[BNM] [Fwd: www or no www]

[delarge]

yeah - I always knock the www. out - it's cumbersome and quite pointless

Isn't there some influence on search engine ranking as well?
If you have www. AND no www. - isn't it counted a 2 sites/duplicate content?

--
Paul Burgess

http://iampaulburgess.co.uk


On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 11:49 AM, Antony Jones <antonyj at gamesys.co.uk>wrote:

> I think there is a general consensus that having www is pointless
>
> http://no-www.org/
>
> I think it's quite attractive, but I agree with no-www. It's redundant.
>
> Ant
>
> On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 11:45 +0100, Mat Walker wrote:
>
> >
> > -------- Original Message --------
> > Subject:      www or no www
> > Date:         Mon, 20 Oct 2008 13:54:49 +0100
> > From:         Beth Granter <bethgranter at yahoo.co.uk>
> > Reply-To:     beth at bethgranter.com
> > To:   bnmlist-owner at brightonnewmedia.org
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Everyone,
> >
> > My new workplace's website doesn't work without the www
> > (http://www.twentyfirst.com <http://www.twentyfirst.com/> works,
> > http://twentyfirst.com <http://twentyfirst.com/> doesn't) and I've been
> > put in charge of managing a rebuild of the site... so this is something
> > I'd like to change. Our IT team have told me that it is bad practice to
> > not use the www, and because we host the site ourselves and the domain
> > without the www is used for our mailserver (or something - there was
> > some techy reason that apparently we cannot make it work, which I didn't
> > totally get). So if anyone could give me their vote on whether it is
> > good or bad practice to have no www in your URL functioning and why, it
> > would be much appreciated.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Beth
> > http://bethgranter.com <http://bethgranter.com/> (no www necessary
> there!)
> >
> --
>
> BNM Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://www.brightonnewmedia.org/options/bnmlist
>
> BNM powered by Wessex Networks:
> http://www.wessexnetworks.com
>