<i>"... What happens when you don’t date your articles? ..."</i><p>I read a lot of articles and going through through them is a bit like undertaking an archeology dig for useful bits of information. The best sites include subtle hints that convey context. Useful if you are evaluating, <i>"do I continue reading?"</i><p>How?<p>Authoritative sites are good because they convey more meaning than just an article. They tell you <i>"who"</i> is writing, <i>"when"</i> it was written and most important their viewpoint and intent, the <i>"where"</i>. You find this out using subtle hints.<p>Date is an important clue for understanding context. Writers who don't including perceived affordances such as date, mark themselves as the writer equivalent of a first time ice skater constantly tripping over. A writer newbie, who doesn't grasp the concept of readers who use context to search and evaluate. Some sites where I have found a motherload of stuff:<p>- <a href="http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/" rel="nofollow">http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/</a><p>- <a href="http://htmlarchive.scripting.com/" rel="nofollow">http://htmlarchive.scripting.com/</a><p>- <a href="http://www.scottberkun.com/essays/" rel="nofollow">http://www.scottberkun.com/essays/</a><p>- <a href="http://paulgraham.com/articles.html" rel="nofollow">http://paulgraham.com/articles.html</a><p>- <a href="http://www.avc.com/a_vc/archives.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.avc.com/a_vc/archives.html</a><p>I read these sites again and again, because the value of the posts are increased by the <i>"perceived affordance"</i> of details such as the date a post was written.