The rest of the Web saw hypertext as an electrified table of contents, or a supply of steroid-addled footnotes. The Suckters saw it as a way of phrasing a thought. They stitched links into the fabric of their sentence, like an adjective vamping up a noun, or a parenthetical clause that conveys a sense of unease with the main premise of the sentence. They didn't bother with the usual conventions of "further reading"; they weren't linking to the interactive discussions among their readers; and they certainly weren't building hypertext "environments". ... Instead, they used links like modifiers, like punctuation - something hardwired into the sentence itself. Most hypertext follows a centrifugal path, forcing its readers outward. The links encourage you to go somewhere else. They say, in effect: When you're done with this piece, you might want to check out these other sites. More sophisticated hypertext story-spaces say: Now that you've enjoyed this particular block of text, where would you like to go next? Suck, on the other hand, points its readers outward only to pull them back in, like Pacino's tragic dance with the Mob in the Godfather trilogy. The links were a way of cracking the code of the sentences; the more you knew about the site on the other end of the link, the more meaningful the sentence became.