Categories
Diversity Technology

Guys Don’t Link

Recovered from the Wayback Machine.

The Better Bad News folk did a take on the AutoLink fooflah, which is worth a chuckle, though not necessarily a guffaw. However, what I found more interesting about the page is the *list of webloggers that the BBN folks referenced:

1. Opt Out Petition
2. Dan Gillmor
3.The Scoblizer

4. Dave Winer
5. Cory Doctorow
6. Time
7. Mark Jen
8. Steve Rubel
9. Kas Log
10. Tim Bray

with sonic support from Plastikman

Aside from the Time article, which is actually written by a woman, and the petition, all of the webloggers linked were men. Every single one.

This matched closely what I found at Doc Searls, in his post on AutoLink. He references the following bloggers:

Steve Gillmor
Tim Bray
Dave Winer
Dan Gillmor
Fred Von Lohmann
Craig Burton

ubermostrum at kuroshin

Again, all guys.

Point of fact, if you follow the thread of this discussion, you would see something like Dave linking to Cory who then links to Scoble who links to Dave who links to Tim who links to Steve who then links to Dave who links to Doc who follows through with a link to Dan, and so on. If you throw in the fact that the Google Guys are, well, guys, then we start to see a pattern here: men have a real thing for the hypertext link.

Well, huh. How about that. Not being a guy, I couldn’t understand this male obsession with the link, so I decided to call on an expert on gender roles about the issue: Lawrence Summers, Harvard’s current President.

“Larry,” I said. “What is is with guys and links?”

“Well Shelley, statistics–now, don’t worry, I won’t show you any actual values because being a women and all, we know that you can’t do more than count your ten fingers and toes–anyway, statistic show that guys are linked more than women, and link to each other more than they link to women. And when one guy links to another guy, a whole bunch of other guys come along and link them both, and then start linking to each other.”

“I’m aware of the behavior, Larry. But what causes it?”

He beamed at me, patted me on my head and chucked me under the chin. “Why honey, it’s because the male brain is wired for linking!”

I’ll have to admit, I was taken aback by Larry’s response. I mean, it didn’t make sense that a guy’s brain could better handling linking, especially since women also use the link.

“Larry, are you sure that linking isn’t a pattern based on cultural and social similarities, rather than gender-based differences in the brain? Guys are linked more because our current society and most cultures still see men as ‘authorities’, regardless of demonstrated capability?”

Larry just smiled, somewhat sadly and shook his head.

“All too often we think that guys are linked more than women because of social patterns, but that’s really not the case. Look, there are three reasons why men are linked more than women, and I’ll take them in the order of importance.”

He held up the index finger on his right hand. “The first reason men are linked more is based on interest and time. Women just aren’t interested in weblogging as much as the men, and don’t have the time for it, even if they are interested. You ask both men and women the question, ‘What’s more important: your families or your weblog?’ and I bet you’ll find that women, overall, will pick their families over their weblogs.”

He held up the middle finger on his right hand. “The second reason is aptitude — men and women’s brains are different, and men are more equipped to handle the complexities of the link, as compared to women.”

Larry then held up the third finger, almost indifferently and said, “And then there’s the social issues, but I don’t want to get into this because anything having to do with social issues means folks like me have to change, and we don’t want that.” He quickly lowered his third finger. “And I don’t want to get into time and interest, because I’m running out of time and the topic has little interest.”  And with that, he lowered the index finger, leaving only the middle finger raised.

“And that leads us back to men and women’s brains being different, and men being better equipped to handle linking.”

At that point, Larry noticed the stunned look on my face, my mouth opened in astonishment. He said, “Seriously, I think it’s important to focus this topic on the hard wired differences between men and women, virtually to the exclusion of any other discussion.”

“To take an example I discussed previously, when I gave weblogging tools to my twin little girls, and they are Daddy’s good little girls might I add, it wasn’t long after I showed them what a link was that they were calling them ‘Daddy links’, ‘Mommy links’, and ‘Baby links’. Leaving aside that all the television they watch features ads with little girls playing house and pretending to be mommies, how else can you explain this behavior other than the female brain perceives the link in a different way from the male brain?”

The conversation continued from that point, but I don’t remember much of it as my brain was in a red haze–I imagine that Larry would say it was because I am a woman and we were, after all, discussing links. Later that day, though, not feeling overly satisfied with his answers, I sought out the one fountain of wisdom I always returned to, again and again, whenever I was troubled about gender issues: Mags the bartender down at the Bushels of Beer Bar & Grill.

When I got there, business was slow and Mags was wiping down the counter. Her hair was steel gray, though strands of golden blonde appeared here and there–she always did miss a few when she colored. Peering out at me from behind thick, fake glasses, she smiled broadly, easily re-cutting the lines long creases into her cheeks. She was a lovely woman, though she spent a great deal of time trying to live this down.

“Shelley! What are you doing here on a fine afternoon! I thought you walked during this time of day?” she said, reaching under the counter at the same time to get the mixings for my usual margarita.

“Skip the drink today, Mags.” I said, heavily, as I plopped down on the stool. “What I want from you is advice, not booze.”

I then proceeded to tell her all about Google’s new AutoLink, and my own findings on men and links, and the conversation with Larry the Harvard President. She nodded from time to time, as if nothing I said was unexpected. When I was finished, she looked at me a moment and then did something she rarely did — come out from behind the counter to sit on the stool next to me.

“Shelley, I’m not surprised by anything you’re saying. But you might be surprised when I say that I sort of agree with your Harvard President — men do think differently about links than women.”

I was surprised, and showed it.

“Oh, I don’t mean that men and women’s brains are wired so differently that men are naturally more adept at linking then women. No, the difference between men and women lies in how men perceive links, not their ability to use them.”

She leaned closer to me, even though no one else was in the place.

“You see, guys see links as an extension of themselves. ”

Extensions of themselves? Extensions? Slowly, understanding dawned.

“You mean…”

“You always were a bright girl, mores the pity.” She said, winking at me. “You got it in one. To you and me, a link is just a link. To a guy, however, a link is something special, a part of himself. The most,um, important part of himself.”

Time for plain speaking. “Mags, are you telling me that guys equate links with their dicks?”

Mags just smiled, patted my hand one more time, and then got up and moved back behind the counter.

“Shelley, to a woman, a link is a way of connecting and being connected. To hearing and being heard. But not so for a guy. Guys see links as power, and therefore something precious, and to be protected. They hold on to their links as tightly, and as lovingly, as a thirsty drunk holds onto a bottle.”

At that moment I had a mental image, of a male weblogger I know, carefully adding a link to his post, bright, feral grin on his face, manic glaze to his eyes. But instead of typing into a keyboard he was…oh, that’s disgusting!

I shuddered, world twisted upside down. “Surely, Mags, not all guys think this way!”

Mags shook her head. “No, this attitude isn’t universal among men. There are many guys who see a link as nothing more than a way of inviting a conversation or passing along useful information. They link without regard to the consequences, and the most they hope for is that it might spark an interesting discussion.”

She stopped wiping the counter and leaned closer to me, lowering her voice. “The power-link guys have a word for men who link just to link,” she whispered. “They call them linkless.”

At that point, a couple of people entered the bar and Mags hurried off to do her job, leaving me to think on our extraordinary conversation. The more I thought on Mags words, though, the more I could see the truth in them. Much that has confused me about this environment is explained if one considers for a moment that some men think of links as some form of virtual penis.

For instance, ‘nofollow’ wouldn’t just be a misuse of HTML and a way for Google to solve the weblogger pest problem: it would be way of increasing the power of one’s link– literally a hypertext version of Viagra. As for Google, it becomes both the hand and the condom, enabling and protecting at the same time.

Sites such as Technorati become the internet version of a locker room, where the guys can hang around, comparing themselves to each other. Those that come up short look at their better endowed brothers with both envy and admiration; sucking up in order to increase their own stature.

When we women ask the power-linkers why they don’t link to us more, what we’re talking about is communication, and wanting a fair shot of being heard; but what the guys hear is a woman asking for a little link love. Hey lady, do you have what it takes? More important, are you willing to give what it takes?

Groupies and blogging babes, only, need apply.

And the phrases, “circle jerk” and “Google juice”, take on new depth and sudden meaning in light of this discovery.

I wandered home from the bar, in a daze of comprehension so strong, it literally staggered me. I thought back on what started this all: the AutoLink. Now, I could understand the concern: it was all about protecting the Link.

What I see is functionality that can only be used in one browser, in one operating system, and only when the weblog reader pushes a button; when pushed, the tool only autolinks a few items: addresses and ISBN numbers and a few other innocuous odds and ends. To me, this is no big thing, but to those who run afeard of this technology, if we treat this service indifferently, other tools will take this as a sign of easy compliance and do truly evil things with the link.

We could then have ‘neocon’ and ‘progressive’ linking toolbars, that automatically link words such as ‘patriot’ to either Michelle Malkin or Atrios if the reader pushes a button. Or syndication toolbars that convert the word “Atom” to a link to the RSS 2.0 specification. (Resulting in such fine combinations as: “RSS 2.0 and Eve” and “Water is made up of two RSS 2.0 of hydrogen and one RSS 2.o of oxygen.”)

Why, some toolbars might even link terms to Wikipedia entries, and modern civilization, as we know it, would collapse into tattered heaps of folksonomic trash.

But not all guys saw AutoLink as the damnation of all mankind. No, a few anarchists in the crowd are always looking for opportunities to rip open the constraints and just let it All Hang Loose.

Yes, so much is explained now. Where I saw AutoLink as a relatively uninteresting and innocuous innovation, to some guys it was a way of dropping their pants and swinging what they got, while to others, it was a big metal Zipper, just waiting to catch the unwary.

Categories
Technology

Don’t link to this

Never attempt to write anything as long as my previous post, directly in the weblogging tool. If you do, you will go mad, and most likely cause harm to your computer or cat, whichever is closer.

I did want to point out that after my experiment in the earlier post–and did you all have to click that link that said “don’t click”? Is that the key to popularity? Name your weblog, “Don’t Read Me”?–I did confirm what Kevin Marks wrote earlier, in that you can use your own URL as the feed for a Technorati tag, rather than have to point to Technorati directly.

As long as the rel=”tag” attribute is in the link, Technorati pulls the filename from the URL and uses this as the tag name. This should reassure folks who are concerned about putting too much juice into Technorati, because any tool, now, can do the same: look for the attribute and derive the tag name from the file name, and create it’s own ‘tagback’ page. And since I point the link at my URL, even if the Technorati tagback page disappears, my link is still valid; I control the data, and the tagback still exists.

Kevin also confirmed that search bots are being denied access to the tags page, through the use of the META tag. Google honors this, so no pagerank. No pagerank, no reason for spamming.

Categories
Technology

Tagback seed is sprouting

As you can see from the initial , created for yesterday’s post, several people have added weblog posts that tagback to the original item. In addition, a new del.icio.us tag, tagback, was created, and since neither the original del.icio.us bbintroducingtagback and tagback tag entries are being pulled into the Technorati tagback page (anyone know why?), I used furl to add links to both delicious tag pages, as reference. And others have added the Technorati tagback page to the del.icio.us tagback page, as cross-reference.

Now when you access the page, you’ll find weblog posts that respond to the original post, my funky photos, as well as cross-references to related but not directly linked material, including material from a rival bookmarking site.

There has been considerable, and good, discussion about using a tag, or even the name I used yesterday and I’m going to cover these in more detail in my long awaited – you are waiting for it, still, I hope–sequel to tags and folksonomies, which should be out late tonight. However, before I expanded on the concept of tagbacks, I did want to see Technorati’s reaction, first. After all, I am proposing to utilize more, perhaps considerably more, of the organization’s resources. However, from Dave Sifry’s early response, the company is cool with the concept.

Speaking of such heavy utilization of Technorarti, Kaf asked the question in my comments about whether I am changing my mind about centralized services. After all, Technorati is centralized, and trackback is distributed. My answer is that once a resource has been corrupted by outside interests, as trackback and comments have been, then I would rather centralize that resource in the care of skilled technicians who are motivated to keep the resource clean, then put the burden on all the poor souls who don’t know SQL and don’t understand XML-RPC and pagerank, or who don’t have the tools to easily clean up their sites.

There is a risk that Technorati may go away someday, or put up a costwall between us and the data, especially if investment companies urge this. However, by making use of many resources, such as del.icio.us, furl, even flickr, (and other tag based entities sure to pop up), and cross referencing the material, we should be able to pick up the threads if need be. And I am making an assumption about Technorati: that the organization doesn’t intend to cause harm. They might put ads into the tagback pages, but we’ve seen ads embedded in all of the facilities we use, and they don’t cause harm. Still, to repeat: we are backing up the threads by using cross-references in other tag-enabled tools, no offense Dave and Kevin and other folk at Technorari.

In addition, if I understand the documentation with Technorati tags correctly, the URIs we use don’t have to be to Technorati, though I’m not sure how this works yet, especially in regards to tagback–still experimenting around.

Another personal refinement is that I decided not to generate new tagbacks automatically with each post, because some posts, such as this, are an addition to one published previously. I’ll use the original tagback for all posts on the same thread. In addition, not every one of my posts needs a tagback page, though if I don’t add one, with tag systems such as delicious and furl, flickr, and other systems sure to spring up, as well as webloggers ready to wield that mighty link to create a tagback page, someone can always create one for me if they disagree.

The tag for this post is bbintroducingtagback. To add an item to the discussion surrounding this post, you can use this tag with a flickr photo or as a del.icio.us or furl bookmark tag. You can also include the following Technorati tag in your post: .

Categories
Technology Weblogging

Bad Webloggers. Bad.

Recovered from the Wayback Machine.

As you can see, I’m still getting pingbacks, even with removing the link to the pingback server from my page header. The reason for this, most likely, is because in the WordPress code somewhere, my site is responding affirmatively to an XML-RPC request, and the pingback is then sent. I’ve since moved the xmlrpc.php file elsewhere, though this means I can’t remotely post for now. But I rarely do anyway.

The pingbacks are from a post that Jonathon Delacour wrote on the recent trackback and nofollow issues, over at Writable Web, the new weblog he’s writing in conjuction with Marius Coomans. In this writing, Jonathon provides a nicely done comparison of pingbacks and trackbacks and how the two have become somewhat synonymous in most webloggers minds, primarily because of trackback autodiscovery. He also covers the new nofollow attribute, automatic addition of in weblog tools such as TypePad has led the spammers this last week to basically hit webloggers across the nose with a rolled up newspaper, going “Bad, webloggers. Bad.”

In the meantime, here’s a surefire method of preventing comment spam:

Open up robots.txt, or create one, and add the following two lines:

User-agent: *
Disallow: /

It could take a couple of months, but eventually you’ll find you’ll have no more comment spam. Of course, you’ll have no Google or other search engine pagerank, either. But why bleed pagerank out of the weblogs slowly with nofollow, when we can do it quickly with robots.txt?

Seriously, bite the bullet, cut the cord, and be comment spam free. Isn’t this what everyone wants?

Categories
Technology

Daily hits via Technorati

Through Technorati I found a post where Roland Tanglao referenced my post on trackback being dead. There was a discussion in comments about Technorati opening up Watchlists and API queries.

Hmmm.

I then created a watchlist of my base URL, http://weblog.burningbird.net, which you can access directly with this URL. This returns an RSS feed of the watchlist for the entire weblog — a watchlist being all links to my weblog on any specific day.

I took my old Backtrack application, which used to backtrack trackbacks and print out who else has trackbacked a specific post, and modified it to consume the RSS that Technorati provides, instead. I then posted a link to this at the top of my sidebar, and you can also check it out here.

If you want to do the same, create a watchlist for your weblog, copy the source code for Backtrack, and then modify the look and feel to match whatever you want. You’ll want to leave the PHP bits in the body alone, except to replace my watchlist URL with your own.

This will give you a list of links to your weblog, tracked by Technorati, on a daily basis. The question remains, though, how this alternative to trackbacks will scale, because Technorati is a centralized service, and one that can get sloggy at times.

Update: to add Technorati and Bloglines links to your posts

I’ve added Technorati and Bloglines links to each of my posts.

For WordPress, the Technorati link is:

<a href=”http://www.technorati.com/cosmos/search.html?rank=fresh&url=<?php echo get_permalink() ?>” >Technorati Links</a>

If you’re not using WordPress, you’ll need to replace the function call to print out the permalink with whatever your tool supports. Just see what the tool uses for your permalink and copy this into the placeholder of the Technorati link.

For Bloglines citations (thanks to Dare for pointing this out):

<a href=”http://www.bloglines.com/citations?url=<?php echo get_permalink() ?>&submit=Search” >Bloglines Citation</a>

Again, replace the WordPress permalink function call for whatever your tool uses.

These will return the links, in Technorati or in Bloglines, for a specific post. Now, Bloglines was just bought out by Ask Jeeves, so who knows how long this functionality will last. And I’m sure someone somewhere is about to buy out Technorati, so ditto. But might as well make use of the functionality for now.