Newsvine
  • Welcome
  • Help
  • Report Bug
  • Conversation Tracker
  • Your Column
  • Replies
  • Friends
Type Comments Since You Last CheckedArticle Source Last Checked Stop Tracking All Clear Tracking All
Advertise | AdChoices
Log In | Register
Close the Login Panel
Existing users log in below. New users please register for a free account.

New Users:

Existing Users:

E-Mail:
Password:
Forgot Password?
Please enter the e-mail address or domain name you registered with:
E-Mail/Domain:
Back to Login
Log Out
  • Top News
  • Local News
  • World
  • U.S.
  • Sports
  • Politics
  • Tech
  • Entertainment
  • Science
  • Business
  • Health
  • Odd News
  • More
    • Arts
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Fashion
    • History
    • Home & Garden
    • Not News
    • Religion
    • Travel
Visit Ilyanep's column >>

ILYANEP

Home Page
A Modern-Day Philosophe
Articles Posted: 17  Links Seeded: 25
Member Since: 4/2006  Last Seen: 3/11/2010

What is Newsvine?

Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.

Get a Free Account
Help
Fun Stuff
  • Your Clippings
  • Leaderboard
  • E-Mail Alerts
  • Top of the Vine
  • Newsvine Live
  • Newsvine Archives
  • The Greenhouse
  • Recommended Articles
  • Wall of Vineness
Put a Seed Newsvine link on your own site

Web 2.0 and Its Communities

Sun Jun 25, 2006 1:59 PM EDT
web2-0, technology, web-2-0, community, newsvine, wikipedia, blog, myspace, digg, social-networking, wiki, encyclopedia, xanga, livejournal, social-news, openid, newsvine-is-awesome
By Ilyanep

Live Poll

Favorite of the listed sites? (Newsvine left out cause it wouldn't be fair ;P)

View Results
  • 749
    Xanga
    0%
  • 750
    Livejournal
    5%
  • 751
    Wikipedia
    60%
  • 752
    Myspace
    10%
  • 753
    Digg
    25%

VoteTotal Votes: 20

Advertise | AdChoices

Web 2.0 is the new fairly old buzzword flying around on the Internet for a while. O'Reily defines Web 2.0 as using "the Web as a platform" and "harnessing collective intelligence".

To me, Web 2.0 is doing the Internet from the bottom up. For example, blogs allow you to publish your own unfiltered and unedited content. Wikis typically have more editors than administrators. And social news sites, such as Newsvine, allow the users to post the majority of the news.

Now, if the majority of content on these sites is created by users, it is probably important to know what sorts of communities these sites house. That's what the focus of this article is, for the most part. The following sites are places that I have a user account in, and have used for at least a little while. I won't go into a huge explanation of anything, as I simply want to outline the communities using broad strokes.

With that in mind, let's get started then.

Xanga

Xanga was the first site where I ever had a blog. According to Wikipedia, Xanga had its beginnings in 1999 as a place for people to share book and music reviews. It then eventually evolved into a place for people to host their own blogs.

As of May 3, 2006, Alexa Internet rated Xanga the 21st most popular English-language website, and the 42nd most popular website in the world.

To me, Xanga seemed like it had only the most basic of features. People can customize their blog layouts, add shout-out boxes, have comments, and 'subscribe' to other people's blogs (and have all new posts shown on one page).

Xanga's community is at once easy and hard to define. At a broad level, Xanga can be called the Myspace of blogs, as from what I've seen, it's very popular with the high school crowd. On the other hand, every community has its exceptions, but I can't really think of any off the top of my head (mostly because I haven't used it for a few years).

Wikipedia

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that was originally created in 2001 by Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger to be a compliment to their other project, Nupedia. Nupedia had articles/edits submitted by users but approved by accredited editors. Wikipedia was originally only meant to be a place where users could work on articles before submitting them. In the end, Wikipedia skyrocketed and Nupedia died. Final tally: Nupedia - 24, Wikipedia - 1,212,194.

Wikipedia is a radical new idea in that it places total and complete trust on the user. Anyone, and that means anyone can edit any article (for the most part). But I'm sure you've heard this already, so let me outline the community.

The community of the English Wikipedia is probably one of the most diverse groups of people I've seen on the Internet. People from many different countries, from all age groups, and any demographic contributing to the articles. Obviously, disputes break out from time to time, but there are numerous different ways to get conflicts mediated and solved.

Overall, Wikipedia is fun to edit and the community is pleasant most of the time.

LiveJournal

LiveJournal was originally created in 1999 by Brad Fitzpatrick as a place where he could share his activities with his high school friends. In 2005, it was purchased by Six Apart, the company that makes Movable Type.

I currently use LiveJournal for my blog. Aside from the fact that it has a pretty good set of features, I like the community.

Now, I can't say that I've delved too much into the community, but from what I've experienced, the Livejournal community is mostly people who are computer savvy, many of whom are geeks like myself. There's not as much immaturity as I've experienced on other blog sites, like Xanga.

Plus, Livejournal is one of the first websites to implement OpenID.

Myspace

Myspace, oh Myspace. Everyone's heard of it. It's the first widely successful social networking site for everyone (come on, it's not like Friendster was that successful). Everyone knows how it works, and everyone knows all the problems with it, including the 14-year-old girl whose parents recently sued Myspace for 'allowing' a man to pretend to be a high school senior.

The community is about as bearable as watching Napoleon Dynamite. The majority of the people on there are kids in High School, which is fairly understandable. However, the problems begin when the immaturity of these high school kids is blown wide open for everyone to see.

If Xanga is the Myspace of blogging, then Myspace is the AIM of social networking. In my opinion, it's not well developed, and the only reason I use it is to keep in contact with certain friends who only go on Mypsace anymore. The website is poorly designed, in my opinion, and half the functions go offline weekly for maintenance.

For just one example, see my other article, about how the old annoying e-mail forwards have, in a sense, migrated to these sorts of communities.

Digg

Almost everyone on Newsvine has probably been to Digg first. Digg originally started out as an experiment in 2004, when it was created by, among other people, Kevin Rose.

I think that we can all say Digg was a good and novel idea, and that Newsvine probably benefited from it being there.

Unfortunately, the community slips further and further into oblivion, not to be confused with Oblivion, every time I check up on it. Sometimes, 'intelligence' of the masses isn't quite as intelligent as previously thought.

Comments sometimes end up being very immature, and people vote down any comment that disagrees with their point of view, even if it brings up a valid point. That's part of the reason that I'm not a big fan of being able to vote comments down.

Newsvine

Newsvine, our favorite website ;).

Newsvine was originally founded in 2005, but opened up its floodgates to non-invite users in early 2006. It has quite a few unique features that sets it apart from Digg and Slashdot. I won't really go into them because we should all know them.

In my opinion, the community at Newsvine is much, much more mature than the one at Digg. Comments are much more rarely inappropriate, and logic tends to prevail more often. Perhaps it's just a function of having a small community, but I'd like to think that's it more of just having a more mature demographic around and that it'll stay that way. Perhaps the motto "get smarter here" was very aptly chosen.

And that ends our brief tour of a couple Web 2.0 websites. Unfortunately, the masses sometimes don't act very well, especially over the Internet. Good for us, though, that a few safe havens exist where we can have intelligent conversation. These places are addicting like no other.

Sweet Fennel! (Couldn't resist)

This has been another fluff article brought to you by Ilyanep not knowing what to write about :). Most information comes either from Wikipedia, general knowledge, or personal experience.

  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top | Front Page

Published to:

  • Ilyanep's Column, All of Newsvine
  • Groups: none
  • Regions: none
  • Public Discussion (8)
Jason Newton

I am sick of hearing about all this Web 2.0 nonsense. It seems to me just a fashionable 'tag' (no pun intended) for any site with some nice clean CSS and a sprinkle of Ajax.

I've nothing against your (well-written) piece but if people like yourself keep talking about Web 2.0 then it keeps getting hyped up.

Regards

  • 1 vote
Reply#1 - Sun Jun 25, 2006 3:01 PM EDT
Ilyanep

Yes, I agree Web 2.0 is a little over hyped for something that seems too little, but it is good to have a blanket term to call all of these websites.

They're a little more than a nice design and AJAX, but they're also content submitted by users. If you really look at it seriously, all 1990s websites were characterized by HTML, static pages, and the top feeding you content (much like television is now). On the other hand, this new breed of web pages is PHP/ASP.NET/other scripting languages, and content comes straight from the users. It's just something to call them, in my opinion.

  • 1 vote
#1.1 - Sun Jun 25, 2006 4:40 PM EDT
Reply
Dom Pody

Excellent article. I voted Wikipedia because it's the most productive of the sites you listed. Xanga/LiveJournal/MySpace are horrible websites because they don't do anything- "yay I can comment on pictures!!!!!!!!!11111ONE"- and Digg, while informational, has turned into a contest to see who can get the first post (Slashdot anyone?). Wikipedia, though, is informational and has a very unified community (most of the time... don't get me started on the userbox wars :p).

Although, had it been an option, I would've gone Newsvine for sure :)

  • 3 votes
Reply#2 - Sun Jun 25, 2006 4:00 PM EDT
KarlitaG

Yup, Wikipedia for me. Netvine is my new darling, though and I WOULD have voted for it. I lived through Web 1.0, working for my first Internet start-up in 1995 (yes, there was a commercial Internet back then). I think the Web 2.0 hype is fun and silly and goofy and it too will shake out to provide services we can't live without.

    Reply#3 - Mon Jun 26, 2006 6:51 PM EDT
    Jason Newton

    This sums it up nicely.

      Reply#4 - Thu Jun 29, 2006 9:35 AM EDT
      Ilyanep

      Straight past the gamma, delta, and epsilon stages, eh?

        #4.1 - Thu Jun 29, 2006 12:13 PM EDT
        Reply
        Shawn Gordon

        Web 2.0 does not exist.

        The advances being touted under the general umbrella of Web 2.0- advances written about with considerable skill on Web 2.0 Explorer Blog Richard MacManus - well, of course those advances exist. RSS, Social Media, content aggregation, podcasting, you have it.

        My problem is not with the characterization of the components of Web 2.0. It is the implication inherent in the very livery, "Web 2.0," that I just don't get.

        How did we get here? First of all, Web 2.0 is a marketing slogan. For perspective on this, let us go to what some would call a creature of Web 2.0 itself- Wikipedia. Here's what Wikipedia has to say about this Web 2.0:

        The term "Web 2.0" refers to what some people see as a second phase of development of the World Wide Web, including its architecture and its applications. It was coined by Dale Dougherty during a meeting between O'Reilly and Associates (a computer book publisher) and MediaLive International (an event organizer) as a marketable term for a series of conferences.

        There you have it. A slogan. Most marketers have them.

        The problem I have with this "Web 2.0" slogan is that it is a contrivance, meant to imply a unified movement or wave toward a better Web. Just the very numbering of the thing brings out my moo-goo detector: 1.0 sounds like a beginning. 2.0 (as opposed to a tenth-decimal, such as 1.7 or a 2.4 implies - by its very roundness, a coordinated, standards-based, like-minded rebirth, reconstruction, renaissance, resurrection, whatever you want to call it. 2.0 is the ideal number for such an impression: it implies a concerted, noble effort at refreshing an inspired, but now aging, creation. even "3.0" implies, well, we didn't get it right the first time, 2.0 was transitory and is getting long in the tooth, so here we are transitioning to 3.0. But 2.0 sounds good.

        Well, Web 2.0 is bunk. Not that the elements of this rebirth aren't there. I comment about some of them, and Richard has them nailed. It's just that they cannot be classified under a common umbrella. They are forward lurches of various standards and technologies, some compatible, some not. Some revolutionary, some evolutionary, some impractical. Some are collaborative, others are highly competitive with each other (Digg / Newsvine, though I do not think intentionally).

        Now, I'll point out what the Wikipedia article describes Web 2.0 consists of. The article attributes the elements of Web 2.0 as "one or more of the following:"

        A transition of websites from isolated information silos to sources of content and functionality, thus becoming a computing platform serving web applications to end users;

        A social phenomenon referring to an approach to creating and distributing Web content itself, characterized by open communication, decentralization of authority, freedom to share and re-use, and "the market as a conversation";

        • A more organized and categorized content, with a more developed deeplinking web architecture.;
        • A shift in economic value of the web, potentially equalling that of the dot com boom of the late 1990s.

        Wow, that's one broad umbrella. My problem with all this is not that the changes described in each of these points aren't real, it is just that many of these changes are incremental, and only related to each other in the broadest, most general sense.

        That is, until some clever marketers wanting to charge a fortune for you to attend their conferences dreamed this one up. Dreamed Web 2.0 up as a nice-off-the-tongue, easily memorable descriptor for come to our conferences, learn about what's hot.

        Or, as Wikipedia puts it:

        Skeptics argue that the term is essentially meaningless, or that it means whatever its proponents decide that they want it to mean in order to convince the media and investors that they are creating something fundamentally new, rather than continuing to develop and use well-established technologies.

        Well-put, Wikipedia! As an example to back that statement, I'll point out AJAX (Java and XML) and RUBY ON RAILS.

        The other false assumption about Web 2.0 is that it is a set of visual design standards, but most know by now it is not.

          Reply#5 - Thu Jul 20, 2006 7:31 PM EDT
          Ilyanep

          Very well put, Shawn Gordon, and I would tend to agree to a certain point. On the other hand, it's convenient to be able to group these sites, ones in which the users provide the content [which is my idea of Web 2.0], into one category.

          Of course I could call the article "Communities of sites where users provide the main content" or "Communities of blog, social news, and user-driven encyclopedia websites", but that's obviously long-winded :)

            #5.1 - Thu Jul 20, 2006 10:41 PM EDT
            Reply
            Leave a Comment:
            You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
            You're in XHTML Mode. If you prefer, you can use Easy Mode instead.
            (XHTML tags allowed - a,b,blockquote,br,code,dd,dl,dt,del,em,h2,h3,h4,i,ins,li,ol,p,pre,q,strong,ul)
            Newsvine Privacy Statement
            As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
            FUN STUFF:
            • Leaderboard |
            • E-Mail Alerts |
            • Top of the Vine |
            • Newsvine Live |
            • Newsvine Archives |
            • The Greenhouse |
            COMPANY STUFF:
            • Code of Honor |
            • Company Info |
            • Contact Us |
            • Jobs |
            • User Agreement |
            • Privacy Policy |
            • About our ads
            LEGAL STUFF:
            • © 2005-2012 Newsvine, Inc. |
            • Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
            • Newsvine is a property of msnbc.com