ID:188536
 
A friend of mine gave me a URL to a Geocities site that apparantly was created by Dantom during 1998.

It can be located here : http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Chasm/7626/

Is this a BYOND-prankster's hoax, another Dan and Tom unrelated to BYOND, or the misadventures of Dantom before the settlement of DUNG?

Please tell! :-D

~Kujila
It's another Dan and Tom, not related at all. DUNG was originally created in 1996, anyways =P
In response to Nadrew
DUNG was originally created in 1996, anyways

Oop! Guess I should've checked that out first, eh?

Thanks,

~Kujila
Funny, that site was created on 3/20/2004...
In response to Foomer
Uhmmm... That is impossible, concidering this topic was made 2 days before that o_O
In response to Shun Di
Which leads me to suspect that it wasn't last updated in 98.

That and no unupdated Geocities page would ever last 6 years.
In response to Foomer
Well, the content may be new... But the account itself is definitely an old one...

GeoCities hasn't used that URL system in ages (moving to a simple http://www.geocities.com/yahoousername format)... I'm not sure of all of the details, but the old system used subdomains like TimesSquare, and SoHo, and whatnot (presumably other Manhattan sections, like Tribeca...but I don't recall ever seeing any of these), followed by a secondary name (the "Chasm" in this instance...and I've also seen "Dojo" and other seemingly random words), and ended by a number...

I assume that upon signing up for a new GeoCities site, the user would pick what section they'd like to be placed into for their URL...

But anyways, I'm almost sure that they haven't used that system in a long while, so the account is definitely an older one...

But you're right about GeoCities not likely leaving a dormant site up for that long... I'd bet they have garbage collection that dumps the unupdated sites every once in a while (and in fact, I vaguely remember reading this in their ToS, but I could be mistaken)... But perhaps there was something in their user agreement back when that site's owner had signed up that promised that they wouldn't? Who knows...?

However, I'm still not entirely sure that this is a hoax... It actually seems like a genuine case of coincidence...

After all, the only details that match up are the names, and that they are game makers (and choosing "Dantom" as a company name by combining their first names isn't exactly a thought that could conceivably only strike one particular set of Dan's and Tom's)...

The games themselves don't match up with known Dantom projects (even the story of BYOND's beginnings as a particular game they intended to make can't really even be stretched to explain that list)... The site lists them as brothers... The site also gives Tom's (and presumably Dan's, since they are reportedly brothers) last name as something entirely different than BYOND's Tom (or Dan, for that matter)...

Sure, an inexperienced prankster from this site could potentially have set it up and made up some horribly uninformed and incorrect information in their attempt to make it sound like our Dantom, but I've gotta believe that anyone going to these lengths to try to convince us that these kids (the site is rather poorly designed, overly simple, and basically all-around childish in both wording and execution) are the "real" Dantom would have tried a little harder to get their story straight...

So, my judgement on the matter is that it really is just an innocent coincidence...
In response to SuperSaiyanGokuX
SuperSaiyanGokuX wrote:
I assume that upon signing up for a new GeoCities site, the user would pick what section they'd like to be placed into for their URL

Yeah, that's how it used to work. I'm told that they had a "cyberspace city" thing going - pick your "city" depending on the subject area of your website, then pick an empty "house" to make your site in. =)

So, my judgement on the matter is that it really is just an innocent coincidence...

Agreed. A weird coincidence, but a coincidence nonetheless.

If someone wanted to impersonate Dantom, there would be many better ways of doing so than setting up a Geocities website with a ton of incorrect information.
In response to Foomer
archive.org has entries in 2001 and 2002. (http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.geocities.com/ TimesSquare/Chasm/7626/) How do you figure it was created in 2004?
In response to SuperSaiyanGokuX
SuperSaiyanGokuX wrote:
GeoCities hasn't used that URL system in ages (moving to a simple http://www.geocities.com/yahoousername format)... I'm not sure of all of the details, but the old system used subdomains like TimesSquare, and SoHo, and whatnot (presumably other Manhattan sections, like Tribeca...but I don't recall ever seeing any of these), followed by a secondary name (the "Chasm" in this instance...and I've also seen "Dojo" and other seemingly random words), and ended by a number...

Area51! :)
In response to Shadowdarke
If you view source theres some weird line of code at the bottom with a date in it, but it appears to me to be something that geocities adds because I checked yesterday and today, and it was the current time I checked that it showed.
But what do dan & tom have to say about this website?
In response to Strawgate
11/24/98 --- HUGE NEWS!!! TOM BISCIGLIA IS COMING HOME FOR THANKSGIVING, AND WILL WORK ON BLAZING RAY!!! Also, Night fighter is being brought into consideration as a streets of rage-typed game. I'm making a new section of Game Status, so be prepared!! Huge remodeling, and a new game is bought into view. Reinken's Story!!!!!!!! Another Biggie ;)

simple.. if toms name isnt TOM BISCIGLIA then its not them =P
In response to Strawgate
Not much they can say; it's not doing anything wrong.
Wow... That was good for a laugh. The extremely poor site design was evidence enough, for me anyhow, that it coulnd't be anything related to our Dan and Tom. I mean, "Please email our company at [email protected] (I dont know how to make E-mail links, someone tell me please!)" That was just pathetic.

Resonating Light

In response to Resonating_Light
Resonating_Light wrote:
Wow... That was good for a laugh. The extremely poor site design was evidence enough, for me anyhow, that it coulnd't be anything related to our Dan and Tom.

http://web.archive.org/web/20010201060000/http://byond.com/
In response to Jon88
Still looks better than the site in question.