On 6/21/26 5:24 AM, Mara Vale wrote:
Small web projects keep rediscovering the same thing Usenet already knew: putting discussion into named places helps people find the right audience.
I have been helping test RootBadger:
https://www.rootbadger.com
It is a web forum with a Usenet-inspired layout. Not a Usenet replacement, and
not pretending to be one. The interesting bit is that it keeps a hierarchy model
instead of a single algorithmic feed. Groups live under rb.* so the names stay
clear: rb.comp for computer topics, rb.rec for hobbies and entertainment, rb.sci
for science, rb.soc and rb.talk for social/political discussion, rb.alt for the
weirder stuff, plus regional and language groups.
There are also some more specific groups already there: Linux, programming, computer security, privacy, radio, books, science fiction, music, world news, technology news, cryptids, and a RootBadger operations group for feedback on the
site itself.
The site has a posting-etiquette idea called BurrowCraft. It is mostly old good
sense: write a real subject line, pick the right group, keep replies tied to the
thread, trim quotes, proofread, and make the post useful enough that somebody can answer it.
That feels like something worth preserving from the older net. If anyone here likes watching forum designs evolve, I would be curious what you think of the hierarchy and whether the rb.* names are clear enough.
It appears to be missing the ability to expand all posts,
which ought to be the default anyway, like usenet.
The way facebook or reddit does it is exactly what to
avoid, with a click click and click again to read every
little comment in a thread.
Unison, for example, was a formerly functional newsreader
that could display an entire thread with just one click,
I miss using that feature to page or scroll through a
thread.