unearth.wiki

The -ing of Web 2.0

/ɪŋ • ʌv • wɛb • tuː • poɪnt • oʊ/ English gerund suffix "-ing" (continuous action, ongoing process) + Web 2.0 (user-generated content era, 2004-present). "The verbs users invented when platforms only gave us nouns."
Definition The thesis that the true landmarks of Web 2.0 are not the platforms themselves (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram) but the user-generated verbs—the gerunds, the "-ings"—that users invented to describe new social behaviors within and against platform architecture. Terms like friending, unfriending, liking, retweeting, hashtagging, lurking, selfieing, shadowbanning, and doomscrolling are the real archaeological record: vernacular language encoding lived experience, ritual practice, power struggles, and emotional texture that official platform terminology never captured. These "-ings" are Cultural Fossils—evidence of how people actually used (or resisted, or were harmed by) social media, as opposed to how platforms wanted them to use it.

The Core Thesis: Verbs, Not Nouns

When historians excavate the Web 2.0 era decades from now, what will they find?

The official record will show:

But the real history—the one that captures how billions of people lived within these platforms—is written in verbs:

Archaeological Principle: Platforms are architecture. User-generated language is artifact. Architecture tells you what was built. Artifacts tell you what was lived.

The "-ing" suffix is crucial—it marks continuous, ongoing action. These aren't one-time events; they are rituals, practices, habits embedded in daily life. The gerund form linguistically preserves the repetitive nature of these behaviors: you don't "like" once—you're liking, perpetually, compulsively.

Vernacular vs. Platform Language

Platforms create official terminology:

Platform language is prescriptive—it dictates how features should be used. Vernacular language is descriptive—it captures how features are actually used, including emergent behaviors, unintended consequences, and user resistance.

This divergence is archaeologically significant. When user language differs from platform language, it reveals:

The -ings: A Typology

User-generated verbs can be categorized by what they reveal about Web 2.0 culture:

Category -ing Examples What It Reveals
Social Curation Friending, Unfriending, Blocking, Muting Digital relationships as performative, revocable, quantified
Performative Identity Retweeting, Sharing, Hashtagging, Selfieing Identity as curated presentation, not authentic expression
Engagement Currency Liking, Hearting, Upvoting, Favoriting Social approval quantified, gamified, commodified
Silent Participation Lurking, Creeping, Stalking (profile viewing) Majority participation is passive consumption, not creation
Platform Pathologies Doomscrolling, Rage-baiting, Thirst-trapping User awareness of manipulative design, yet inability to resist
Power & Control Shadowbanning, Deplatforming, Doxxing Asymmetric power—platforms control visibility, users control exposure
Algorithmic Navigation Gaming (the algorithm), SEO-ing, Hashtagging Users learning to speak the language of invisible systems

Why Gerunds Matter: The Linguistic Archaeology

The "-ing" form is not accidental—it encodes specific cultural meaning:

1. Continuous Action (Not One-Time Event)

"I liked a photo" vs. "I'm liking photos"—the gerund signals habitual behavior, not isolated action. This matters because it reveals Web 2.0 behaviors are compulsive, repetitive rituals, not casual interactions.

2. Normalizing the Abnormal

When a behavior becomes a gerund, it's been normalized into culture. We don't have a gerund for "using a telephone" (no one says "I was telephoning"), but we have "texting," "tweeting," "TikToking"—because these are distinct practices with cultural significance beyond the tool.

3. Encoding Social Practice Beyond Technical Function

"Liking" is not just "clicking a button"—it encodes:

The technical function is: "Increment like counter by 1." The social practice is: "Liking."

4. User Agency in Naming

Platforms built features. Users named practices. This is significant:

Naming is ownership. When users generate their own verbs, they reclaim linguistic authority over their own experience.

The Archaeological Value of User-Generated Language

Why does this matter for Digital Archaeologists?

1. Reveals Actual Use vs. Intended Use

Platforms intended the Like button as simple positive feedback. Users used it as:

The gap between intention and use is where culture happens—and vernacular language preserves it.

2. Captures Emotional Texture

Platform analytics measure engagement. User language captures emotion:

3. Documents Resistance and Awareness

When users name practices platforms want invisible (shadowbanning, doomscrolling), it's an act of archaeological resistance—making the hidden visible through language.

4. Preserves Context That Will Be Lost

In 50 years, when Facebook is a Digital Fossil:

The "-ings" are the primary sources future archaeologists will need to understand what Web 2.0 felt like.

Supporting Concepts from the Field Note

Dunbar's Number and Digital Scale

Robin Dunbar's research suggests humans can maintain ~150 stable relationships. Facebook "friends" routinely exceed 500+. The term "friending" reveals this cognitive dissonance—it's not friendship (intimate, reciprocal), it's friending (performative, scalable, revocable).

The 90-9-1 Rule

In online communities:

Yet platform language emphasizes creators ("Influencers," "Content Creators"). User language acknowledges the majority experience: "Lurking."

From Conversation to Connection (Turkle)

Sherry Turkle argues social media replaced conversation (messy, uncertain, human) with connection (curated, controlled, performative). User-generated verbs encode this shift:

Strategic Implications for the Foundry

For Digital Archaeologists:

When excavating Web 2.0 artifacts:

For Landmark Smiths:

When forging Landmarks or Monuments:

For Clients (Own Your Ground):

User-generated language demonstrates:

The -ings We'll Excavate in 2075

When future Digital Archaeologists excavate the 2020s, the "-ings" will be the artifacts that reveal:

These verbs—user-generated, vernacular, emotionally precise—are the true landmarks of Web 2.0. Not the billion-dollar platforms. Not the venture-backed unicorns. Not the IPO press releases.

But the words ordinary people invented to name what they were living through.

Final Thought: Platforms give us nouns. Users give us verbs. Nouns are things. Verbs are life. When we excavate Web 2.0, we're not looking for the architecture—we're looking for the -ings that show how people lived within it.
Stratigraphy (Related Concepts)
Cultural Fossils Landmark Doomscrolling Shadowbanning Attention Economy Platform Risk Digital Sovereignty Archaeobytology Archive & Anvil

a liminal mind meld collaboration

unearth.im | archaeobytology.org