Webring - Another One Bites The Dust 90
imrdkl writes: "Salon is running an feature about the history of the WebRing since Yahoo! bought it last September. The article goes on to give an outlook on Yahoo! itself, including how WebRing has recently been sold to one of the original developers. Webring seemed to me to be a really nice neighborly concept, but it seems at least some of the ringmasters reckon it should die now."
Alternative webring systems (Score:3, Redundant)
Re:Alternative webring systems (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Alternative webring systems (Score:2, Informative)
http://directory.google.com/Top/Computers/Interne
"The requested category Computers > Internet > Web Design and Development > Webring Systems could not be found. It is likely that this category has been moved to another location within the directory. "
Check your links first next time. Moderators, please mod the parent down.
Re:Alternative webring systems (Score:1)
However, now ...>Web Ring Systems doesn't work, and ..>Webring Systems does. What the heck? I bet it has something to do with Google's redundant servers:
$ host google.com
google.com has address 216.239.39.100
google.com has address 216.239.33.100
google.com has address 216.239.35.100
google.com has address 216.239.37.100
google.com mail is handled (pri=40) by smtp3.google.com
google.com mail is handled (pri=10) by smtp1.google.com
google.com mail is handled (pri=20) by smtp2.google.com
$
Other Slashdot users reported ...>Web Ring Systems working yet ...>Webring Systems not, the complete opposite of what I currently experience. Odd. At least, I'm glad to know Google's directory for webrings (or is it web rings?) is not going the way of Yahoo's.
Re:Alternative webring systems (Score:1)
http://www.noroua.nb.ca/Webring/index.htm
That is a URL to a working version if you want to see how I did it.
Webring "communities"? (Score:4, Insightful)
Remember the last time you noticed a link to a webring'd site - you were probably on that site due to Google, and you were there because you wanted a specific piece of information.
Information found - close the window.
Information not found - hit back and try the next search result down.
Any online "communities" are usually formed by a group of people who know each other (at least to a minor degree), and not by the "next link on this webring."
Re:Webring "communities"? (Score:1)
Re:Webring "communities"? (Score:2)
You hit it on the head with this comment. The webrings were a useful tool for content providers, because it gave them a sense of community. Given the ratio of consumers to providers, though, that turns out to be a pretty small segment of the web population.
Re:Webring "communities"? (Score:2, Interesting)
Some sort of competition sometimes springs up when you see the other sites on the ring - but it's all friendly.
If you were looking for something like 'Bryce Pics' and galleries, a web ring is nice because you search once, and hit next when you are done with that page. You don't have to go back and search through google again.
Why does everyone think they suck so much? Maybe I need to start a 'Save the webring' webring?
Often Overlooked, Perhaps, But... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:so what? (Score:1)
But the average web surfer doesn't know what IRC is. On my website I'd say that most of the visitors would think IRC is a new TV network. But they all know what a chat room is, and they all want one on the site so they can talk amongst themselve, hence the need for some kind of web browser based chat room system.
Just because one person has no need for a service doesn't mean that somebody else does not.
Re:so what? (Score:2, Insightful)
>But the average web surfer doesn't know what IRC is.
Hmmm, could there be a connection here ?
Salon anyone? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Salon anyone? (Score:1)
Re:Salon anyone? (Score:1)
Re:Salon anyone? (Score:1)
I think that is, in fact, what they do. Part of the deal and all - if you pay for a subscription they remove the advertising.
Re:Salon anyone? (Score:1)
Well, there are some of us who don't read Salon at all. But we're equally annoyed to see Salon stories in /. because Salon stories are the reason we don't read Salon in the first place. :) So we're really on the same side, but fr different reasons.
Re:Salon anyone? (Score:1)
Taking your point literaly
I remember... (Score:5, Insightful)
But almost as quickly as webrings became popular, they (for the most part) vanished once again. I think there are three major reasons for this:
Those reasons and a myriad of lesser ones are what contributed to the death of webrings, if you ask me. Kind of a shame, but honestly I (as a web surfer and as a webmaster) never found much use for webrings beyond the fact that it was kinda cool to be part of a "group."
Re:I remember... (Score:3, Insightful)
I think the major problem with webrings is that they weren't useful. I very rarely used them for navigation; even if I was interested in Topic X, who says that the Next Site on Topic X's webring would be any good?
In general, if I was interested enough in the genre of site to be on a site regarding it long enough to see the "Member of Topic X Webring" navigation item, I probably knew most of the good sites anyway.
Re:I remember... (Score:1)
Re:I remember... (Score:3, Insightful)
One of the reasons may be that "back in the day", the ratio of "good sites on a topic" to "how easy it is to find them" was quite low. Today, the ratio is a lot higher -- it's easier to find more sites on a given topic both because there's more of them (chaos breeds goodness), and because there's a lot more investment into things on the web (consider news sites, for example).
I was involved in a few webrings back in the day, but like the original poster said, it was more of a "belonging" thing than anything else. Being in a webring meant being in a community. One of the big ones of the day was diary-l (I don't know what happened to it). The webring also had a mailing-list -- and it was folks in the mailing-list that probably had the best time -- after all, that encouraged more interaction than anything else, and made people feel part of a group.
It was an interesting social phenomenon, I think. In a place where there was considerably less social interaction, webrings came to be to try to bring some order to the chaos, and make people feel like they were part of a community. It was, of course, essentially an illusion (or a clickable link, at best), and I think webrings were one illusion that became evident by virtue of their being useless.
Re:I remember... (Score:2)
Agreed - that was always an annoyance to me. Quite often, in the pre-Yahoo WebRing! days, I would use it for looking at pages for certain topics. Some rings would be in great shape, with active Webring maintainers, and 404's and broken sites would not last long.
Others seemed like they were started by someone on a whim, then completely ignored.
3.Why the hell do we need 50 Linux webrings?! "Linux Users," "Linux Lovers," "The *Official* Linux Webring," "The Unofficial Linux Webring"
I wonder how many of the duplicate rings for any one topic were due to a person being denied a spot in another ring due to not having a good enough site to become part of the ring. Either that, or wanting the power of being the "maintainer" - those people were just as responsible for #1.
I still have a fond memory of WebRing. I also was temporarily part of EUROPa, and then a part of the original WebRing, before all the various rings, and the random page I went to for being added to the ring happened to have information on a personal topic that has, in many ways, changed my entire life. I would have probably gotten things taken care of without stumbling across the WebRing... eventually. But I will never forget the Ring, nor the person who's page I found myself at...
Good concept, unpractical in real life... (Score:1, Redundant)
How many times did you fall on a web page that had that webring thing? Ok.
How many broken links? how how many times did you have to cache the original page in a different page, "lookup 5 sites" on another page, and go thru them one by one? (or always pressing back after a 404 error).
I guess the ringowners had better things to do than to maintain their lists, the concept was cool while it was working, but right now it's just a pain and time wasting. I agree, put this dog to sleep.
Re:Good concept, unpractical in real life... (Score:2)
Re:Good concept, unpractical in real life... (Score:1)
Re:Good concept, unpractical in real life... (Score:3, Interesting)
For example, say I make a webring for Handspring Visors. It's dedicated to websites about Visors, Visor software, Visor mainteance - everything Visor. Now other Visor sites wouldn't join up - the owners of the other sites would create competing webrings, and before you know it there'd be a webring for Visor Hardware, one for Visor games, one for Visor hotsync tips, one for Visor hacking, etc.
How many webrings do we need for the same topic?
the dark side of webrings (Score:2)
Search engines do a better job of delivering information looking for.
Half the time, links in webrings were broken.
Duplication of effort; everyone and their brother wanted to be the "founder" of THE Linux webring - and the same was true for EVERY topic imaginable. More like webchainmail.
The worst part was the webrings where some goofball thought they'd use the 1337-est tricks they knew in designing their web page, so 90% of the bandwidth to download the info went to bad flash, stupid fucking
Good riddance.
Can't wait for LoTR... (Score:4, Funny)
"One ring to connect to then all, and in the Ethernet bind them..."
*wince* [Ducks myriad of popcorn and Glossettes from the back of the back of the theatre... [lordoftherings.net]
Yeesh. Sorry 'bout that...
Soko
Re:Webrings have been good for linux (Score:3, Interesting)
Off the topic of linux webrings, there exists quite a few sites that are designed to let anyone create and manage webrings. An example is Ring Surf [ringsurf.com]. The site claims they have over 20,000 rings. Other sites that offer many tools for webmasters, such as Bravenet [bravenet.com] offer ring setup as well.
As for me, I never joined the cult of webrings because I found them to be useless and didn't want to waste the space on my pages. I'm surprised webrings lasted as long as they did.
Re:Yahoo!'s intent was malicious anyway (Score:3, Insightful)
I still have a rocketmail account. I really miss rocketmail, which is one of the many things that yahoo swallowed. I think that they were interested more in acquiring the 411 database that came with rocketmail, than actually keeping most of the other services that came with it. I don't blame people for wanting to make money, but I wish that it was a little easier to leave a few little corners of ingenuity alone. Rocketmail, Geocities, 411, Webring...
I almost never read that account, but it's nice that it's still there. Guess I should be grateful that it didn't get thrown out along with everything else. Yahoo used to be a couple of fun guys in a trailer on campus. Times sure have changed.
Re:Yahoo!'s intent was malicious anyway (Score:2, Insightful)
I think in years to come we're going to look back on many different ideas which were very good but never made it. Why? Because they got swallowed up, the big company didn't know what to do with it, and eventually it became a casualty of a budget cut/lack of interest by the big corperation. It's sort of sad to think of how my internet experience a few years ago was defined by fairly innovative ideas that were doing pretty good, and now most of them have been taken over and either killed or corrupted beyond redemption. WBS really comes to mind as the only chat room I've ever been able to tolerate, and that was killed not so long ago (taken over by Infoseek alliance or whatever). Even slashdot itself might end up in this category eventually...
Just remember the "alternatives": (Score:3, Flamebait)
Even with some of their more unfortunate antics, they have still been a more user-oriented network than either AOL or MSN.
Re:Yahoo!'s intent was malicious anyway (Score:5, Informative)
First off, I am a Yahoo employee by way of GeoCities. I worked for GeoCities during the Webring acquisition. GeoCities bought Webring, not Yahoo. Yahoo bought GeoCities some months later, and ended up getting Webring basically by accident.
Further, I was a member of the team talking to Webring about integrating their technology. At *no point* did anyone mention interstitial ads, nor did it come up during the transition to Yahoo. Given that I was one of the key contacts on our side, you'd think someone would have mentioned something like that to me.
Basically, Webring was bought by management -- all of our engineers thought the technology was crap. Their employees were incompetent. The integration was killed quickly and quietly when it became apparent that they had nothing going for them but some half-assed Perl scripts. I still have no idea why the company was actually purchased, but then I'm just a lowly programmer.
Re:Yahoo!'s intent was malicious anyway (Score:3, Insightful)
This is entirely correct. I remember feeling nervous when Webring got swallowed up by the vastly more commercial GC.
WebRing didn't need very much, really. It worked, and worked pretty well. It let ringmasters set up the rings pretty much the way they wanted to: good rings were useful, bad rings were not. Post Yahoo! the rings became much, much less useful, as the Yahoo-borg attempted to corrupt all webrings with its user interface.
Now, I like the Yahoo! UI for a general search directory, but man, it sucks as a page design element. Straightjacketing.
And then I can go on about how All Ring Members Must Now Have a Yahoo! ID Instead of Just an Email Address... bah.
Re:Yahoo!'s intent was malicious anyway (Score:4, Informative)
I, too, am a Yahoo-acquired GeoCities engineer; though I wasn't part of the original Webring acquisition, once I got to Yahoo it was easy to see that they had absolutely no use for Webring. The role that GeoCities bought Webring for--tying together user's sites by topic rather than loosely-defined "neighborhoods"-- was accomplished much better through the Yahoo directory, it was felt.
In the Bubble days Yahoo could afford to support projects that had only loose connections to the central site, and so Webring wasn't axed after the Geo acquisition (as it no doubt would be in today's climate). It, too, was to get tied into the directory somehow (yes, the descendant of David & Jerry's original "List" was still central to Yahoo, and is to this day in various guises). I've no idea how anyone would have got the idea that adding links back to Yahoo's directory constituted interstitial ads--that's either a gross misunderstanding or a false rumor spread by PO'd ringmasters. Back then, Yahoo had no need to create more ad slots--just getting folks to visit the central site was considered to be of value. (The old "eyeball"game.)
There is a tragedy here, but no crime. Webring was a speck on GeoCities' balance sheet, much less on Yahoo's. Geo might have done something better with Webring if it (Geo) had remained independent. But Yahoo's acquisition of GeoCities left it with no real place. I'm glad they finally let it go.
Re:Yahoo!'s intent was malicious anyway (Score:1)
Corporate purchases are like the old 'pig-in-a-poke' metaphor... management almost never knows EXACTLY what they're getting, they look at balance sheets and concepts... then when a few years have past and the merged/purchased parts don't work, it's too late. I work for a small company that did that, and now it faces bankruptcy or worse because the purchased units never measured up to expectations.
Re:Yahoo!'s intent was malicious anyway (Score:1)
"Today, GeoCities has exciting news for you. We are pleased to announce that GeoCities has acquired WebRing. As many of you know, WebRing is the largest ring community with more than 66,000 rings representing more than 900,000 members. The WebRing technology allows users to create their own communities based on interests and links; more than 220,000 GeoCities members are already RingMembers!"
They ought to start ... (Score:2, Funny)
Terms of the deal (Score:3, Informative)
-russ
My Webring migrated and it works fine. (Score:2, Informative)
Webrings are not inherently rocket science, it is just nice to have a common clearinghouse. I wish the new maintainers the best of luck.
Re:My Webring migrated and it works fine. (Score:1)
Re:My Webring migrated and it works fine. (Score:3, Interesting)
I've actually gotten two requests for signups to my (low-traffic) ring since the switch back from Yahoo!
I'm glad it's out of Yahoo! actually. the ring code fascists were irritating. why can't we have custom fragments?
The Title's a Bit Wrong (Score:2, Informative)
My Webring Days (Score:2, Interesting)
Maybe one day I'll use Ringlink to revive The Absinthe, but only when I feel that it may be fun once again, it's certainly past the 'so last year' phase and hardly anyone has a decent ring anymore.
Links2Go ! (Score:1)
Webrings, routing, and utopia (Score:1)
The same could/should be said of 'blogs?? Ted Nelson had a good thing going when he provided for link fixup in his early hypertext fantasies!