In reply to: The Awesome Directories.

Kicks,

I think I have an answer to your linkrot concern. Not for Awesome but a hypothetical directory – “someday”.

The idea really isn’t mine, I got it thinking about the Microcast.club directory, which is really a new Indie style webring that also has a List of Sites page aka a flat directory page.  When you join you get a webring code to place on your site, plus listing in the directory.  Cool.

Linkrot.

On some hypothetical future niche directory it’s that webring code that prevents the linkrot.  As long as the webring/directories robot keeps finding that validation code you stay in the directory, no code and eventually you will be dropped. Not perfect but it automates the process a bit.

It wouldn’t have to be a webring code, it could just be a validation code, I suppose.  I like the idea of indiestyle webring/directory combined.  My worry would be scale on the ring.  Old style webrings had a sweet spot of 50-200 sites.  Over 200 and they become difficult to manage and it was found that bigger destination sites in the ring siphoned off too much ring traffic and gave very little back.

Still adding that directory page was a good evolutionary move for indie-style rings.

Massaging this idea a bit:  one could let ring members self define subject categories when they join very much like you did on Indieweb.xyz (tags sorta) which would help when it gets larger.

This was also posted to
/en/linking.

2 thoughts on “In reply to: The Awesome Directories by Kicks Condor

  1. Ok, yeah—this will be essential. I wonder if I can use the page’s title tag
    for this? Like: save the title tag the first time I check the site. Because it’s
    much less rare for the title tag to change than the body text.

    I like the idea of the webring code. I just don’t have any influence on some of
    the sites that I am linking to. But yeah: mixing webrings and Indieweb.xyz is
    interesting.
    As for the size of a directory (or webring), that is such a big problem on the
    Web. They need to have upper limits, for sure. If it gets too big, it feels (and
    does become) unusable. If it’s too large, then nothing in it is special. Like
    with these “awesome lists”—you are led to believe that the list is a severe
    abridgement, because the links in it are truly impressive.
    With webrings, someone is special by virtue of discovering the ring first. So
    I can see closing admittance. I’m not that into webrings because it’s a pretty
    fragile link between all parties.
    I’d like linking to take some effort, which also limits the amount of links you
    can have and makes them more potent.
    Thanks for the ideas! Great stuff.

    Also on:

    • I’m not yet convinced webrings will work in 2018 for traffic. But even just a validation code would help indicate the site has lost it’s ability to be listed. OTOH a ring code gives traffic options to members 2 ways either from another member in the ring, or from the directory itself.

      The trick with a directory is the directory needs to attract visitors itself so it can disperse them out to those listed. If the directory provides no traffic there is little reason to be listed.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.