Flutterby™! : Link Attribution

Next unread comment / Catchup all unread comments User Account Info | Logout | XML/Pilot/etc versions | Long version (with comments) | Weblog archives | Site Map | | Browse Topics

Link Attribution

2010-02-09 01:19:08.488454+00 by Dan Lyke 4 comments

[ related topics: Weblogs ]

comments in descending chronological order (reverse):

#Comment Re: made: 2010-02-11 00:00:47.611894+00 by: Rudolf

Mike has replied to my enquiry but didn't seem eager to discuss the matter.

#Comment Re: made: 2010-02-09 20:42:49.968162+00 by: Dan Lyke

outsidecounsel, I think you nailed one of my big discontents with comments: I loved the days when we used to have comments back and forth between blogs (which, I think, the one on attribution links was a prefect example of), and hated that Trackbacks got so quickly overrun by automated spammers.

I also think Brad was as much a force in the notion of the community around weblogs as Dave Winer, both because the "Break Bread with Brad" gatherings were a great plate to put faces with names and discover blogs that you otherwise wouldn't, but also because on various online forums he had a way of finding common ground and breaking through disagreements that was tremendously empowering. I remember him defusing a minor flame war between me and Jay Ashworth that humorously reminded me that I was one side in a nerd war with no winners.

Rudolf, given the strength of some of the personalities involved in the early weblog culture, there were a number of cliques resulting in invite-only forums where a primary rule was that the existence of said forum wasn't mentioned externally. I don't remember all the chronologies, but it's quite possible that Mike is alluding to a discussion in such a place, in which case it's extremely unlikely that any archives survived. I know Mike became a little reclusive a few years ago, but have you tracked him down and asked?

#Comment Re: The History of Weblog Comments made: 2010-02-09 20:21:54.820962+00 by: outsidecounsel

Interesting that Brad got it right-- he understood the form, even when it was emerging. It seems to me that comments have had an effect on the form that has not really been noted-- at one time the exchange of attributions led to a form of conversation back and forth between and among sites that really doesn't go on any more. If someone has something to say they say it on the in the comments. This means that the reader is less likely to be drawn to another site, and it makes the process of finding new sites more difficult, even as weblogs continue to proliferate.

#Comment Re: attributions made: 2010-02-09 13:20:00.938445+00 by: Rudolf

Thanks for the link, Dan!

It'd be nice to get hold of the comments that were made in November 1999 in places other than Scripting News, as mentioned by Mike Gunderloy.

What I noticed while roping this string of comments into a single thread: Brad -- God rest his soul -- really seemed to be chewing on your "incest" barb and eventually, in January 2000, came up with his sturdy defence of link attribution as a community building strategy.

I wonder if he really was the first to voice that defence. I'm fairly sure Jorn *intended* link attribution as a community building strategy of sorts, but if he (or anyone else) ever made the explicit case before Brad, I've missed it so far. Mike, in the post linked above, seemed to get within inches of making that case, but then didn't.

Of course, I suspect Brad *underestimated* link attribution, as I believe those credits were what got the joint jumping in the first place...