Subject: web sites going dark

From: stan kulikowski ii <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 08:11:31 -0400 (EDT)

>> I was wondering, and I have asked the firm where I
>> work, if all web sites (commercial and otherwise)
>> should "go dark" in memory of the victims today.
>

  on this suggestion, i put my entry page of a web design course dark, so
we could discuss the issues and techniques of design in the course.  the
technique is rather simple, but the motivations are a little more complex
than i had anticipated.

  how many times can any of us recall that this was done?  for what reasons?

i seem to recall that some web sites went dark after the passage of the
telecommunications act of 1996.  this was done in protest over the
censorship issues in the decency parts of the bill, and these were
eventually struck down by the supreme court.  i would not imply any
causality here, but the judicial result did give some validation to the www
expression.

going dark in protest is a different motivation than going dark as an
expression of support for victims.  same technique, different goals.  it
seems to me there is some risk of misunderstanding ambiguous sentiments
tied to the same expression.  i had thought that support of victims means
the people who survived the attack, and the relatives of those who died--
and probably those of us who have an empathy of this event as a tragedy.
there is a different 'support of victims' which means to focus on the dead.
like 'remember the alamo' was a symbol to charge emotional energy and spur
soldiers into later battles.

news agencies are showing detailed images of the towers falling which are
intended to charge the sentiments of the viewers.   children will be
drawing images of jets, towers and smoke to discharge these anxieties they
get from the news.  very similar symbolic expressions which either build
catharsis or discharge it.

i could use a little RFC on this design technique of web sites going dark,
at least to collect data on when and how this has been used.  perhaps some
informal guidelines on the range of motivations and use of symbols.
                                                           stan

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 12:07:13 -0400

>   how many times can any of us recall that this was done?  for what reasons?

A case could be made that we should keep our web sites *not* dark.

Consider this:  Israel is a small country surrounded by much larger countries
that don't particularly care for it.  Yes, it has a continuing problem with
terrorist attacks - but not as much as you'd expect from location and population
considerations.  Why don't they have MORE of a problem?

I'll submit the hypothesis that it's because every terrorist wanna-be that didn't
just fall out of a tree knows that if you use a car bomb on an Israeli site, it
doesn't accomplish much - you kill a few victims, they have funerals, the
Israeli military launches a reprisal atttack.  But the terrorist doesn't accomplish
his main goal - upsetting the populace.

In the initial hours after the attacks, somebody stated that George W Bush
should return immediately to Washington DC, to send the message that he believed
that DC was safe.  I opined that no, he should remain in Nebraska for a while -
because an even more powerful message for the terrorists than "DC is safe" is
the message "it doesn't even *matter* if DC is safe - this country is so great
and so capable that we can drop our President in the middle of a corn field
200 miles from anywhere, and he can STILL run the country from there".  It may
not be the message *our* people want to hear - but if the terrorists learn that
they're just trying to nail Jello to a tree - and that it's explosive Jello to
boot.....

				Valdis Kletnieks
				Operating Systems Analyst
				Virginia Tech

---

From: vint cerf <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 20:01:53 -0400

consider a twist of ribbon as an alternative?

vint

---

From: David Farber <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 20:48:02 -0400

The web is the most valuable source of information to citizens and the 
world at this difficult hour. To darken it at this time would be 
disrespectful for those who died in defense of the freedom to know.

Dave

---

From: stan kulikowski ii <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 23:50:20 -0400 (EDT)

>disrespectful for those who died in defense of the freedom to know.

  perhaps we are talking about different techniques.  a web site goes dark
by changing its background to black, maybe with solemn trim and some other
incidental graphics (like a ribbon twist if one is accepted as the icon).
they do not go offline, or stop performing their functions in any other
way.  it is a visual effect only to express sorrow over some issue.  how is
this disrespectful?  the same data is available, but with a style that
represents the mood.

  i thought that was understood as the design technique  there is a
difference between going dark and turning off.
                                    stan

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 21:33:34 -0700

>difference between going dark and turning off.

the term "go dark" has a long-standing meaning of "shut down".  i'm used to 
hearing it about theatres and other performance venues, but it certainly 
has been the standard meaning for at least the last 50 years...

and I wish I did not know that.

d/

----------
Dave Crocker  <mailto:[email-masked]>
Brandenburg InternetWorking  <http://www.brandenburg.com>
tel +1.408.246.8253;  fax +1.408.273.6464

---

From: mcmurry jim <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2001 00:04:32 -0700 (PDT)

Im sorry I did not elaborate further.

What I meant by "going dark" was not an actual
shutdown, but in fact along the lines of what both
Stan and Vint have stated....

To make something else more prominent on the site,
other than commerce.  This is what numerous sites have
done:

www.apple.com
www.amazon.com
www.barnesandnoble.com
www.verizon.com
www.ge.com
www.sun.com

They all have varying degrees of this.  None has
turned out the lights, but have made other things more
prominent on their sites.

I have had quite a few emails directed at me from
individuals (and not to the list) that had some pretty
choice words for me, but I still stand by my idea.

And to the gentleman who asked about the peoples in
Iraq and Jugoslavia, I would expect the peoples in
those countries have done similar things, both online
and offline when tragedy struck,.

Every human life is precious, no matter where you are
in the world, and anything like this, where the toal
is greater than Pearl Harbor and the sinking of the
Titanic, not only US citizens, but people from
Mainland China, Poland, France, Singapore, etc where
in these buildings, they too must not be forgotten.

jim
> and I wish I did not know that.

__________________________________________________
Terrorist Attacks on U.S. - How can you help?
Donate cash, emergency relief information
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/fc/US/Emergency_Information/

---

From: stan kulikowski ii <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2001 13:20:42 -0400 (EDT)

>has been the standard meaning for at least the last 50 years...

  if i might interject a little from the arts into an engineering group...

  even in the theater 'going dark' does not mean that the performance
functions  cease.  the stage goes dark usually for a scene change which is
a time of intense production activity.  the actors are groping their way
off stage and stage crew are scurrying about changing the set pieces.  i
have done this many times when i worked in theaters.  there are some
dramatic effects when actors continue to speak lines in the dark and the
actual performance does not even pause.  the signal when the show actually
does shut down are the house lights coming up, not the stage going dark.
even backstage, the stage lamp is lit when the show shuts down so it is not
dark there either.  'going dark' is only when a performance is in full
operation.

  i think most web designers should have known what jim mcmurry meant by
'going dark'.  i certainly did.

  now, that we have the terminology cleared up, does anyone recall other
events when web sites went dark?   besides the telecommunication act of
1996, i have a vague recollection about AIDS awareness, but do not recall
when any event would trigger this response on the internet.  i think a
sorrow or sympathy reaction is generally tied to time-specific condition.
the acceptance of the twisted red ribbbon for AIDS was recognized as an
icon for an academy awards ceremony after rock hudson died if i remember
right.

  if there are so few web designers on the ietf, perhaps this is the wrong
forum to collect this information.  where else might we go?
                                                      stan

   .                                              [email-masked]
  ===    qui non est hodie cras minus aptus erit
  | |    who not is today, tomorrow less suitable will be
  ---            -- Ovid _Remedia Amoris_ i 94