directly to a resolution to a computer problem on my site, John. I don't just post a link to my homepage and let them 'figure it out' from there. This had always been the policy before with ZDNET and assumed it had carried over to CNET. I only posted my homepage in SE so some of the members there could view it for me and let me know if they had problems...I haven't done so since it first went up, and I don't use it in my signature as I viewed that to be 'advertising' or 'spam' from the old rules.
From what I understand from Lee, he sees no reason for members not being able to post their website....I have real strong issues with that and fear it sets a dangerous precedent to members...especially newer ones.
They come to CNET for help and literally have to be trusting as hell in order to follow instructions from complete strangers. Can you imagine those trusting souls clicking a link in somebody's reply or signature and ending up with spyware, popups, viruses, browser helper objects, porn, hijackings, etc? I am totally against using links to vague homepages for those reasons....I would much prefer the old rules of 'do no harm' by linking ONLY to the actual page on a site that will resolve the problem the person is having since for copyright reasons we aren't allowed to copy/paste those instructions to our replies. It's rough enough on newbies traveling unknown terrority without CNET members tossing them in with the sharks, too.
TONI
in the Desktop Forum:
http://reviews.cnet.com/5208-7586-0.html?forumID=68&threadID=114571&messageID=1301903
I personally have no objection to his signature with the info, something like Wayne or Toni H. giving out info on their personal web site.

Chowhound
Comic Vine
GameFAQs
GameSpot
Giant Bomb
TechRepublic