💾 Archived View for midnight.pub › replies › 8747 captured on 2024-08-25 at 05:44:12. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

> Good/bad things came of it all, I am sure (and I am sure
> all "decently" written), but my pockets still have lint, my
> happiness/joy is still derived out of daily activities and
> "busywork" at Clubhouse, and socializing over cigarettes
> with friendos who attend the events, and the words written,
> some still to be, likely won't garner much more than the
> (joyous?) act of just writing them.
>
> With that context, having them on the Web isn't drumming
> up more importance or interest in the words than if I keep
> them offline, which I do mostly.

"having them on the web" == "accessible to most people"

Given most people are imbeciles, well... how could the web have gone any other way?

One might say the web DEI'd itself to death - the so-called "Eternal September" being the first wave of marauding takers-only "included" by increasingly greedy pioneers who became more interested in "monetizing" than being part of something interesting....

Write a reply

Replies

~tffb wrote (thread):

right, as to not "hinder" myself with strict Gopher/Gemini protocols (and really, I DO see them as an arbitrary "c***block" of content accessibility) yet still use the page>tree method of posting, I have a site (as of now unnamed, and remaining unnamed in any public sphere) where I am writing posts as .txt files, and just hosting it from a "front" page, with nothing much else on Index.html other than a link to index.txt, where I have (yes, in plaintext) the URLs of pages on the site (/about.txt, /meta.txt, etc). None links, so the curious and creepy must copy/paste (or type) the continuation of the URL into their browser, but one can (one-by-one) browse the site for different things. Hell, it's MORE of a chore than Gopher, when one thinks of it - but only for the "navigator"/visitor, not for those whom I want to share a singular link to. And no mention of the rest of the site per-page, so using a URL shortener would put the (shortened) URL in the person's browser, but the page would not indicate WHERE it came from, who wrote it, what the "main" page was/is for that site.

Suffice, one can pull a string or two and just see the "source" of the shortened URL in one form or another, but even that can be circumvented with some privacy-centric/anaonymous-first URL shortener of some type.

Point being, if I want to share a thing with someone, I can without (in the back of my mind) thinking they will keep turning up, expecting/wanting more (and MORE and MORE) posts, and e-mailing me for RSS feed info, and word-mincing the entries to shit, like some energy drink enamored editor of idiocy.