Or, a society will just start having children again once the population gets small enough that having children becomes a more optimal decision or the supply of things that make having children optimal is increased...
I think it's a good thing to have more people creating things. I also think it's a good thing to have to do some work and some thinking and planning to produce a work.
I really try hard not to be down on stuff like this, to let it pass uncommented, but the mere creation of this site is evidence that creator missed the point of the original that they derived it from.
They don't have to actively cultivate it but they should remove the walls between it. There's a lot of red tape/administrative confusion at most schools if you want to do anything interdisciplinary, especially if you want to cross more than two disciplines. Institutions should be more like buffets for the polymath. If I want to interlink say landscape architecture, sculpture, acoustics, materials science and biology I shouldn't need more than one signoff much less the 5 it would probably take to do work in something like that at most universities.
The way to 'beat' the system's hard testing requirements is to make the interdisciplinary programs more involved, more quantitative, and just be more thorough and engaging, including soft skills elements.
I think the best outcome is to have such students crush their standardized tests by outperforming them due to having a higher baseline because of the interdisciplinary program's curriculum.
<font> was deprecated in, I think, the HTML 4 spec. That was published in 1999. Not a great signal to send anyone looking to hire you and checking your source code! And inline styles are just another way of using CSS!
There is a "here's ours" link in the first sentence on the homepage. Sadly the css hides all it's link styling. (Proper "brutalist webdesign" would have that as underlined blue text)
I saw the reply chain and I feel like there's some fundamental misunderstandings.
I don't think GP means adding links is spam, they're saying the links themselves are spam (wt definition 2, content automatically generated for marketing purposes) because that's what they are.
They're saying it's crass (wt definition 2: materialistic, or 1: lacking discrimination) because the goal of TFA is to move away from the machine-curated overly-commercialized impersonal/mechanical web and bring back a web focused on human touch. Creating a list with those commercial, machine-facing pages misses that goal.
They're not saying it's bad - obviously the only way someone would view your link page is if someone posted the link page somewhere of interest to them, it's not like you're pushing it in their faces. In fact, I think they thought the juxtaposition interesting and metaphoric for current social forces.
It's possible that you are an SEO geek and find new SEO marketing pages exciting, and have a circle of friends you share marketing pages with, maybe over coffee, in which case the one who misunderstood everything is me.
[edit] @wizzwizz4 Is it crass to edit your comment multiple times (with no declaration) to address a reply to your comment?
Lol. Thats how the site works. It asks you for a URL and a title for the link. It’s my page, my account, so I linked to my site when trying it out. C’mon. I’m not going to argue about it anymore. Y’all can keep downvoting me if you want to.
That would indeed be crass; but I thought my edits came in before your reply. I apologise if they didn't.
To actually address your comment: "my page" and "my account" are irrelevant. (You're not entitled to anything on someone else's server, except in special cases.) If you're linking those pages because you would like those they're relevant to to visit them, perception matters. If not… well, the perception of "spam" can lead people to treat your site as spammy. (Related: https://www.kjartan.co.uk/.)
I know I said I was done, but, let me get this straight. If I sign up for a website that was created for people to sign up to save links, and in doing so it requires you to submit a URL and a title for the link - and I use the page title as the title for the link: 1) I’m not entitled to do that and 2) It means my website is similar to a geocities page?
Interesting, really! Yes. And I should not step into a bar fight! ;-)
You are both right!
I love that you posted the link. You made it easy for me to get the point of the site as I did not want to use my mail. You effectively lowered my barrier of entry and I thank you for that.
Buuut. You did do the equivalent of just hitting "asdf" on the keyboard. I just put in "my own site". That was not clear to me up front either. I "felt" it "spammy" as well.
While disclaimers are often overused this would however had been nice. "Here you go (just dumb links to my own site)". That would actually have encouraged me even more to visit you.
Someone on the Internet was wrong. Please, no knives :-D
I haven't wanted to wade into this because I want people to use and experience the site in the way they want but also I am kinda interested in the discussion about what kind of "rules" should exist.
Honestly, I appreciate @Cabinguy for taking the initative to show people how it works and if the price of admission is some links to his stuff all the better. Furthermore, this is exactly what it is for. I guess in some ways it IS spammy but that's sort of the point is the market your own links. Generally this url then gets put in your instagram / tiktok / whatever bio that only allows one link.
I like that @WizzWizz4 (the greatest of the WizzWizzes in my opinion) was defending the "sanctity" of my site but also probably more importantly to them this site. However, I just don't think it is needed here. As the website was used as exactly it was intended.
You've generalised in a direction that erases the distinctions I'm trying to highlight. I'm talking about perception (specifically, perceived spamminess), and you're talking about what is permitted. If you don't care about the perception, then that's fine and you can safely ignore me.
1) I'm entitled to pour custard on my head. Doesn't mean that will achieve my goals if I do it in an investor meeting. 2) Sadly, I'm not comparing your page to the positive aspects of Kjartan Poskitt's homepage. Look at the bottom row of links, and the analogy should become clearer.
At least the links have nofollow on them (so only the ignorant/lazy/fraudulent SEO bottomfeeders will try to abuse this. Which I guess, to a first approximation, is "all of them"...)
American doomers generally underestimate how much better we have it than the rest of the developed world on just about every economic measure - income, wealth, employment, etc.
Like sure the EU, healthcare & education is cheap/free, but your taxes at the low end will are double to pay for that. And they pay nurses similar to what we pay fry cooks. Even higher pay places like London, UK pay 1/3 to 1/2 what you can make in NYC or SF for similar jobs.
