Support » Plugin: Simple 301 Redirects » [Plugin: Simple 301 Redirects] Rip-Off Suspicion & Performance Question

  • Hi there,

    Just wanted to congratulate you on this simple plugin!

    I have two things to say (or three if you include that above ;-)) :

    1) I believe that this plugin is a rip-off of your plugin.
    Why do I even bother? Because I took a look on the code and and seems that the other guy just copied your code and added some promo-links and a donate button. Seems unfair to me… What do you think?

    2) Doesn’t the extra database lookup on each visit of my website make it slower?
    Wouldn’t a direct htaccess 301 redirection be much faster? If so, do you plan to add an option which uses the htaccess redirection instead of the current one?

Viewing 8 replies - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
  • Plugin Author Scott Nelle


    Thanks for tipping me off. It looks like someone removed that plugin from the directory before I saw it, so I guess they decided it was a rip off that someone released to get some easy money.

    The extra option check does increase your overhead slightly, and writing to .htaccess is always the fastest way to redirect. I haven’t had any plans to add a feature to write to .htaccess because this is just a quick and dirty plugin. If I end up adding that functionality in I’ll make sure to mention it in the release notes. If someone else wants to fork the plugin and add it they are, of course, welcome to do so. 🙂

    Yes, seems that a WordPress moderator deleted that plugin. Great!
    Unfortunately that developer still has some other plugins which don’t look that good either… In his development log you can see that he’s always changing advertisment links in his plugins, like “Thailand Real Estate” and stuff. 😉

    Because performance is really important to me I’m going to check out one of the “htaccess redirection” plugins than. Lets see if any is as straight-forward and easy as yours. Anyway, thanks for your explanation though!

    If you come across any plugins like this, please send all details to plugins [at]

    Mark (podz)


    Support Maven

    @jan van Dank – I removed that line from the plugin in question and updated it. It cannot now be downloaded.

    That author no longer has any plugins listed.

    @esmi, @mark

    Wow, I didn’t know that you guys at WordPress are that responsive. That’s really great!
    Now only his website still needs to go away… 😉

    Idea: Why don’t you allow certain plugin classifications which the author (and users) can use, like:

    • “shareware” – If a commercial version is available, which the authors often try to hide on the download page.
    • “adware” – Advertisments are displayed. Some users seem to have no problem with that, don’t know if that’s OK with WordPress’ license though.
    • “reduced adware” – Not sure about that, but some very popular plugins include commercial services by third-parties.
    • “reduced adware 2” – Not sure about that one either, but some plugins display more or less unobtrusive notes on the created website like “Created with XYZ Plugin.”
    • “donationware” – well, that’s optional as nearly all plugins have a donate button and that’s cool as long as it’s unobtrusive, optional and doesn’t hide any functionality.

    Other classifications or special tags that could be used as well:
    “phones home”, includes third-party services, commercial upgrade available etc. – You get the idea.

    Of course the wording is up to you! Anyway, that would be some pretty good information you should add to the plugin download pages.


    Mark (podz)


    Support Maven

    “”reduced adware 2” – Not sure about that one either, but some plugins display more or less unobtrusive notes on the created website like “Created with XYZ Plugin.””

    Point 10:

    Plugins cannot display any link without you saying Yes.
    There should be a checkbox, it should be UNchecked and the plugin must work perfectly if you do not want that link. Any plugin that breaks this rule is removed until they fix it. So if you install a plugin and it adds a link without asking? Tell us.

    “phones home”
    That’s Point 7 of the above link.
    If a plugin is sending your data anywhere it must say so. If we get told – or we find – that a plugin is breaking privacy it will be removed until fixed.

    Point 7 also covers ads. If by me looking at a plugin page in my own blog admin the plugin author can know this because they remote load an image then that’s not good. Every image in your plugin should load locally. The only exception to this is when it has to load remotely and you have been told of this when activating the plugin.

    Point 7 does not cover feeds. The default dashboard pulls in feeds and that’s fine for plugins.

    PRO versions are okay but they too need to be GPL. The version we host here must not be crippled. That’s a judgement call but I don’t think we’ve got one wrong in this area before.

    The directory is being overhauled at present and information will be presented differently for some things.

    And the forums and support will always reply so do ask 🙂

    Hi Mark, thanks for your detailed answer. Much appreciated!

    Now back to your plugin! 😉

    @mark (podz)

    “PRO versions are okay but they too need to be GPL.”

    I don’t this point is clear in
    May be you could add it there?

Viewing 8 replies - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
  • The topic ‘[Plugin: Simple 301 Redirects] Rip-Off Suspicion & Performance Question’ is closed to new replies.