



Note the progress feature should include the Announcer, Booster, and Publicist badges.

share|improve this question
add comment

2 Answers

If you are really serious about your announcer badge, you can set things like you can use a tracker that can record the incoming traffic on your link (maybe a blog), or you can use webmaster facilities by google or bing.

Anyways, it is a good idea.

share|improve this answer
add comment

There are three possible solutions to this problem to create a better user experience that also makes it easy to track links:

1. Enlist Stack Exchange developers in displaying the number of clicks beside each shared link in a "shared links stats" page.

The argument for this feature is it may encourage more sharing of links, which is especially important on beta sites. The argument against this feature is that there are already existing tools that track clicks on links. If the argument against this feature wins, then see the next proposed solution...


2. Make it easier to use url shortening services by integrating them with the "share" links below each post.

Many of these services have an API. Stack Exchange developers could implement this, but any developer could implement this as a Stack App user script or browser add-on!**

By making it easier to use url shortening services, we encourage link-sharing without making people go through extra steps who wish to track links. While the first option may potentially reach more users, the second option is potentially easier to implement and allows users to consider to use existing tracking tools outside of Stack Exchange.

The share links that you see today under each post, implemented by Stack Exchange, was originally created as a user script on Stack Apps. It may be possible to use that code as a starting point to expand the share links and integrate them with popular url shortening services.


3. Enlist Stack Exchange API developers to add the stats to the Stack Exchange API.

Adding the stats to the Stack Exchange API seems like a good first step, since the data can at least be made available to add-on/extension and user script developers while not bogging down Stack Exchange developers/designers with more stuff to do.

Option 3 is more advantageous than option 2 because it exposes data for links users have currently shared. For instance, I have links I've been sharing for more than two years. Unless Stack Exchange exposes this information, it's unavailable for any links I haven't shared using shorteners.

share|improve this answer
Anything that leads to more URL shorteners on the internet can only be a bad thing –  Richard Tingle Nov 17 '13 at 22:15
@RichardTingle, you mean more url shorteners, or more use of url shorteners? And just curious, what do you see as the problem with them? –  jmort253 Nov 17 '13 at 22:20
But, yeh, ideally we'd get SE to put together a stats page. That way it's backwards compatible with all our stuff and eliminates any debate about the use of url shorteners... –  jmort253 Nov 17 '13 at 22:21
Either, both, god I hate them. And the surprise! website at the end of them. There's no way to check you really are going where you think you're going when you click them. Also, we are actively trying to clear them off stack overflow at the moment and it would seem a bit hypocritical to encourage them on other sites –  Richard Tingle Nov 17 '13 at 22:35
@RichardTingle it's too bad browsers don't have lookahead features, like you mouseover the link and see the true url. I can understand why folks don't like them, but being able to track your sharing efforts and SEO efforts is super useful. –  jmort253 Nov 17 '13 at 22:37
It's also a solution to a problem that should never have existed which is never pleasing –  Richard Tingle Nov 17 '13 at 22:39
@RichardTingle there is at least one status bar plugin (I have one such for Safari) that will expand all redirects. So no more surprise urls. –  MichaelT Nov 18 '13 at 5:23
@MichaelT Also a solution to a problem that should never have existed –  Richard Tingle Nov 18 '13 at 7:51
add comment

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .