Chris, I'm sorry
I hate the overuse of URL shortners like tinyurl. I like to be able to see what a link is before I click on it. I don’t like that these companies get to be yet another point of surveillance. (To be fair, tinyurl doesn’t seem to be taking advantage of that. I have cookies from tr.im and su.pr, but not TinyURL.) And so I edited your comment to replace a tinyurl with a full url, and commented that I “corrected it.”
I shouldn’t have done that, I should have just commented about it.
(If this blog was a Kindle, I’d undo it.)
One of hte other issues with the URL shorteners is it chokepoints the free interconnectivity of the net. Postings, blog entries, articles, etc that use URL shorteners are putting their information references at the whim of some third party redirector. If that redirector goes away (and they will), the connection is lost.
Twitter I can understanding needing the shorteners. But I really think folks should use full URLs whenever feasible.
I thought about it at the time, actually. The actual link was freakin’ huge, and I was too lazy to write the tags. I’ve been chided elsewhere for embedding long links in comments, so maybe I was overly cautious.
In any case, there’s certainly no need to apologize for being Gallant where I was Goofus.