The Power inherent in Peirce's conception of the sign as I use it to describe the link's nature comes from the optimism that by "knowing" the sign or link, one will know more. What one does not know typically, is what that more will consist of. In hypertext, the possiblilty for informed "pre-knowing" is possible in various ways. Links can function iconically, indexically, and symbolically--all at the discretion of the author--to inform the reader of his or her next destination. In choosing to use or not use these functions, the author exercises his or her ethical power. He or she is choosing to mask or to exhibit the destination nodes, the context into which the reader is moving, the nature of the association he or she sees between the current and subsequent nodes, which nodes have been visited previously and which have not, and , in fact, the awareness that the reader is present at all.

Likewise, in the basic layout of the hypertext, the author decides the various mechanical relationships between nodes (where and when the links will be present). He or she can make these connections more or less "efficient" depending upon how he or she chooses to locate the connections. In this, the author has ethical considerations as well. Repeated links to the same node or ignored links which the reader may have wanted contributes to the ethos apparent in the document as well. Rather than attempting to identify some guidelines that make connections somehow "efficient" or not, I want simply to point out that the choices of where links will go is an ethical one. Instead of calling certain patterns more or less efficient, we can consider some of the basic link-node options as outlined by Landow. In those options, one can see some of the advantages and disadvantages; however, one must also remember that not only placement and relation can aid or hinder efficiency, the ethical use of the various link functions can contribute as well.