If I paste a URL into a post Jive will attempt to replace the link with something related to the webpage that the link is intended for.
Sometimes this is useful, but then again sometimes what Jive replaces the link with is distinctly unhelpful or uninformative.
Is there any way to override this replacement?
Example 1 - here is a random link to a thread in this Community. I obfuscated the URL first to allow it to be displayed
"https://community[dot]mcafee[dot]com/thread/73458" is replaced by Jive with
In this case replacing the message info with the thread title is useful.
Example 2 - a link to BleepingComputer
is replaced with
Okay, that one is reasonably descriptive, but doesn't really show where the link goes. All you can see is that it's a forum somewhere. And there are other examples where the text that Jive uses to replace the link gives no clue at all to the destination.
If there isn't an override option for this, why can't we have a SiteAdvisor rating for external links displayed within the post? They can do it in Facebook, so why not here?
It's a Jive software setting I believe as that option was available on my old personal website I had ages ago, there was a way of overriding it at the ordinary user level, but I can't remember what it was, sorry.
There I defeated the system by clicking Advanced Editor > Html in reply and removing everything but the body and p tags.
However in that instance it was easy as that was all that was there to edit, it would be extremely difficult to single out the right things to delete in an involved response with lots of links.
Another way to fool the system may be by first altering any URL http(s) to hxxp(s) then altering it back using Edit after the post is made. I haven't the time to play around with it I'm afraid.
I'm not sure if this was in the meeting notes, but whenever possible the platform tries to resolve out to a "friendly name." It's not a defect, it's as-designed. As Ex_Brit commented, you can remove the info via the HTML editor.
Regarding SiteAdvisor, I'm not sure. This would probably have to be something we discuss with the product group.