Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 158 Stack Exchange communities.

What is meta?
Here's how it works:
  1. Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
  2. The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
  3. Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates

In short: this is a problem hurting new users, who don't really know how to handle it. Under a certain amount of reputation you are only allowed to insert 2 links in your post.

I admit, in lots of cases this could be overcome, but in reality relatively new users don't bother much to use these practices.

I suggest a hidden filter to allow the generally used example domains above the URL limit.

An other idea: these links do not have to be clickable at all.

An other other idea: links inside code block should not be subject of this limit. If a user wants to hide a link that can be copy-pasted to the url bar, he/she can do it anyway in 1000 ways.

share|improve this question
It's my understanding that the links appear as plain text already for users who don't have the rep to post links. I don't understand why needs to be clickable. – Cody Gray May 3 '11 at 9:57
At first sight I indeed thought it would be nice to exclude the RFC2606 example domains from the URL count and automatic linking. (So,, and, and maybe the test TLDs, .test, .example, .invalid and .localhost. Not so much for though, that's truly a domain like any other.) However, there is hardly any use case that would require these URLs outside a code fragment. I think the OP's comment to Grace's answer, about enhancing the error message, is a better idea. – Arjan May 3 '11 at 13:41
up vote 4 down vote accepted

Links in code formatting already are not counted towards the limit. If you're posting example URLs rather than actual ones, and the need to click them consequently does not exist, the proper way to do it is to use code formatting. You can post as many as you need as a new user by using code formatting.

share|improve this answer
It stands to reason though that new users don't necessarily get this. – Pëkka May 3 '11 at 10:25
@Pekka At best, we can explain it somewhat clearly in the new inline markdown help that's forced upon them. I don't know what much else we can do to alleviate it. – Grace Note May 3 '11 at 10:26
It would be nice if the error message ("you can't have more tha two") also said that "more (example) URLs can be placed inside a code block". – vbence May 3 '11 at 10:39
Grace and @vbence, I guess this answer with the comment actually cover this very nicely! – Arjan May 3 '11 at 13:43
Copying Blowski's comment from my deleted answer: There are questions where you're talking about the URL rather than a code block. For example - talking about how controllers work in a URL, you can simply refer to - it's not obvious that should be in a code block (I intentionally left it out of one). Similar problem for when you're talking about how SEO works - if you're not able to refer to domains as examples it makes it very difficult! – Arjan May 3 '11 at 13:45
(@Blowski: note that Markdown supports code fragments using backticks too, like so.) – Arjan May 3 '11 at 13:53
@Arjan Yes, by the way, your inbox notification will still show up for Blowski. However, he won't be able to read the full comment, which you may recall. – Grace Note May 3 '11 at 13:54
Indeed, @Grace, that length limit is why I ended with the @name, hoping the message itself came through :-) (Oddly enough, the user Atom/RSS responses feed has much longer summaries, but does not show deleted comments, or no comments on deleted answers...) – Arjan May 3 '11 at 21:18

You must log in to answer this question.

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