• web forums and the old hierarchy idea

    From Mara Vale@mara.vale@example.invalid to alt.folklore.computers on Sun Jun 21 12:24:58 2026
    From Newsgroup: alt.folklore.computers

    Small web projects keep rediscovering the same thing Usenet already knew: putting discussion into named places helps people find the right audience.

    I have been helping test RootBadger:

    https://www.rootbadger.com

    It is a web forum with a Usenet-inspired layout. Not a Usenet replacement, and not pretending to be one. The interesting bit is that it keeps a hierarchy model
    instead of a single algorithmic feed. Groups live under rb.* so the names stay clear: rb.comp for computer topics, rb.rec for hobbies and entertainment, rb.sci
    for science, rb.soc and rb.talk for social/political discussion, rb.alt for the weirder stuff, plus regional and language groups.

    There are also some more specific groups already there: Linux, programming, computer security, privacy, radio, books, science fiction, music, world news, technology news, cryptids, and a RootBadger operations group for feedback on the
    site itself.

    The site has a posting-etiquette idea called BurrowCraft. It is mostly old good sense: write a real subject line, pick the right group, keep replies tied to the
    thread, trim quotes, proofread, and make the post useful enough that somebody can answer it.

    That feels like something worth preserving from the older net. If anyone here likes watching forum designs evolve, I would be curious what you think of the hierarchy and whether the rb.* names are clear enough.
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Nuno Silva@nunojsilva@invalid.invalid to alt.folklore.computers on Sun Jun 21 14:53:14 2026
    From Newsgroup: alt.folklore.computers

    On 2026-06-21, Mara Vale wrote:

    Small web projects keep rediscovering the same thing Usenet already knew: putting discussion into named places helps people find the right audience.

    I have been helping test RootBadger:

    [...]
    The site has a posting-etiquette idea called BurrowCraft. It is mostly old good
    sense: write a real subject line, pick the right group, keep replies tied to the
    thread, trim quotes, proofread, and make the post useful enough that somebody can answer it.

    It may make sense to include there "check for similar subjects in the
    past few days/weeks" in order to avoid repeating something, and to try
    to keep things in a single thread :-P

    (cf. <news://news.blueworldhosting.com/1102b55$3h691$1@paganini.bofh.team>)

    Does it refer to RFC 1855, BTW?
    --
    Nuno Silva
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Caffeine Canidae@samuel.common@hotmail.com to alt.folklore.computers on Sun Jun 21 23:47:48 2026
    From Newsgroup: alt.folklore.computers

    Mara Vale wrote:
    Small web projects keep rediscovering the same thing Usenet already knew: putting discussion into named places helps people find the right audience.

    Community spaces have certainly been shrinking, and boiling down into
    sections of current social media sites, Reddit is by far one of the only
    ones that seems to actually cultivate some smaller communities that
    don't always get sucked into algorithms - but everyone knows they have a reputation for a reason...

    It is a web forum with a Usenet-inspired layout. Not a Usenet replacement, and
    not pretending to be one. The interesting bit is that it keeps a hierarchy model
    instead of a single algorithmic feed. Groups live under rb.* so the names stay
    clear: rb.comp for computer topics, rb.rec for hobbies and entertainment, rb.sci
    for science, rb.soc and rb.talk for social/political discussion, rb.alt for the
    weirder stuff, plus regional and language groups
    That feels like something worth preserving from the older net. If anyone here likes watching forum designs evolve, I would be curious what you think of the hierarchy and whether the rb.* names are clear enough.

    Honestly one of the major things that I've noticed the most with using Newsgroups and Usenet as a whole is how utterly human it feels, the
    excitement of seeing a new post in your favourite group, reading through replies, and seeing actual informational content! Seeing a variety - or
    just seeing the topics you want to see! It's beautiful, I'd never think
    that I'd actually have so much fun reading through pure text.

    We're never going to bring back the old net, much to alot of people's
    dismay, but I think we can carry the spirit that it once had - the communtities, the user content, a break from the algorithm and the never-ending slop that thrives off of selling your data.

    I'm glad to see more projects like this cropping up, I'll definitely
    have to check it out!
    --
    - Mokka

    So long, and thanks for all the fish!
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Pluted Pup@plutedpup@outlook.com to alt.folklore.computers on Tue Jun 23 00:03:06 2026
    From Newsgroup: alt.folklore.computers

    On 6/21/26 5:24 AM, Mara Vale wrote:
    Small web projects keep rediscovering the same thing Usenet already knew: putting discussion into named places helps people find the right audience.

    I have been helping test RootBadger:

    https://www.rootbadger.com

    It is a web forum with a Usenet-inspired layout. Not a Usenet replacement, and
    not pretending to be one. The interesting bit is that it keeps a hierarchy model
    instead of a single algorithmic feed. Groups live under rb.* so the names stay
    clear: rb.comp for computer topics, rb.rec for hobbies and entertainment, rb.sci
    for science, rb.soc and rb.talk for social/political discussion, rb.alt for the
    weirder stuff, plus regional and language groups.

    There are also some more specific groups already there: Linux, programming, computer security, privacy, radio, books, science fiction, music, world news, technology news, cryptids, and a RootBadger operations group for feedback on the
    site itself.

    The site has a posting-etiquette idea called BurrowCraft. It is mostly old good
    sense: write a real subject line, pick the right group, keep replies tied to the
    thread, trim quotes, proofread, and make the post useful enough that somebody can answer it.

    That feels like something worth preserving from the older net. If anyone here likes watching forum designs evolve, I would be curious what you think of the hierarchy and whether the rb.* names are clear enough.

    It appears to be missing the ability to expand all posts,
    which ought to be the default anyway, like usenet.

    The way facebook or reddit does it is exactly what to
    avoid, with a click click and click again to read every
    little comment in a thread.

    Unison, for example, was a formerly functional newsreader
    that could display an entire thread with just one click,
    I miss using that feature to page or scroll through a
    thread.


    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2