
The Return of Upcoming.org by Andy Baio - mxfh
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/waxpancake/the-return-of-upcomingorg
======
drgath
Reminds me of when I worked at Yahoo, and in 2009 I had to track down someone
who worked on Upcoming. I found someone who had Upcoming listed in their
Backyard profile, but "Oh, I don't work on that anymore. Last I heard {other
person} was working on it." So I tracked down that person, only to hear the
same response. Following the chain, four or five people and half a day later I
finally found the _one person_ in the entire company who worked on
Upcoming.org, but only part-time in a community support role. Having recently
started at Yahoo, I quickly began to realize what was wrong.

Luckily things have changed considerably since then, and very happy to see
Upcoming being handed back to its creator. Same thing should have happened
with Delicious, but when they were looking for a buyer, Yahoo (allegedly)
refused to sell it back to Joshua Schachter.

~~~
badman_ting
Why the hell did they bother acquiring it, then? I don't get it.

~~~
wpietri
I have know knowledge of this incident. But often corporations don't make
sense from the outside because it's really about some hidden state.

E.g., maybe the person who argued for the acquisition left the company, so
nobody was around to advocate for it anymore. Or the company's strategy
changed, either for sensible reasons or just because there's a new fashion. Or
the person in charge of the acquisition is mainly rewarded for buying things,
but the people needed to make the integration work are rewarded for something
that the acquisition would hinder, so they ignore or sabotage it. Or everybody
really meant well, but it was nobody's highest priority, so it just dies a
slow death.

------
Adaptive
I was upcoming.org user 500 or so and set up the Hong Kong info in it then. It
was heartbreaking to see it atrophy and die. Another in the long list of
acquisitions that demonstrate the ability of Yahoo's corporate mediocrity to
smother good ideas.

If you are uncertain about resuscitating Upcoming, here's a timely anecdote: I
ran an annual scrub on my RSS feeds yesterday. Per category dead-feeds are
usually around 1-2% (even including hot areas like tech).

This year my local feeds category, which long ago replaced upcoming.org for
me, _was over 30% dead feeds (from just one year ago)._ Newspapers, local
focus blogs, etc. The category need is still there but through recent
attrition of local content sites, failure to deliver from local-content
aggregation services, bad content acquisitions (MSNBC/Everyblock's buying
spree followed by its failure), the local content category is ready for new
entrants.

I wish Andy the best in this and will be backing.

------
cromulent
Andy is too humble to mention it, but he is an alumni of Kickstarter, joining
them in 2008 and was at one point the CTO.

[http://waxy.org/2008/09/kickstarter/](http://waxy.org/2008/09/kickstarter/)

~~~
mecredis
Indeed, but he does mention it briefly in the beginning of the video!

------
mountaineer
I liked Upcoming and generally am a fan of Andy's work, but doesn't
kickstarter frown on these types of projects? Are they making an exception
because of Andy's contribution to the site as a prominent leader in the
community?

From the Kickstarter guide:

"Kickstarter cannot be used to fund websites or apps focused on e-commerce,
business, and social networking." [1]

From the project:

"Most importantly, it surfaced what your friends were interested in attending.
Upcoming was among the first generation of web apps to use the social network
for anything beyond Friendster-like connections, helping to define Web 2.0."
[2]

[1]
[https://www.kickstarter.com/help/guidelines](https://www.kickstarter.com/help/guidelines)

[2] [https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/waxpancake/the-
return-o...](https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/waxpancake/the-return-of-
upcomingorg)

~~~
waxpancake
Solid question, and I don't blame you for being skeptical. I went through the
normal submission process, and was reviewed by a moderator I don't know and
have never met. I very explicitly didn't want any special treatment. I was
told it met their guidelines.

My understanding, looking at the recent projects in the Technology and Web
categories, is that they've loosened their enforcement of that guideline over
the last year. Take a look at a search for "Social" in Technology, and you'll
see a bunch of sites/apps that push that guideline:
[https://www.kickstarter.com/discover/advanced?term=social&ca...](https://www.kickstarter.com/discover/advanced?term=social&category_id=16&sort=end_date)

I think the fact that Upcoming is, first and foremost, an arts/technology
event calendar weighed in its favor over, say, a social network for cats.

~~~
bdcravens
My understanding is that web sites shouldn't be crowd-funded because they have
no end, given the need for ongoing hosting, as opposed to products that are a
discreet "thing".

~~~
timdiggerm
That's a good point. In this case, I think it's pretty clear that you are
funding the resurrection-attempt. No guarantees it will work and that the site
will then stick around, but you'll be funding the initial resuscitation.

------
denzquix
As Jason Scott (@textfiles) notes on Twitter, this will be something of a
first: with all the old content coming back, Archive Team/archive.org
"literally provided a backup of a site while it swapped owners."

------
smackfu
Making the two top tiers be sponsorships is interesting. Those raised about
half the total so far. I wonder if anyone was thinking, hey, this is a pretty
cheap way to get good visibility. Especially the $1000 city sponsorship, since
you can just pick big cities like NYC.

~~~
tijs
I was wondering about that. I guess picking the cities would be on a first
come, first serve basis... which could get ugly if you find out you can't pick
your favorite city -after- you've spent $1000.

------
Raphael
What does Upcoming.org do better than Facebook, Google+, and Meetup.com?

~~~
scelerat
For starters, it's _not_ Facebook or Google+.

Many people are looking for ways to be less dependent on FB and Google+. If
the Upcoming folk shape this the right way, both in product design and pitch,
they will capture people who are tired of creepily pervasive social networks
but still want to set up events easily.

~~~
alaskamiller
Who are these magical unicorns? Because it's starting to feel like outrage
porn to point out how people just don't want to invite themselves to a
Facebook event.

~~~
parennoob
Since you use the phrase "magical unicorns" \-- I know 10-15 people (and not
just 'tech' people; they work in different fields like art, writing, etc.) who
refuse to use Facebook because it erodes privacy and atrophies your brain
(which I personally think is a very sensible position, even though I use
Facebook).

Every time there is some event, other people chide them for not having a
Facebook, "Oh, you are too snobbish to have a Facebook, how do I even invite
you to this.". If nothing else, upcoming.org seems like it would solve that
problem -- specially if it allows stuff like easy event imports from Facebook.

~~~
alaskamiller
I remember Upcoming.org from 2003, back then it was a problem needing a
solution but within a few years it was already pointless like plancast or the
variety of other event listings and invitation systems.

There are events your friends want you to show up. Whether that message is
sent via Facebook, email, text, paper, or face to face is irrelevant. If you
are wanted there, you will be there.

There are events you want friends of friends to show up. Facebook facilities
this quite well, and if you don't have a Facebook account to do so but they
still want you there, well, you'll likely be there.

Then there are events you want strangers to show up. Facebook serves this
quite well. If the events require a ticket, Eventbrite's got that covered. If
it's a business event then your Gcal or Outlook has it covered.

In this landscape, where does upcoming.org, where does an anti-Facebook
solution stand? And is it enough to cover payroll?

Because snobbishness aside--I don't own a TV because TV atrophies your brain
when I can create art because I'm artist--this... really isn't a problem
anymore.

~~~
lhl
The scenario where Upcoming excelled, or at least the one that that seemed to
"convert" users and why I think 10yrs later it's still so fondly remembered
(looking at the response on Twitter has been nice) is when Upcoming told you
about that event that you didn't know about and would have kicked yourself for
missing ("if only I had known this thing I would have loved to go to was
happening last night!").

Over the years I experienced this first hand many times (regrettably, also a
lot of "can't go, too busy working on Upcoming"), but I haven't seen anything
since that's provided the sort of social+interest-based serendipity that
Upcoming did in its heyday. A lot of times in the past few years when I've
been traveling I've wish there was something like Upcoming that could
recommend the most interesting things to do in a city that night (like 4SQ or
Yelp for events).

------
8ig8
What did Yahoo! originally pay for Upcoming? I'd guess it was significant. The
reason I ask is why the Kickstarter campaign?

~~~
L_Rahman
The Kickstarter campaign appears to be a way for Andy to determine that there
is still enough demand for what Upcoming provided for it to be worth building
for him.

------
ejstronge
This is the first project I've backed on kickstarter - I often miss events,
mostly concerts, that come through and would love to see what other, like-
minded people are doing/thinking of doing.

I also like the idea of having a development blog to follow, hopefully similar
to what Chris Granger did with Light Table though perhaps with more technical
posts. Are there other examples of good development blogs to follow? Ideally,
I'd like blogs where the writer explained choices that s/he had to make.

~~~
simonw
If you're currently missing concerts, have you tried
[http://www.songkick.com/](http://www.songkick.com/) ?

------
evunveot
It feels good to have a beloved service (potentially) returning, but I believe
there's another opportunity here that's being missed. I don't know if it's
been tried before, but there's a way to organize a service like this, one that
relies completely on user-generated content, that would likely be much more
resilient: a cooperative.

Forgive me if this is half-baked. I'm not an expert by any means.

Add a pledge level of, say, $150, with the reward being that you become a
founding consumer-member of the upcoming.org co-op. The way co-ops work, the
surplus or benefit of the co-op's operations is periodically distributed (as a
"patronage dividend") to the members in proportion to their "patronage" of the
co-op in that period. In a worker co-op, patronage is usually defined as hours
worked and the surplus is basically the profits of the business (cash). In a
consumer co-op like a natural food store, a member's patronage is how much
they spend in the store, and the patronage dividend comes in the form of lower
prices.

You could define patronage in the upcoming.org co-op as participation in the
site: contributing content, performing moderation, that sort of thing. The
patronage dividend can be distributed in the form of free or discounted
admissions to events or other rewards of that sort. Otherwise, it would
operate the same as it would as a for-profit corporation (probably ad-
supported in some way).

(In case it's not clear, I'm not saying the site should be members-only.
Anyone would still be able to have full use the site, but those who pay the
$150 membership contribution would just have additional privileges and/or
responsibilities.)

As far as operations, it could be a multi-stakeholder co-op, as in a hybrid
worker/consumer co-op. There would be two classes of members, one for
employees and one for users. Some proportion of seats on the board of
directors would be elected by each class (maybe 50/50). The board would then
hire managers charged with keeping everything running (monitoring budgets and
all that). In that way, the user-members would have a voice in major
decisions, via their board vote.

There would be no risk of the founder selling out, because it's a standard
part of the by-laws of most co-ops that memberships/votes are non-transferable
and the co-op as a whole can't be sold unless it's to an entity that maintains
the rights of the members (i.e. another co-op).

The main downsides are more organizational complexity and overhead and the
fact that the founder has a much smaller upside potential. In other words, the
best-case scenario for the founder is pretty much a stable job.

Obviously a lot of details would have to be worked out, but I can't help
thinking that all the talk about building something sustainable for "the
community" is pretty rhetorical if you're not willing to actually give the
community a stake in it.

~~~
neilk
Ex-Upcoming employee here. I have no expertise to suggest that a cooperative
model can work on the internet, but I agree.

Personally, the experience of watching Upcoming wither and die is what got me
first interested in alternative ways to pay for social networks and other
community service websites. Co-operatives are one possible model.

------
jenkinsj
I really appreciate this: TBL says cool URIs don't change!
[https://www.dropbox.com/s/2l158c8adnba9nw/Screenshot%202014-...](https://www.dropbox.com/s/2l158c8adnba9nw/Screenshot%202014-05-07%2013.32.02.png)
[screenshot]

------
brianbreslin
Do you think we will see web app projects being backed like this on
kickstarter more often? Imagine geocities or some other site being resucitated
using 2014 tech.

------
oliv__
What's up with the weird digitalized Miles Davis tune in the background?

~~~
kellanem
[https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/waxpancake/kind-of-
bloo...](https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/waxpancake/kind-of-bloop-
an-8-bit-tribute-to-miles-davis)

------
feca
OK, I think an app this simple doesn't need funding, specially in a world
where people die of starvation and malaria. Yet all I get for my observation
is downvotes.

~~~
aspidistra
You didn't mention that you thought the app was simple. You said you thought
running crowdfunding for it was dishonest and immoral.

In any case... Parsing 35TB of HTML, JavaScript and images, and then releasing
that as structured data, on top of rebuilding a sustainable web service? I
don't think it is simple at all. It's not exactly a hackathon project.

~~~
feca
I think we can debate that point, but what I can't understand is the reason
behind the downvotes. Downvoting prevents the debate entirely, and I find it
unreasonable.

~~~
DanBC
Your first comment said "I find it dishonest and immoral". You should have
followed that sentence with some explanation about why you felt it was
dishonest or immoral. Perhaps you don't realise just how offensive that
sentence is?

Some of your later comments say something along the lines of "why pay money
for this when people are starving?" Well, you can apply that to everything.
What computer are you using right now? Why didn't you buy a €30 raspberry pi
and donate the rest to a clean water charity?

Interesting innovative ideas or discussion about developin world problems do
get upvotes. Merely saying "why spend on this instead of starving children"
will allost always get downvotes because it's not an interesting discussion.

------
feca
Why do they need the funding? I find it dishonest and immoral.

~~~
aeontech
You may think it is unnecessary, but I don't see how it is dishonest or
immoral. Those are very strong words not supported by any argument.

~~~
feca
Nobody asked for an argument, and by downvoting any argument on my part was
prevented. I can explain why I find it immoral: I think the world has many
real and deep problems, and investing in a web application that is not hard to
build and solves a superfluous first world problem, is a waste of resources.
Conversely, I think profiting from it is dishonest and immoral. You may
disagree with my reasoning and you may have a different world view to compare,
but the downvotes just terminate the conversation.

~~~
biot

      > Nobody asked for an argument, and by downvoting any
      > argument on my part was prevented.
    

I feel like we're all being trolled, but how is your failure to present a
cogent argument in your initial comment affected by downvotes that occur at a
later time? You did the online equivalent to walking up to someone and saying
to their face that they are dishonest and immoral, without any rationale for
such an offensive position. In real life, you'd be punched in the face or, at
the very least, escorted off their property. Is the fact that you're being
downvoted really that surprising to you?

What you write is being held to a higher standard than what you are accustomed
to. You can choose to use this as an opportunity to grow and improve your
writing and better present your thoughts or you can choose to complain at how
unfair it is. In your Redis comment[0] you talk about having manners and
respect for other people's work. Perhaps you can hold yourself to this same
standard.

[0]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7349654](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7349654)

