The (Indie)Web we weave

I am making a note here, so when we take for granted how awesome our information streams are, we can look back at this snapshot and see how we did it in the ol’ days. Bonus humor, if you catch how meta the topic is.

  1. Mike makes a post about, among other things, blogging and the IndieWeb.
  2. Matthew leaves a considerate and detailed comment on Mike’s post.
  3. Matthew decides to document the sentiment on eir own site (correctly, I think).
  4. Mike employs a snarky editorial method and posts an excerpt on
  5. That gets me thinking, and I reply, both to that particular line and the observation of how RSS is used on the web.
  6. To ensure that my reply is part of a conversation, I post a link in reply to Mike’s post.
  7. Mike points out my reply in further commentary, on the original blog post.
  8. Since I am not participating in the conversation on the original post, and other reasons, Mike then replies with the link to this new comment in the thread.

The hosted software involved in this conversation includes one or more email stacks, WordPress, Drupal and, and content was published on no less than five websites (not including the federation in for non-participants).

Not our DRYest moment. ^_^

The important lesson here is that Mike, Matthew and I are obviously comfortable with all the software involved, and the additional cognitive expense in posting in multiple places is mitigated by other factors that include dopamine and connectedness. The same things that bring people back to Facebook and Twitter. It isn’t fair, but fighting to stop the exploitation of human nature was never going to be a fair fight.

3 thoughts on “The (Indie)Web we weave”

  1. Yeah, I thought, way too long, about where to put my reply to your post. And for more than a few seconds about where to leave this comment.

    One way to see this is as a technical problem, to be fixed by everyone implementing some consensus federation protocol. Of course it’s not just a technical problem, as “consensus” indicates. I think the concepts of POSSE and PESOS are, being just concepts, more amenable to duct tape, including manual copying.

    A huge advantage to legacy silos harnessing internet technologies, for sure.

  2. D O P A M I N C E P T I O N


    I have been thinking about the duct tape on my own blaugh–how glad I am to have my own record of comments, rather than having it lost to the whims of whether Facebook’s relevancy algorithms decide to show me the content ever again (it’s usually there, just buried deep under “click to see all” links, so I can’t even ctrl-f search for the post/link/picture caption/comment I’m looking for in the browser). But then I get anxious about what people will think of their full name copied somewhere else, even though it’s a “public” facebook post–they’re counting on their comment or like being buried under the aggregate of all of our tiny dopamine injections. It does feel weird to have a record of everyone’s names. I think, “should I make a big obvious PSA that things will be copied over, every time I use the Social plugin?” (I did the first few times, but shouldn’t I assume that ppl might not have seen those PSAs?) and “I wonder how many people actually click through and realize there’s more on the blaugh” (I assume it’s quite few) …

    That’s all a bit beside the point. What I actually wanted to say was: I’m glad you are all actually using this marvelous sprawling series of tubes, because we’ll never know how to get to the place where we take for granted how awesome our information streams are. Haha. I fall into the trap of trying to use logic or something to predict behaviors (“oh, they’ll never actually click through to my status.judytuna site!”) but that isn’t the same as actually trying to use the tech.

    Also, it is so easy to accidentally post things on mobile!

    1. What is your concern about pulling out comments from Facebook? Are you worried that someone is going to get upset that they posted there, and it showed up on a different site? Would you be upset?

      I haven’t read a recent version of the Facebook EULA, but I am not concerned that the plugin raises any concerns for them; they could easily block it, and the plugin is sponsored by Mailchimp.

      The more important point, of course, is that the plugin helps Facebook users join the web, which was created to publish content and link it together. If you have cognitive dissonance from it, it is much more likely to be caused by the shame and guilt of using Facebook. =P

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *