249

The revived No JS Club celebrates websites that don't use Javascript, the powerful but sometimes overused code that's been bloating the web and crashing tabs since 1995. The No CSS Club goes a step further and forbids even a scrap of styling beyond the browser defaults. And there is even the No HTML Club, where you're not even allowed to use HTML. Plain text websites!

The modern web is the pure incarnation of evil. When Satan has a 1v1 with his manager, he confers with the modern web. If Satan is Sauron, then the modern web is Melkor [1]. Every horror that you can imagine is because of the modern web. Modern web is not an existential risk (X-risk), but is an astronomic suffering risk (S-risk) [2]. It is the duty of each and every man, woman, and child to revolt against it. If you're not working on returning civilization to ooga-booga, you're a bad person.

A compromise with the clubs is called for. A hypertext brutalism that uses the raw materials of the web to functional, honest ends while allowing web technologies to support clarity, legibility and accessibility. Compare this notion to the web brutalism of recent times, which started off in similar vein but soon became a self-subverting aesthetic: sites using 2.4MB frameworks to add text-shadow: 40px 40px 0px hotpink to 400kb Helvetica webfonts that were already on your computer.

I also like the idea of implementing "hypotext" as an inversion of hypertext. This would somehow avoid the failure modes of extending the structure of text by failing in other ways that are more fun. But I'm in two minds about whether that would be just a toy (e.g. references banished to metadata, i.e. footnotes are the hypertext) or something more conceptual that uses references to collapse the structure of text rather than extend it (e.g. links are includes and going near them spaghettifies your brain). The term is already in use in a structuralist sense, which is to say there are 2 million words of French I have to read first if I want to get away with any of this.

Republished Under Creative Commons Terms. Boing Boing Original Article.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] ThePowerOfGeek@lemmy.world 49 points 3 weeks ago

JavaScript, AJAX, and modern web frameworks have pushed us away from displaying information in a pure and clean way. We need to go back to a better time!

Looks at no-HTML websites

Shit, we've gone back too far!

[-] b_tr3e@feddit.org 20 points 3 weeks ago

CSS on the other hand is quite essential to separate layout from content. Which is a good thing, so I can't really think of a reason for a "no-CSS" rule. Specifically if you can use inline styles as well but in a way more messy way.

[-] garretble@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago

CSS is useful but also the devil.

[-] SonOfAntenora@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

CSS is mostly evil when you have to center elements in the page.

[-] garretble@lemmy.world 14 points 3 weeks ago

text-align: center

or

margin: auto

or

grid

or

flexbox

It's really not that hard now.

[-] Bilaketari@reddthat.com 2 points 3 weeks ago

What if I still have to support IE6?

[-] garretble@lemmy.world 20 points 3 weeks ago

Then quit your job and get one that doesn’t need to worry about stuff Microsoft doesn’t support anymore.

[-] tomenzgg@midwest.social 5 points 3 weeks ago

I made a promise, Mr. garretble: a promise. "Don't you make me use any other browser," said my nan; and I don't mean to. I don't mean to.

She's still using Windows XP.

[-] frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 3 weeks ago

Someone will thank you for your service. Not me, but someone.

[-] dontbelievethis@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 weeks ago

Then your life choices should be of more concern then centering a div.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Zexks@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

Learn flex forget pixels and screen measurements.

[-] howrar@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 weeks ago

I think the idea is that you keep the layout as simple as possible such that you don't need any code for it, css or otherwise.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] umbraroze@slrpnk.net 26 points 3 weeks ago

"No HTML club" is kinda going too far on the Web. If you go there you might as well start a No HTTP Club and serve stuff over Gopher and FTP.

But we definitely need an HTML 2.0 Club.

[-] ChuckTheMonkey@fedia.io 8 points 3 weeks ago

Might as well do no digital club and we exchange information through mail and pigeons.

[-] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 3 weeks ago

Too much information.
Back to smoke signals.

Wait. You know what? Back to monke!

[-] whaleross@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

It was a mistake to leave the oceans in the first place.

load more comments (1 replies)

I recently made www.timedial.org, using mainly HTML 3.2. I tried HTML 2.0, but the lack of tables, fonts and even text alignment was a bit too much.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

HTML 2.0 doesn't have tables, and tables are not so bad, even org-mode has tables.

Since HTML 4.01 was a thing when I first saw a website:

Being able to have buttons is good. Buttons with pictures too.

And, unlike some people, I liked the idea of framesets. A simple enough websites could have an IRC-like chat frame to the left and the main navigable area to the right.

And the unholy amount of specific tags is the other side of the coin for not yet using JS and CSS for everything.

I think an "RHTML" standard as a continuation and maybe simplification of HTML 4.01 (no JS, no CSS, do dynamic things in applets, without Netscape plugins do applets with some new kind of plugins running in a specialized sandboxed VM with JIT) could be useful. Other than this there's no need in any change at all. It's perfect. It has all the necessary things for hypertext.

[-] yeah@feddit.uk 2 points 3 weeks ago
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] CriticalMiss@lemmy.world 18 points 3 weeks ago

I can get behind no JS club, I can’t get behind no CSS club.

CSS is 🆒

[-] Retro_unlimited@lemmy.world 17 points 3 weeks ago

Just earlier I was reading about this website hosted on solar power and the extremes they went through to get the website to be simple so very little data is transmitted to save precious watts.

The website https://solar.lowtechmagazine.com/about/the-solar-website/

[-] RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 weeks ago

This is genuinely inspiring to me, may be my new ADHD hobby for the next couple of weeks.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Absaroka@lemmy.world 12 points 3 weeks ago

I do wonder if we're going to see some websites popping up that kind of hit the reset button on social media and go back to smaller communities of folks with something in common.

I kind of miss the days of actually having online conversations with folks you know are real people (not bots), that aren't trying to be an influencer, or get famous, or some how many money off your interactions.

[-] meejle@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

I think it'll happen, but I don't think it's happening yet.

The unease is already there ("the internet used to be a place"/"why isn't the internet fun any more?" sentiments and #OldWeb #SlowWeb hashtags), but I don't think people are ready to do anything about it.

I'm only one guy, with a small internet following, but I recently had a go at launching a small "Gaymers" webring (well, a simplified version of one). I promoted it on my socials, I laid out why I think it's a good idea, I paid to "Blaze" it on Tumblr – I even emailed some like-minded creators directly.

I rewrote the webpage multiple times, to try to make it more persuasive and more concise. I added a contact form in case people felt uncomfortable emailing me. I loosened the rules to allow commercial websites, as long as they were still independent. I worked hard on the widget and incorporated feedback (made it respect prefers-reduced-motion and made a static version for sites where animation would feel out of place).

I got some good feedback; lots of people said it was interesting, and a good idea. But literally no one joined or expressed any interest in joining. 🤷‍♂️

I'm going to have one more go at promoting it next time I've got money to spare, but I'll most likely end up quietly deleting it along with any evidence it existed, because a webring of one is fucking embarrassing. 💀

I guess if you build it, they will not necessarily come lmao

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] blah3166@piefed.social 2 points 3 weeks ago

Check out the gemini protocol: https://geminiprotocol.net/

It kinda fills that niche of the "old web".

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago

How do you use hyperlinks without HTML?

[-] dubyakay@lemmy.ca 11 points 3 weeks ago
[-] Banthex@feddit.org 12 points 3 weeks ago

Jesus. This is getting out of hand.

[-] Agent641@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

We can go further. We could take away your fancy "URL"s and just use IP addresses for navigation.

Heck, we could do away with TCP/IP altogether and network over serial. It's a perfectly functional protocol with several baud rates to choose from. I like ol' reliable 9600, but I sometimes dabble in 115200 when I'm feeling adventurous.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 5 points 3 weeks ago

Forces one to avoid deep links and parameter crap. I'm sorta two minds about this.

[-] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 2 points 3 weeks ago

If you want to know copy and paste this link into your browser: text.only

[-] cabillaud@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

That reminds me of lynx

[-] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 10 points 3 weeks ago

Pfff, that's nothing. My club doesn't even have a website.

[-] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 10 points 3 weeks ago
[-] the_wiz@feddit.org 6 points 3 weeks ago

Just to mention it:

gopher://sdf.org

There is no better place for plain and real content

[-] owl@infosec.pub 6 points 3 weeks ago

no http club, who is joining?

[-] zloubida@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 weeks ago

I did using Gemini (the protocol, not Google's thing) and Gopher.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 weeks ago

Pretty much have. If it's not https, I stay away.

[-] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

No HTML should rather do all-Commonmark instead, imo. Background color and text width & stuff should not be your (the creators) business but my (the users) business only. But some basic styling is nice.

[-] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

i guess Commonmark is the same thing as Markdown?

in that case, this is why i love the fediverse (especially lemmy) so much: comments and posts are simple markdown.

it comes quite close to the principle of distributing content in the way of markdown articles.

[-] AmidFuror@fedia.io 4 points 3 weeks ago

I am in the "whistling into the phone handset on a dialup connection is the purest form of online communication" club.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] the_q@lemmy.zip 3 points 3 weeks ago

Get this bs outta here. I write on paper! No one knows my thoughts or feelings!!

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] vantablack@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 3 weeks ago
[-] CaptPretentious@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

That is made by someone who had a Geocities website, or went 1000% in on MySpace back in the day.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2025
249 points (98.8% liked)

Technology

72958 readers
1139 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS