this person just used the term “fansites” to mean onlyfans and 😔

@Lady Are Those Even Websites.

@gaditb they're sites but they're not web

@Lady I feel like sites are more... total? managed uniquely?

Like a building is a site in the way a website is, but I don't think a cubicle is or a stage is.
(I'm pretty sure an apartment or a mall kiosk can be a site, though.)
And I think an OnlyFans is more a cubicle or stage than a building.

Is what I think my thoughts are.

@gaditb generally the distinction i make is more basic; if you treat it like a place then it's a site, and people treat onlyfans like a place (you can “go” there)

but idk i'm definitely not invested in defending it lol

@Lady Ah see I've been treating "a place you can 'go' " as, like, fundamental to the conceptualizing of space on the internet as a whole, and the specific properties of what you can expect when you go there as what determines what type of space it is (what shape/texture it has, how it fits in to broader spaces, etc.).

Like, the way I was thinking of it even something as small as a Twitter thread, including replies (or not including replies), is a place you can go.

@gaditb yes, but an API call isn't

so for me "site" means a particular set of technologies or capabilities (navigable via a URL, human-readable, “interactive” rendering of hypertext content) enabled by the internet, in contrast to other uses of the internet (things without URLs, things without frontends, etc)

@gaditb but “web” is more demanding as it implies a certain level of interoperability and connection, whereas a URL which can only be viewed in a specific app or with a specific login can be a site, but isn't a part of the web