Given how worried everyone is about the AI slopocalypse where the internet is drowned in LLM-generated junk content maybe it's time for a resurgence of human curated directories like this one.
I joined a web ring last year, but I'm uncertain about it. Modern web rings tend to automate updates to the next/prev buttons, so I'm never sure what I'm linking to. The web ring owner acts as curator, but I don't know how much effort they put in to keep slop or other undesirable content out.
I'm part of one and I don't think it really promotes discoverability. What could work would be some kind of search engine restricted to said webring to make a button to list similar articles. At least I would click on such a button!
I'd like to argue that Wikipedia also tries to be comprehensive within the limits of relevant topics. And overall, Wikipedia still seems to be going strong.
I'd argue that Wikipedia and its 'sister' projects have accidentally cannibalized a sizeable fraction of the former 'non-commercial, non-business focused' Internet of the 1990s and early 2000s. If you're providing information in a way that's not intended to further some sort of profit motive, it makes sense to work within that large established project because that maximizes the resulting exposure. The rise of LLMs only makes this starker, every LLM is trained from Wikipedia.
> Wikipedia [..] have [..] cannibalized a sizeable fraction of the former 'non-commercial, non-business focused' Internet of the 1990s and early 2000s
Interesting take. Do you mean Wikipedia has cannibalized the traffic to these web sites or do you mean that Wikipedia lead to these web sites going offline altogether?
The problem with https://ooh.directory/ is that nobody can tell what gets added and what doesn't. Submissions go through an opaque review process and a lot of good submissions don't make it.
Just try searching your favorite bloggers in ooh.directory. 9 out of 10 times they'll be missing from the directory.
I'd prefer a more transparent directory where we can can tell why something is or isn't added.
Hi, it’s my site. I’m sorry you don’t feel this hobby site run by one person doesn’t have a sufficiently transparent process. The process is: I add blogs that are interesting, recently-updated, etc, when I have time. And there’s only so much of that in life.
Another problem is that I like to add a variety of sites so that people following what’s recently added don’t get swamped by loads of blogs on one topic. And last time the site got on HN the suggestions (not “submissions”) were swamped with mostly men with rarely-updated blogs about computers. I’m expecting more now :)
I also enjoy searching for blogs that I find interesting and adding those, rather than relying solely on the suggestions. Honestly, I’ve been thinking of removing the suggestions form entirely, because it results in exactly this level of expectation and uncertainty about what gets “approved”.
And, yes, of course lots of blogs are missing! Look how many blogs are in there and try to guess how many blogs there might still be out there!
Just wanted to say: thank you for making and maintaining this. I’m sorry that so many of the initial comments on this HN post are from one person complaining that their submissions didn’t get accepted. That’s the thing with the personal web: it’s personal! It’s what that person wants, which happens to be the thing that makes it great. If you don’t like it, the rest of the internet is still there.
To be fair, I appreciate the technical effort it takes to build and maintain a directory like this. It isn't lost on me that many people like it. Kudos to the author for creating this. I absolutely don't mean to be negative about it.
But that shouldn't stop me from sharing my experience as a user. That it feels frustrating when I spend time making a bunch of submissions and I never hear anything back. But yeah, it's their website and their rules. Yes, it's one person making the decision. Yes, it's personal. I understand all that.
I was more interested in finding something less personal and more community-ish. where the power to add or reject submissions does not lie with one individual. Wouldn't that be nice?
Have you looked at MetaFilter? I've been a lurker there for years, but have never contributed so I don't know what that process looks like. But their tagline is "Community Weblog". It might be worth checking out.
>I was more interested in finding something less personal and more community-ish. where the power to add or reject submissions does not lie with one individual. Wouldn't that be nice?
This would be overwhelmed with AI slop within days.
> This would be overwhelmed with AI slop within days.
Why so? What's the logic? With ooh.directory, one person is curating it. With a community project, 10 people may curate it. What makes 10 people curating the list more susceptible to slop?
I think the challenge would be picking those 10 people, in a way that is satisfying to you and everyone. (Is there a good way to find 9 like-minded people on the internet who have spare time?)
And to prevent commercial and political interests from joining the community, and later overwhelming the original core team.
I think you're asking the author to organize a structure like Wikipedia, with talk pages and topic experts, which would be a significant undertaking.
> removing the suggestions form entirely, because it results in exactly this level of expectation
I think the expectation is less about the suggestions form and more because of the tagline "a place to find good blogs that interest you". If the tagline was clearer that these were hand curated, then I think no one would care about the process you currently have.
There's always some friction between implicit assumptions of reader and writer. I assumed they were hand curated. I've never seen algorithmic selection produce the kind of variety I see on there.
>> Another problem is that I like to add a variety of sites so that people following what’s recently added don’t get swamped by loads of blogs on one topic. And last time the site got on HN the suggestions (not “submissions”) were swamped with mostly men with rarely-updated blogs about computers.
Essentially my trouble with every "share your blog" type thing that appears on HN. Some of the blogs do show some interest outside computers, but those posts are quickly swamped by more computer touching.
I appreciate the curation in favor of diversity of interest here.
edit: You can see it in a lot of the suggested alternatives elsewhere. I think it's hard for someone to really get it if computer touching is their life. Curation like this is vital to avoid regression to the mean.
Yeah, from a HN point of view I imagine most blogs are tech blogs. But for me, trying to curate a wider selection, tech blogs should be a very small minority. There are so many non-tech categories that I’m much more interested in populating, never mind categories that don’t even exist yet. A real joy is finding a niche topic where there are loads of current blogs, all linking to each other. Blogspot is full of that kind of thing.
I'm not the site owner but it might help to share some of the content you'll see in Gmail when you hit "show original". That'll show things like SPF and DMARC pass/fail.
Plenty of blog aggravators with transparent curation processes exist, and are terrible. No need to make this one like the other others that are worse than it.
Sometimes I think about making public a utility or data set that I've curated for my own use. I don't necessarily intend to continue it or support it but I think, maybe some people would find it useful in its current state. And then I think about getting these comments all the time and it seems not worthwhile.
So what? This website is just some man's collection of blogs, not a government registry funded by tax money. It does not seem to even take public donations. Why shouldn't its maintainer be allowed to exercise personal judgement in his curation efforts? Why does he have to justify putting one blog up there but not another any more than the New York Times need to justify publishing one article but not another?
It is weird how entitled people can get when it comes to things others create and distribute for free. The same seems to happen with open source software in general too. Somehow the ones who pay nothing, ask for the most.
> So what? This website is just some man's collection of blogs, not a government registry funded by tax money. It does not seem to even take public donations. Why shouldn't its maintainer be allowed to exercise personal judgement in his curation efforts?
Unnecessarily aggressive response from you given that you are addressing positions I never actually took. Of course the maintainer is entitled to exercise personal judgement about what gets included. When did I say anything othrwise?
What I am saying is that, as a user, it is frustrating to spend time putting together submissions and then hear absolutely nothing back. I am not demanding special treatment, just a basic acknowledgement or a brief explanation when something is rejected. Expecting that level of courtesy when you interact with a project does not strike me as unreasonable. If that is considered entitlement, then yes, I suppose I do expect basic courtesy from people I engage with.
All I am asking is whether anyone might be interested in building something more community-ish, where decisions do not rest entirely with one individual. If someone creates that, I am happy to support it with my time and contributions. That is the only point I am making.
And then what? You're looking at a list of hundreds of submissions and why they have been added or not added, which completely defeats the purpose of that website.
I don't get the point of these sites, because it I want a curated list, I visit the front page of hackernews or reddit -- and trust the system.
Ohh.directory I'd the same thing, except for a different selection process.
don't see why it has to be this way. It doesn't take much to tell us what the review process is like and what gets added and what does not. If I know in advance that the blogs I submit are outside their scope, then I won't waste time submitting them.
I also don't see why there can't be an open directory of websites where the community makes decisions about what to add instead of leaving it to a single individual.
Give it a rest. The scope is in the FAQ. Blogs get added when I have time.
As you can tell from the site, there are many, many suggestions and I’m not finding time to add many new blogs https://ooh.directory/about/charts/
There is no guarantee any blog you suggest, even if it’s in “scope”, will get added before either of us die. If that’s a problem save yourself all this angst and don’t suggest anything.
Appreciate the reply. My submissions fell within the scope though. I think I took the rejections too personally. Sorry for that. I appreciate the time and effort you put into maintaining the site. I will give it a rest.
Sorry for being a pain in this thread. Wishing you all the best with the project going forward.
>> "I also don't see why there can't be an open directory of websites where the community makes decisions about what to add instead of leaving it to a single individual."
Because no one who wants one has made it. Why not be the change if it's something you want?
If your response is anything other than enthusiasm to get started, you understand why it hasn't happened.
I am pretty happy with https://marginalia-search.com/. It's kind of my secondary search engine at this point.
I can always search for anything and find indie websites writing about the topic.
It also helps with the dread of not having to add my personal site to yet another blog curation site which I don't know will:
1. Be maintained in the longer term.
2. Would be willing to add my site to the curation site.
Syndic8, DMOZ, NewsIsFree, and TX (lost to history?) used the same taxonomy approach seen on ooh.directory. All are defunct now, but DMOZ appears to live on as curlie.
Technically, we could tag our RSS feeds with the taxonomy defined by ooh.dir, which would allow us to automatically sort blogs into topic groups, but I haven't found a single feed that uses the approach. We end up with ad-hoc category labels that are challenging to deduplicate, or more often, uncategorized blogs.
Taxonomy labels are often deduplicated on Wikidata, the unofficial "hub" of the modern Semantic Web. There's already a defined property for matching DMOZ/Curlie labels, and others could be added if relevant.
That's great, will you also add the category field to the text file in the repo? These projects are often heavy on tech blogs and I'd like to filter those out.
From what I have seen over the years, the problem with such aggregation sites has been that the maintainer eventually loses interest or does not renew the domain etc.
The only way to maintain long term interest in such sites would be to have it as a github site/or a long term commitment, community contributions with some kind of community filtering/voting to maintain the quality of submissions.
Does the name ooh has anything to do with Yahoo. Because that was what reminded me of, but I cant find anything about naming info on the site. So just wondering.
There are lot of internet article farming, but the real internet is increasingly "small". So I am not surprised we are back to where we started again; Directory.
Some suggestions: I know none of us like "the algorithms choosing", but I think we can do better than alphabetical order. Number of clicks you see (popularity), or number of inbound links google tells you about would be good.
I also think you've gone to great effort, but it's still very light in some categories. I hope you keep going - what's your data source? Are you tracking outbound links from the ones you have indexed to find new blogs?
Thanks for the kind words. The source is user suggestions and my own searching and browsing.
I do sort of track outbound links, so that I can show which domains a blog links to most, which can sometimes give a sense of what the blog is about.
But, while I haven’t analysed the data, I suspect the links from one blog to another would be a very tiny percentage of the overall outbound links. It’s the kind of thing that might have been more interesting/useful in the olden days of blogging when more people linked to each other, and replied to each other, via blogs rather than social media.
I like the idea of some kind of algorithm minimalism, or at least parsimony; but I also think sometimes it might be appropriate? In this case, another approach would simply be randomization, which doesn't favor any name (Aaaaaron Aaaaanderson's blog :P ), this randomization can be consistent (such that you can find something you wish in linear time).
I think equally important is algorithmic transparency, that is, that the algorithm be publicly disclosed (although I think simplicity is a component of transparency: if you just dump a huge incomprehensible algorithmic mess somewhere that's not very helpful), so that you at least know what you are getting into, and better yet have some ability to choose and make educated critique of the current state of things (i.e. does the algorithm just maximize engagement like a slot machine? or does it optimize for some kind of helpfulness?).
the google is dying narrative usually misses the fact that the incentive loop for niche blogs is just broken right now. we're caught between writing for the 'helpful content' algorithm or writing for actual humans. curated directories like this are basically the only way to bypass the seo arms race and find real domain expertise again.
I'm not sure where they are at this moment, but a while back Google seemed to abandon EEAT and SEOed pages in favor of pure domain authority. So it no longer mattered if you page had the all-important "Key Takeaways".
Blogs are still discoverable via aggregators and link sharing. But those are ephemeral, directories like this and search engines like marginalia are important resources.
I'd argue there is a difference between a blog and a newsletter, but that would take longer to discuss than I have right now. But you're right that the boundary between the two is extremely blurry.
However, I'm guessing you tried to submit a Substack URL and was told newsletters aren't accepted? Even if I allowed newsletters, I wouldn't add any Substack newsletters because of the platform's fascist-supporting tendencies.
I'm not sure about the orange on dark green colour scheme, but I like that the site is responsive and light-weight, and manages to show a bunch of fancy effects in pure CSS.
I was surprised that Simon Willison's blog is listed in Python and Web Development categories, but not AI.
That’s one problem with categorising blogs - they often shift focus over time, like Simon’s. I’ve added it to the AI category now - thanks for pointing that out!
>> No blogs or categories were found matching emacs.
> OK then.
Exactly. This is a deeper problem with ooh.directory, that the review process is opaque. They do not explain why something is added or rejected. I do not care much about Emacs itself but I submitted several of my favourite bloggers who write about retrogames, gaming rigs, and custom keyboards. None of them were added. None at all.
I do not think we should be encouraging closed directories like this in the community. I would much rather see a transparent directory where the review process is clear.
> You do seem particularly offended or annoyed that some blogs you suggested have not yet appeared on the site.
I'm not offended. Just a little frustrated that I took the time to make some submissions of blogs I thought were missing but never heard anything back.
But you're right that it is your hobby site, so you get to decide what goes in.
I've been building a list of blog lists, and I know of 136 feeds that use that category tag. (Open filters, select emacs under category, adjust language as needed).
I've submitted entries but they never get added. I have no idea how they decide what makes it into the directory and what doesn't so I've stopped trying.
ooh this reminds me of the old internet. Altavista, Yahoo, etc. all had lists like this!
It's fun to click about and go down the rabbit hole of things I might not normally see in my daily routine which is now mostly about avoiding the hellscape of the modern internet.
Please considered sorting websites by last updated date by default, instead of alphabetical which is a pretty useless method of presentation. It works better for books and static pages, not dynamic internet content.
It’s not “useless” it just depends on what it is a user is looking for. I decided that alphabetical as default makes most immediate sense to someone arriving at the site. “Last updated” could also look a bit random initially.
But random orders lend themselves better for discovery? If somebody’s site is just AAA they will be at the top of the list forever, what value is there in that?
The value is that it's slightly easier to browse an alphabetical list than a random one (no, I don't have a citation for this).
But, yes, it would be nice to have the option to change the sort order, as well as the current filtering. One day, if it doesn't make the UI too complicated. I value simplicity.
Given how worried everyone is about the AI slopocalypse where the internet is drowned in LLM-generated junk content maybe it's time for a resurgence of human curated directories like this one.
Let's bring back the webring.
The no ai webring is full of really unique stuff. There’s definitively people out there still doing webrings. Now we need a metawebring.
https://baccyflap.com/noai/
Slop sucks and all, but those abandoned "let's make pages look like geocities" sites are pretty tiresome.
I joined a web ring last year, but I'm uncertain about it. Modern web rings tend to automate updates to the next/prev buttons, so I'm never sure what I'm linking to. The web ring owner acts as curator, but I don't know how much effort they put in to keep slop or other undesirable content out.
I'm part of one and I don't think it really promotes discoverability. What could work would be some kind of search engine restricted to said webring to make a button to list similar articles. At least I would click on such a button!
It was tried before (e.g. Dmoz) and it does not work after it becomes popular.
I'm thinking more like just taking all the text files from 80-90s and making a separate static, frozen in time internet.
Dmoz was trying to replicate the Yahoo! style of directory, which requires being comprehensive.
Today we don't need comprehensive, we need maximum signal and minimum noise.
If you're not trying to be comprehensive it's not a real directory, it's just an ordinary "awesome-list".
I'd like to argue that Wikipedia also tries to be comprehensive within the limits of relevant topics. And overall, Wikipedia still seems to be going strong.
I'd argue that Wikipedia and its 'sister' projects have accidentally cannibalized a sizeable fraction of the former 'non-commercial, non-business focused' Internet of the 1990s and early 2000s. If you're providing information in a way that's not intended to further some sort of profit motive, it makes sense to work within that large established project because that maximizes the resulting exposure. The rise of LLMs only makes this starker, every LLM is trained from Wikipedia.
> Wikipedia [..] have [..] cannibalized a sizeable fraction of the former 'non-commercial, non-business focused' Internet of the 1990s and early 2000s
Interesting take. Do you mean Wikipedia has cannibalized the traffic to these web sites or do you mean that Wikipedia lead to these web sites going offline altogether?
Yup. Search engines will basically be dead. Anything you’d type into a search engine you will probably prompt from an LLM instead.
But hand curated human directories should in theory have a very high signal to noise ratio. Every link should take you to a quality site.
Hear! Hear!
Related. Others?
A collection of 2,299 blogs about every topic - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40693787 - June 2024 (18 comments)
Remember to submit your blog to ooh.directory - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36458877 - June 2023 (6 comments)
Ooh.directory - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33719983 - Nov 2022 (167 comments)
The problem with https://ooh.directory/ is that nobody can tell what gets added and what doesn't. Submissions go through an opaque review process and a lot of good submissions don't make it.
Just try searching your favorite bloggers in ooh.directory. 9 out of 10 times they'll be missing from the directory.
I'd prefer a more transparent directory where we can can tell why something is or isn't added.
Hi, it’s my site. I’m sorry you don’t feel this hobby site run by one person doesn’t have a sufficiently transparent process. The process is: I add blogs that are interesting, recently-updated, etc, when I have time. And there’s only so much of that in life.
Another problem is that I like to add a variety of sites so that people following what’s recently added don’t get swamped by loads of blogs on one topic. And last time the site got on HN the suggestions (not “submissions”) were swamped with mostly men with rarely-updated blogs about computers. I’m expecting more now :)
I also enjoy searching for blogs that I find interesting and adding those, rather than relying solely on the suggestions. Honestly, I’ve been thinking of removing the suggestions form entirely, because it results in exactly this level of expectation and uncertainty about what gets “approved”.
And, yes, of course lots of blogs are missing! Look how many blogs are in there and try to guess how many blogs there might still be out there!
Just wanted to say: thank you for making and maintaining this. I’m sorry that so many of the initial comments on this HN post are from one person complaining that their submissions didn’t get accepted. That’s the thing with the personal web: it’s personal! It’s what that person wants, which happens to be the thing that makes it great. If you don’t like it, the rest of the internet is still there.
To be fair, I appreciate the technical effort it takes to build and maintain a directory like this. It isn't lost on me that many people like it. Kudos to the author for creating this. I absolutely don't mean to be negative about it.
But that shouldn't stop me from sharing my experience as a user. That it feels frustrating when I spend time making a bunch of submissions and I never hear anything back. But yeah, it's their website and their rules. Yes, it's one person making the decision. Yes, it's personal. I understand all that.
I was more interested in finding something less personal and more community-ish. where the power to add or reject submissions does not lie with one individual. Wouldn't that be nice?
Have you looked at MetaFilter? I've been a lurker there for years, but have never contributed so I don't know what that process looks like. But their tagline is "Community Weblog". It might be worth checking out.
I've only submitted a few things, but never seemed to face a selection process. I think the low paywall is the only barrier.
>I was more interested in finding something less personal and more community-ish. where the power to add or reject submissions does not lie with one individual. Wouldn't that be nice?
This would be overwhelmed with AI slop within days.
> This would be overwhelmed with AI slop within days.
Why so? What's the logic? With ooh.directory, one person is curating it. With a community project, 10 people may curate it. What makes 10 people curating the list more susceptible to slop?
I think the challenge would be picking those 10 people, in a way that is satisfying to you and everyone. (Is there a good way to find 9 like-minded people on the internet who have spare time?)
And to prevent commercial and political interests from joining the community, and later overwhelming the original core team.
I think you're asking the author to organize a structure like Wikipedia, with talk pages and topic experts, which would be a significant undertaking.
I’ve always enjoyed your curation, especially in the music department. Thanks so much!
> removing the suggestions form entirely, because it results in exactly this level of expectation
I think the expectation is less about the suggestions form and more because of the tagline "a place to find good blogs that interest you". If the tagline was clearer that these were hand curated, then I think no one would care about the process you currently have.
There's always some friction between implicit assumptions of reader and writer. I assumed they were hand curated. I've never seen algorithmic selection produce the kind of variety I see on there.
>> Another problem is that I like to add a variety of sites so that people following what’s recently added don’t get swamped by loads of blogs on one topic. And last time the site got on HN the suggestions (not “submissions”) were swamped with mostly men with rarely-updated blogs about computers.
Essentially my trouble with every "share your blog" type thing that appears on HN. Some of the blogs do show some interest outside computers, but those posts are quickly swamped by more computer touching.
I appreciate the curation in favor of diversity of interest here.
edit: You can see it in a lot of the suggested alternatives elsewhere. I think it's hard for someone to really get it if computer touching is their life. Curation like this is vital to avoid regression to the mean.
Yeah, from a HN point of view I imagine most blogs are tech blogs. But for me, trying to curate a wider selection, tech blogs should be a very small minority. There are so many non-tech categories that I’m much more interested in populating, never mind categories that don’t even exist yet. A real joy is finding a niche topic where there are loads of current blogs, all linking to each other. Blogspot is full of that kind of thing.
fyi, I just signed up and the confirmation email went to my spam folder (Gmail).
I'm not the site owner but it might help to share some of the content you'll see in Gmail when you hit "show original". That'll show things like SPF and DMARC pass/fail.
FTW!!!
Plenty of blog aggravators with transparent curation processes exist, and are terrible. No need to make this one like the other others that are worse than it.
Sometimes I think about making public a utility or data set that I've curated for my own use. I don't necessarily intend to continue it or support it but I think, maybe some people would find it useful in its current state. And then I think about getting these comments all the time and it seems not worthwhile.
An RSS feed of changes would help.
There should be a feed of “Recently added blogs” linked right on the home page!
Oh, hang on, what’s that I see on the home page?
So what? This website is just some man's collection of blogs, not a government registry funded by tax money. It does not seem to even take public donations. Why shouldn't its maintainer be allowed to exercise personal judgement in his curation efforts? Why does he have to justify putting one blog up there but not another any more than the New York Times need to justify publishing one article but not another?
It is weird how entitled people can get when it comes to things others create and distribute for free. The same seems to happen with open source software in general too. Somehow the ones who pay nothing, ask for the most.
> So what? This website is just some man's collection of blogs, not a government registry funded by tax money. It does not seem to even take public donations. Why shouldn't its maintainer be allowed to exercise personal judgement in his curation efforts?
Unnecessarily aggressive response from you given that you are addressing positions I never actually took. Of course the maintainer is entitled to exercise personal judgement about what gets included. When did I say anything othrwise?
What I am saying is that, as a user, it is frustrating to spend time putting together submissions and then hear absolutely nothing back. I am not demanding special treatment, just a basic acknowledgement or a brief explanation when something is rejected. Expecting that level of courtesy when you interact with a project does not strike me as unreasonable. If that is considered entitlement, then yes, I suppose I do expect basic courtesy from people I engage with.
All I am asking is whether anyone might be interested in building something more community-ish, where decisions do not rest entirely with one individual. If someone creates that, I am happy to support it with my time and contributions. That is the only point I am making.
> Submissions go through an opaque review process and a lot of good submissions don't make it.
That's no different than the old DMOZ.
And then what? You're looking at a list of hundreds of submissions and why they have been added or not added, which completely defeats the purpose of that website.
I don't get the point of these sites, because it I want a curated list, I visit the front page of hackernews or reddit -- and trust the system.
Ohh.directory I'd the same thing, except for a different selection process.
You either trust it or you don't.
> You either trust it or you don't.
don't see why it has to be this way. It doesn't take much to tell us what the review process is like and what gets added and what does not. If I know in advance that the blogs I submit are outside their scope, then I won't waste time submitting them.
I also don't see why there can't be an open directory of websites where the community makes decisions about what to add instead of leaving it to a single individual.
Give it a rest. The scope is in the FAQ. Blogs get added when I have time.
As you can tell from the site, there are many, many suggestions and I’m not finding time to add many new blogs https://ooh.directory/about/charts/
There is no guarantee any blog you suggest, even if it’s in “scope”, will get added before either of us die. If that’s a problem save yourself all this angst and don’t suggest anything.
Appreciate the reply. My submissions fell within the scope though. I think I took the rejections too personally. Sorry for that. I appreciate the time and effort you put into maintaining the site. I will give it a rest.
Sorry for being a pain in this thread. Wishing you all the best with the project going forward.
In which case they're in the pool of (currently) 2,888 other suggested blogs that I've yet to evaluate.
Please quit the yapping, you don't _want_ to understand it.
>> "I also don't see why there can't be an open directory of websites where the community makes decisions about what to add instead of leaving it to a single individual."
Because no one who wants one has made it. Why not be the change if it's something you want?
If your response is anything other than enthusiasm to get started, you understand why it hasn't happened.
I am pretty happy with https://marginalia-search.com/. It's kind of my secondary search engine at this point. I can always search for anything and find indie websites writing about the topic.
It also helps with the dread of not having to add my personal site to yet another blog curation site which I don't know will:
1. Be maintained in the longer term.
2. Would be willing to add my site to the curation site.
pretty sweet!
I was looking at the RSS spec a while back to figure out how the category field was supposed to work and ended up digging up web directory history.
https://alexsci.com/blog/rss-categories/
Syndic8, DMOZ, NewsIsFree, and TX (lost to history?) used the same taxonomy approach seen on ooh.directory. All are defunct now, but DMOZ appears to live on as curlie.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_web_directories
Technically, we could tag our RSS feeds with the taxonomy defined by ooh.dir, which would allow us to automatically sort blogs into topic groups, but I haven't found a single feed that uses the approach. We end up with ad-hoc category labels that are challenging to deduplicate, or more often, uncategorized blogs.
Taxonomy labels are often deduplicated on Wikidata, the unofficial "hub" of the modern Semantic Web. There's already a defined property for matching DMOZ/Curlie labels, and others could be added if relevant.
I also maintain a human-curated directory (and search engine) of personal blogs at https://minifeed.net
You can submit a blog here: https://minifeed.net/suggest
Criteria is pretty simple:
- Must be written by a human.
- Must be in English (for now).
- Must have a valid RSS feed.
- Must not be purely a "micro-blog", i.e. must have some content other than tweet-sized status updates or links.
This looks great. Your https://minifeed.net/about page is really nice too. Well done! You should make it a top level post if you haven't already
I've been meaning to do this for a year now, still feel like there are things to improve before I do that :)
> Must be written by a human
How does one ascertain this?
Honor system and smell test, I would think
I am a fan of https://blogs.hn/. It is mostly HN-like content, but I visit it daily. I wish there was a "new" view though.
Just worked on adding categories to Kagi Small Web (inspired in part by OOH) last night.
https://kagi.com/smallweb
This did give it a new dimension.
Each has its own RSS feed too as well.
It feels like we're _so_ close to having StumbleUpon back.
https://www.readsomethinginteresting.com/
It was an amazing site. Just click on the bookmark and discover something new.
That's great, will you also add the category field to the text file in the repo? These projects are often heavy on tech blogs and I'd like to filter those out.
We are classifying them at runtime, per entry. More accurate and LLMs are cheap.
From what I have seen over the years, the problem with such aggregation sites has been that the maintainer eventually loses interest or does not renew the domain etc.
The only way to maintain long term interest in such sites would be to have it as a github site/or a long term commitment, community contributions with some kind of community filtering/voting to maintain the quality of submissions.
Does the name ooh has anything to do with Yahoo. Because that was what reminded me of, but I cant find anything about naming info on the site. So just wondering.
There are lot of internet article farming, but the real internet is increasingly "small". So I am not surprised we are back to where we started again; Directory.
A good idea, and one I had myself recently.
Some suggestions: I know none of us like "the algorithms choosing", but I think we can do better than alphabetical order. Number of clicks you see (popularity), or number of inbound links google tells you about would be good.
I also think you've gone to great effort, but it's still very light in some categories. I hope you keep going - what's your data source? Are you tracking outbound links from the ones you have indexed to find new blogs?
Thanks for the kind words. The source is user suggestions and my own searching and browsing.
I do sort of track outbound links, so that I can show which domains a blog links to most, which can sometimes give a sense of what the blog is about.
But, while I haven’t analysed the data, I suspect the links from one blog to another would be a very tiny percentage of the overall outbound links. It’s the kind of thing that might have been more interesting/useful in the olden days of blogging when more people linked to each other, and replied to each other, via blogs rather than social media.
I like the idea of some kind of algorithm minimalism, or at least parsimony; but I also think sometimes it might be appropriate? In this case, another approach would simply be randomization, which doesn't favor any name (Aaaaaron Aaaaanderson's blog :P ), this randomization can be consistent (such that you can find something you wish in linear time).
I think equally important is algorithmic transparency, that is, that the algorithm be publicly disclosed (although I think simplicity is a component of transparency: if you just dump a huge incomprehensible algorithmic mess somewhere that's not very helpful), so that you at least know what you are getting into, and better yet have some ability to choose and make educated critique of the current state of things (i.e. does the algorithm just maximize engagement like a slot machine? or does it optimize for some kind of helpfulness?).
the google is dying narrative usually misses the fact that the incentive loop for niche blogs is just broken right now. we're caught between writing for the 'helpful content' algorithm or writing for actual humans. curated directories like this are basically the only way to bypass the seo arms race and find real domain expertise again.
I'm not sure where they are at this moment, but a while back Google seemed to abandon EEAT and SEOed pages in favor of pure domain authority. So it no longer mattered if you page had the all-important "Key Takeaways".
Blogs are still discoverable via aggregators and link sharing. But those are ephemeral, directories like this and search engines like marginalia are important resources.
Turns out my blog is actually a newsletter? Seems like a distinction without a difference.
I'd argue there is a difference between a blog and a newsletter, but that would take longer to discuss than I have right now. But you're right that the boundary between the two is extremely blurry.
However, I'm guessing you tried to submit a Substack URL and was told newsletters aren't accepted? Even if I allowed newsletters, I wouldn't add any Substack newsletters because of the platform's fascist-supporting tendencies.
I have a page on my site dedicated to list the blogs I frequent:
https://rednafi.com/blogroll/
I'm not sure about the orange on dark green colour scheme, but I like that the site is responsive and light-weight, and manages to show a bunch of fancy effects in pure CSS.
I was surprised that Simon Willison's blog is listed in Python and Web Development categories, but not AI.
That’s one problem with categorising blogs - they often shift focus over time, like Simon’s. I’ve added it to the AI category now - thanks for pointing that out!
Quick, Simon, pivot to cooking!
Wow, I just worked on a blog sophistication analyzer. I wonder what could be learned by comparing all blogs here together: https://github.com/juleshenry/-shtetltleths-
Opened it, and two clicks in I immediately found a blog that made me say “woah”. Success!
> No blogs or categories were found matching emacs.
OK then.
>> No blogs or categories were found matching emacs.
> OK then.
Exactly. This is a deeper problem with ooh.directory, that the review process is opaque. They do not explain why something is added or rejected. I do not care much about Emacs itself but I submitted several of my favourite bloggers who write about retrogames, gaming rigs, and custom keyboards. None of them were added. None at all.
I do not think we should be encouraging closed directories like this in the community. I would much rather see a transparent directory where the review process is clear.
You do seem particularly offended or annoyed that some blogs you suggested have not yet appeared on the site.
You can read the FAQ article to see the criteria for what’s accepted, and also reasons why suggested blogs haven’t yet appeared.
Ultimately it’s my own hobby site and so I decide what is “good” or “interesting” - so long as it meets the other criteria.
> You do seem particularly offended or annoyed that some blogs you suggested have not yet appeared on the site.
I'm not offended. Just a little frustrated that I took the time to make some submissions of blogs I thought were missing but never heard anything back.
But you're right that it is your hobby site, so you get to decide what goes in.
The sole person running this site doesn't find the same things interesting than you do. How dare they.
The sense of entitlement displayed is really breathtaking.
There's an RSS planet that curates blogs about emacs, for anyone who is looking.
https://planet.emacslife.com/
I've been building a list of blog lists, and I know of 136 feeds that use that category tag. (Open filters, select emacs under category, adjust language as needed).
https://alexsci.com/rss-blogroll-network/discover/
lol
Even after the site being on HN last time, and getting hundreds and hundreds of tech blog suggestions as a result, none of them were about emacs.
What are your favourite emacs blogs?
You can be the first! (I'd be interested!)
I've submitted entries but they never get added. I have no idea how they decide what makes it into the directory and what doesn't so I've stopped trying.
You've posted ten times in this thread alone... You never stopped trying, but you should.
Vim wins again
I'm subscribed to the Index Issue (i think that's the name) which has a nice short list of curated blogposts. Works for me!
Granted, I'd love a more technical version. Perhaps anyone here could start one?
Make an RSS list, pick the ones out you liked and BAM, you got my sub :)
ooh this reminds me of the old internet. Altavista, Yahoo, etc. all had lists like this!
It's fun to click about and go down the rabbit hole of things I might not normally see in my daily routine which is now mostly about avoiding the hellscape of the modern internet.
the internet got just a little bit more human again.
This is great. Some good nostalgia vibes.
The fact that it’s not exhaustive and is a reflection of the creator’s taste is a feature, not a bug.
Nice nostalgia but are these directories actually being used by anyone?
https://minifeed.net is another similar site that I’ve enjoyed.
Have another look at this great project!
https://hnpwd.github.io/
Please considered sorting websites by last updated date by default, instead of alphabetical which is a pretty useless method of presentation. It works better for books and static pages, not dynamic internet content.
It’s not “useless” it just depends on what it is a user is looking for. I decided that alphabetical as default makes most immediate sense to someone arriving at the site. “Last updated” could also look a bit random initially.
But random orders lend themselves better for discovery? If somebody’s site is just AAA they will be at the top of the list forever, what value is there in that?
The value is that it's slightly easier to browse an alphabetical list than a random one (no, I don't have a citation for this).
But, yes, it would be nice to have the option to change the sort order, as well as the current filtering. One day, if it doesn't make the UI too complicated. I value simplicity.