7, 2019 at 12:39 | history | answered | Dan Hulme | CC BY-SA 4.0 |