From: Adrian Tymes (wingcat@pacbell.net)
Date: Sun Apr 27 2003 - 23:32:01 MDT
--- Mike Lorrey <mlorrey@yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- Adrian Tymes <wingcat@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > --- Mike Lorrey <mlorrey@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > This actually sounds like it might be the basis
> of a
> > > very popular
> > > website. Imagine a site dedicated to fact
> checking.
> > > Even presenting
> > > different facts *along with their subjective
> > > contexts*.
> >
> > Imagine http://www.urbanlegends.com/ and sites
> like
> > it.
> > ^_-
>
> Not quite what I had in mind. Urbanlegends.com works
> to dispel
> misinformation. They certainly are not a one stop
> reference center on
> almost anything.
True. That's why I say, "and sites like it." Google
around for others, though there are some topics that
simply have not been written about or otherwise have
knowledge of them shared with the public, so there
can't be a single one stop reference center on "almost
anything".
> > A common problem with the Web seems to be that,
> while
> > there are many sites that are useful in this
> manner,
> > one has to conceive of the idea that X would be
> useful
> > before one can think to search to see if anyone is
> > already doing X. Has anyone managed to find a
> > workaround for this?
>
> They once invented this thing called advertising...
...and these other things called spam, and banner ads,
and other abuses such that paying nonzero attention to
the ads is usually practically useless. Eesides,
advertising is usually only employable when someone
stands to profit more than the cost of the
advertising;
this has a less than perfect correlation with the set
of useful ideas.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Apr 27 2003 - 23:44:51 MDT