When Was The Exact Day Slashdot Jumped The Shark?

by Noah Gift

In the era of Web 2.0, it appears that Slashdot has "Jumped The Shark". The question now, is when did this happen? I remember in the early 2000's, Slashdot was THE geek website, but something has changed and it appears they have lost the magic. I decided, today, to take them off of my RSS Reader, as I find their stories trite, boring and dare I say, irrelevant to IT?

So the questions of the day are:

When was the exact day, and, what was the exact story, that caused Slashdot to jump the shark?
Who did you replace Slashdot with in your RSS reader?
What is your best bet to the cause of their demise?

UPDATED SPECIFIC REASONS FOR TAKING SLASHDOT OFF OF MY RSS FEED:

Why I think Slashdot has Jumped The Shark?

Please note, comments are now closed as I can't respond to them all.

Due to an overwhelming response by a fanatical few, I have decided to post in detail, why I no longer find Slashdot interesting, or relevant, and why I have decided to take them off my RSS feed. This is just my opinion, and I am sure each and ever person that uses RSS at some point has made the same decision about another website. If you get angry easily you might not want to read the rest of this post:

1. I am 32, and I have outgrown any interest in the usual stories that appear on Slashdot. A specific example is this story, about a "Coup" attempt in an Apple Underground User Group. I have absolutely zero interesting in ever reading something like this for the rest of my life.

I felt violated reading something that stupid today, and I will admit it may be because of my age, and due to the fact that I now have a wife, a kid, and a life.

2. I never really participated in the community much, I only read stories, and as I mentioned the stories are getting very bad.

3. I am bored of the terms, "Troll", "Trolling", and "Dvork", they make my skin crawl just like it would make my skin crawl to hear someone use the terms, "Your playa hatin", or "Give me the bling, bling", or "Far out man". These terms are so commonly used on Slashdot that it is impossible to avoid them and the only possible alternative is to never read anything on Slashdot.

4. Slashdot played an interesting role in the early 2000's, as it was a human funneled aggregator for news stories. As technology has progressed, a different model of story submission has started to thrive and it does not require a select group of humans to filter which stories are good and which stories are not good. I believe the model that Digg, Reddit, and DZone use are far superior to the method of story submission and approval that Slashdot uses.

I feel that the method that Slashdot uses is a dying art, and the very poor quality of stories suggests that the human element responsible for editorial content is either very young, or not very good.

5. RSS Readers have changed the way people read technology and other news, and it has caused people to stop having a "home page" anymore. People now have the ability to create their own custom filters and get their own news in anyway they see fit. The role of Slashdot as the only aggregator for IT news has ended. Given a choice, I would much rather use RSS than the editorial process at Slashdot to get news stories.

6. As evidenced by the responses today, it is quite impossible to have a discussion with some outspoken members of the Slashdot community. It would take a large amount of patience, time and energy that I, frankly, am not willing to part with, to discuss why I am "liar, hypocrite, troll, etc". It is just not interesting to me, and even if it was I would probably need to quit my job just to respond full time to the complaints.

If you feel the urge to yell at me, please remember this is just my opinion and I am very sure other people feel very differently. I do not have the time to discuss the matter anymore due to work and personal obligations, but thank you to the people that did respond. I did learn one very important lesson today though, some opinions are probably best left unsaid, as the effort required to explain it is not worth the cost of expressing it.

In summary, I do feel Slashdot has "Jumped The Shark", I won't read Slashdot anymore, and I am sorry I brought it up.

-Noah

53 Comments

Robert
2007-09-10 05:43:44
You don't say "why" you think it has jumped the shark.


The best bet I could give is their (not in general either) hatred for anyone or anything religious.


You can count on 1 thing and that is eventually someone will sarcastically bring up religion so the whole /. crowd can take a swing at the piƱata.

Dave
2007-09-10 05:52:15
I can't pin it down to a specific point in time, but two things happened. The editorial quality slipped (though it was never outstanding to begin with), and the meme situation got out of control. Every story had to have a "first post", "imagine a beowulf cluster...", "I, for one, welcome our new xxx overlords", "I must be new here, but...", and so forth.


Digg and Reddit fill the gap more or less, as do the 100+ sites in my Google Reader account.

Noah Gift
2007-09-10 06:02:48
Dave/I agree with you. Having a Google Reader acccount eliminates anything good I got out of Slashdot. Digg, Reddit and DZone are the main techie news sites I have in my RSS reader now. Kind of sad that Slashdot tanked as it makes me feel old.


CraigM
2007-09-10 06:41:06
Nice troll.


I find Slashdot to still be relevant. I think of Slashdot as my personal assistant, sifting through the noise so I don't have to. Sure, some of the stories that make the front page are stale, but sometimes these things need a little while to cook before they really make any sense.


Plus I at least find a few comments that are relevant and add to the story. I haven't found that kind of quality with any other sites.


Perhaps a list of what sites you've found filled the gap would help the discussion?


And yes, I've tried Digg and DZone. I find I have to actively pan for gold on those sites, and more often than not come up with nothing (or pyrite). No thanks.

Anonymous Coward
2007-09-10 06:58:32
Digg killed off Slashdot because of a combination of Slashdot's bad site design (as unappealing as it is unusable) and bad commenters. Of course now that Digg is dead, the bad commenters have moved on to plague Digg, so I don't really read that anymore either.


Also, Slashdot's moderation process meant that the stories would come out hours or days after the stories broke on sites like Gizmodo or Engadget or Digg. The game changed and Slashdot didn't even try to keep up.

Noah Gift
2007-09-10 07:04:00
CraigM/This wasn't a troll. I just woke up this morning and realized Slashdot sucks. Nothing personal, but it is boring. It used to be really cutting edge, but unfortunately 2001 Perl/CGI technology doesn't cut it anymore, and the stories are just horrible.
Anonymous Coward/Nice Tribute Name! I agree with every point you make. I especially agree that bad commentators combined with slow, irrelevant, or repeat stories broke their back.


Adam Backstrom
2007-09-10 07:19:16
I still find it relevant. Some of the recent articles I've starred in Google Reader:


John Booty
2007-09-10 07:23:50
I've actually come back around to enjoying Slashdot. In the past few years, many of the really atrocious 13-year-old-on-too-much-Ritalin-style commenters seem to have left Slashdot and moved on to places like Digg.


The result is that Slashdot's discussions have improved. Of course, you need to browse at an appropriately high threshold if you want to retain your sanity.


Slashdot isn't the center of the geek universe that it once was (RSS readers like Google Reader have rendered Slashdot irrelevant as a news-gathering service) but I still enjoy it, unfashionable as it may be.

Thomas
2007-09-10 07:45:49
Slashdot is still relevant. I prefer it to Digg and others because it filters out the stupid crap that makes it into Digg (another top 10 list anyone?) Digg et al have good news, but you have to do your own filtering and I almost never read the comments there because the digg community is... immature (to say the least).
CraigM
2007-09-10 07:48:26
Noah: I'm still convinced that was a troll. You haven't cited examples, or suggested remedies to the problem. If Slashdot isn't the cutting edge for you anymore, where do you go for news? I've found I've unsubscribed from high-traffic, gotta-post-at-least-30-articles-a-day sites like Boing-Boing, Engadget, and Gizmodo because I was inundated with the same story told practically the same way. I'd rather have a single story, with several links, and some description to round it off than what passes for news at Digg and D-Zone.


So, unless you're willing to cite examples, and replacement sites, you've only added noise to the discussion. Those who add noise to discussions are trolls.

Noah Gift
2007-09-10 08:18:41
CraigM/My specific examples:


1. Before RSS Slashdot served as "human" aggregator and editor's coagulated user submitted content. This is irrelevant with technology such as Reddit, DZone, Digg combined with RSS readers.
2. The quality of stories and comments are very poor. This story about some foiled mac Coup in a User's Group this morning was the final straw on the camel's back. Perhaps I am just too old for this type of news anymore, but I have way too much going on in my life to ever read something so stupid again. I thought to myself, "Wow, Slashdot really sucks. I guess I need to take them off of my RSS feed."
3. So many, quality, newsites and blogs off RSS, that Slashdot can no longer be the place to get the hot "scoop". The "scoop" is everywhere. By the time it gets to Slashdot it has been spread all across God's creation.



Brian
2007-09-10 08:31:32
To me the jump-the-shark moment was when they started "Your Rights Online" and became a political leftist conspiracy theory site. Not that Digg is any better in that regard, but for different reasons.


Then there was the censorship with the editors moderating down entire threads of comments which were critical of Slashdot. Modslapping I think was what it was called. This pissed a lot of people off and opened the door to other sites to step in.


Let's face it, the editing was always crap, there just wasn't competition with enough momentum at first. They had a good idea, but failed to advance it in any meaningful way and got left in the dust.

Matthew Sporleder
2007-09-10 08:32:32
Does using perl/cgi really have anything to do with slashdot's decline? Or are you implying that perl creates bad visual design?
Rudolph
2007-09-10 09:04:37
Best. Comment. EVER.
pudge
2007-09-10 09:16:53
ROTFL.


Say what you want about the stories, but man, that claim about "2001 Perl/CGI technology" just makes you look really dumb, first for thinking it matters (I dare you to give a single example of it mattering), second for thinking Slashdot has used CGI at any time since you can remember.


As to the stories themselves, they are not significantly different from what they were years ago. Maybe your preferences have changed. "Jump the shark" implies a change, and you can't even cite anything. You just find it "boring." That says more about you than it does about Slashdot.


Of course, I've worked at Slashdot, as a programmer, since January 2000. So I will be able to see through your claims about "Perl/CGI technology" immediately.


It also means I've seen a lot of trolls, and yours isn't a very good one. You've got a long way to go to reach the levels of Dvorak.

Noah Gift
2007-09-10 09:37:41
Rudolph/Pudge/Perhaps the Perl/CGI comment came across differently than I intended as I was not slamming Perl. Dynamic languages are all fun. My point was to imply that is "appears" that slashdot has not changed with the technical times. I would love to get a reply from a Digg or Reddit programmer to see if they agree.


On the topic of "boring", yes, it does say a lot about me. Perhaps I have outgrown Slashdot. I no longer find the content intellectually stimulating and the vocabulary used feels like I am watching reruns off an old show on Television. All of the Slashdot inside lingo like, "Trolls", "Anonymous Cowards", etc, are much over used words that rot like a basket of fruit left out in the sun.


At some point a community either changes and adapts or stagnates and gets left behind. Sorry, but Slashdot is not cutting edge anymore. I know this is harsh, but maybe you guys can work hard and change that. Until then, it isn't interesting or relevant to me anymore. This is, in fact, the definition of jumping the shark.


2007-09-10 09:52:58
Have you considered maybe that you're spending too much time reading news that doesn' t do anything for you? Choose a time of the day, quickly go through your RSS feeds, and ignore it the rest of the day.


This isn't a new idea, either, and has been around as long as newspapers have. You have an insatiable, false need for information, but no real need of it. Wait a week and most of the information you thought was so important won't matter.


To me it looks like Slashdot is just doing the sme thing its always done. You've probably just out-grown it an d moved on. Despite any talk of "demise", it's still there just chugging along. You've found other palces to staisfy your information lust. Slashdot was your gateway drug, and you're on to other things.


So, what else from seven years ago bores you today?


2007-09-10 09:53:01
Slashdot hasn't changed. You've just grown up. :)

2007-09-10 09:57:05
You keep saying "jumping the shark", but I don't think it means what you think it means. See, for instance Wikipedia's definition: "a metaphor that has been used by U.S. TV critics and fans to denote the point at which the characters or plot of a TV series veer into a ridiculous, out-of-the-ordinary storyline."


You're claiming Slashdot hasn't moved on. That's the opposite of jumping the shark.


It's fine not to like slashdot. I don't like it either. But, at least be honest with yourself and the facts.

Noah Gift
2007-09-10 10:06:44
Anonymous(Not Coward :) ),


"The term has also evolved to describe other areas of pop culture, including movie series, music or acting celebrities, or authors for whom a drastic change was seen as the beginning of the end. These changes are often attempts to attract their fans' waning attention with over-the-top statements or increasingly overt appeals to sex or violence (see circling the drain). As this idiom grows in popularity, it is being broadened to simply describe any decline in viewer appeal for the TV series in question, without requiring a significant "jump the shark" moment as justification.
"
Yo, yo, slang evolves aight, playa! :)

adrian
2007-09-10 10:09:25
mmmm...you are trolling, and poorly at that. Today I decided to scratch my ass, and that has about as much meaning as you pulling slashdot from your RSS feed and deciding that it has 'Jumped the Shark'.
To respond to the examples you didn't put in your original troll post:


You said: 1. Before RSS Slashdot served as "human" aggregator and editor's coagulated user submitted content.


I say: RSS has not replaced community based news sites. RSS does not give the commentary that is often a part of the slashdot experience.


You said: 2. The quality of stories and comments are very poor.


I say: Meta mod, mod, comment, use your filters and tags, or friend/foe options - there are tools you can use to customize your slashdot experience and filter comments/stories with, Slashdot is hardly unique in experiencing trolls - see above. - you however throw baby out with bath water, marginalizing the 1000's of active positive contributers to the site.


You said: 3. So many, quality, newsites and blogs off RSS, that Slashdot can no longer be the place to get the hot "scoop".


I say: Who Cares - this is actually much like your point 1, you likee the RSSeee? Slashdot isn't just about the scoop, it's about the community that you obviously haven't been a part of.

pudge
2007-09-10 10:13:29
No, anyone who uses the slang to refer to a simple decline in appeal is misusing the term. It makes no sense to refer to it that way.


And you're being inconsistent anyway (just like you were when you backtracked off the Perl claim), since you asked for jump the shark moment, and now you are saying your use is justified because no moment is necessary.


Noah Gift
2007-09-10 10:17:15
Pudge/I vote we take your complaints to Slashdot readers. Oh wait, you guys don't ever post anything negative about Slashdot on your site :)


I let all the complaints fly, and I don't moderate them. Discussion is good as I think I obviously struck a nerve. If Slashdot wasn't "boring" my post wouldn't be climbing straight to the top of the blog chart. I hope you guys can turn it around. I used to like Slashdot.


CraigM
2007-09-10 10:22:01
OK. I'll play along a little while longer:


I've not logged into reddit.com, and I don't have an account. Here's the first 10 stories on the page:


1.
The guy who predicted the fall of the USSR, argues that the disintegration of American hegemony already is in full swing, and he predicts that the Bush American Administration and its neocon theorists "will go down in history as the gravediggers of the American empire." (dailykos.com)
219 points posted 6 hours ago by moriquendo 78 comments

2.
Hidden method of reading revealed (news.bbc.co.uk)
122 points posted 4 hours ago by manino 14 comments

3.
A Condolence Message and a reply [pic] (high5art.com)
237 points posted 8 hours ago by neoronin 83 comments

4.
xkcd was right -- "Dating Pools" graph with real census data [pic] (flickr.com)
127 points posted 4 hours ago by sn0re 32 comments

5.
San Diego Comicon and other top places for geeks to get Hot Girls (pics) (discoversd.com)
100 points posted 3 hours ago by christynski 98 comments

6.
The Most Deceptive Sign in LA [Pic] (laist.com)
145 points posted 5 hours ago by neoronin 22 comments

7.
xkcd: Dating Pools (xkcd.com)
452 points posted 12 hours ago by Flemlord 102 comments

8.
Missouri cop caught on tape "I can make up nine things to arrest you" (video.google.com)
829 points posted 15 hours ago by qgyh2 423 comments

9.
Having fun with CSS :target - now works in every major browser besides MSIE (virtuelvis.com)
124 points posted 5 hours ago by Arve 43 comments

10.
Seems there is trouble brewing in the small town of Walnut Cove, NC. And, in response to that trouble the town council members have instituted an ordinance requiring 5 or more people to obtain a permit before gathering. (populistamerica.com)
97 points posted 4 hours ago by democracy101 46 comments


Fascinating. Two stories about an xkcd comic, and only a few stories that are actually interesting. Now, perhaps that is a bit unfair, since this is the front page, but honestly if that unfiltered mess was in my RSS reader, I think I would have made good on my quiet monastic life threats a long time ago. Sure, I can likely make my own custom feeds, but honestly if someone else is up for the task of filtering my RSS feeds, and I'm OK with their filtering, then that's one less thing I need to worry about.


(And just to be fair, there are some real turkeys that Slashdot has approved. I'm OK with that. I just mark it read, and move on. When it works, it really works).

zack
2007-09-10 10:31:43
slashdot is still in my rss reader. Along with reddit, and 70 other feeds.
RobM
2007-09-10 10:43:27
To me, Slashdot has never 'jumped the shark' because, to me, it sucked hard from day one. Childish spin on stories backed up with even more childish comments... no thanks, that's what tabloids are for.


Picking on the technology used seems strange to me though. It either works or it does not. Why would you want or need them to re-invent the wheel?

Noah Gift
2007-09-10 10:44:14
To the comments about me growing out of Slashdot. Ya, that also might be a factor. I suppose I would much rather read a WSJ RSS feed....


I do vote that we permanently eliminate these inane references from our vocabulary though, whether you continue to read slashdot or not:


"Troll"
"Dvork, referring to John Dvork"


After you reach 30 your threshold for listening to those terms goes down to say one or two times a year.




2007-09-10 10:52:02
If you don't like being called a troll, don't post uniformed opinion in an effort to inflame other uninformed opinions. You clearly don't understand the situation and haven't thought about the topic hard enough. You're looking for validation in the form of people agreeing with you, and you're defending to the last an opinion that you don't even seem to like any more. You do this in other blog entries too, so this isn't just you having a bad day.


That's why you're called a troll.

Noah Gift
2007-09-10 10:54:07
RobM/I do completely apologize if it appeared that I slammed Perl. That was not my intention. My intention was to say Slashdot sucks, which I think everyone is clear on right? Does everyone know that I think they suck.....? Good. Ok. On to Perl.


I only brought that up, off the cuff, as Perl was the first scripting language, and great at what it does, btw. It was a first solution for generating dynamic content on the web, well maybe the only solution, in the 90's and it was often used as Perl/CGI. I meant to say that in the, wow "they really haven't changed sense", not the "that technology sucks sense".


aaron
2007-09-10 11:00:24
For me? Digg. Haven't taken them out of my reader just yet, but used to be my homepage and that got changed long ago.
pudge
2007-09-10 11:01:17
Pudge/I vote we take your complaints to Slashdot readers.


What complaints? I have none. You are the one complaining, except you can't even come up with anything substantive.



Oh wait, you guys don't ever post anything negative about Slashdot on your site :)


In general we do not post about Slashdot on Slashdot, so why would we post negative things about Slashdot?



I let all the complaints fly, and I don't moderate them.


Yes, which is what Slashdot has done since Day One. Why do you pretend this isn't true? Users moderate comments, but Slashdot rarely does, and then only when people are being clear trolls or in some way abusive. And of course anyone who wants to can read all the comments.


Hell, I've moderated UP many comments critical of Slashdot, criticisms both editorial and technological. None of us have any problem with criticsm, and welcome it. You really don't appear to know what you are talking about.



If Slashdot wasn't "boring" my post wouldn't be climbing straight to the top of the blog chart.


OK, um, if you don't want to be compared to Dvorak, then don't make the same fallacious arguments he does. A lot of people are reading your post because they think your post is wrong, as evidenced by most of the commenters, so to use a lot of hits as evidence people agree with you is nonsense.


What reference would you prefer, if not "Dvorak" or "troll"? What would you suggest to convey the notion you blindly throw out arguments not based in fact or reason in order to increase your hit count?


Noah Gift
2007-09-10 11:01:29
Actually, I am probably talking to the same anonymous poster over and over again. So I wouldn't say defending as much as I would say debating with the same guy :)
pudge
2007-09-10 11:02:43
It was a first solution for generating dynamic content on the web, well maybe the only solution, in the 90's and it was often used as Perl/CGI. I meant to say that in the, wow "they really haven't changed sense", not the "that technology sucks sense".


Why would you be surprised that something that works well hasn't changed? How does that make sense?


Noah Gift
2007-09-10 11:03:24
Ok, perhaps I am now even MORE bored talking to people who work at Slashdot. Geeze, and you wonder why the posts are so bad. :)



pudge
2007-09-10 11:12:14
Shrug. I wasn't seeking to entertain you, only to point out that your post, and supporting comments, were nonsense.


And it's not even about Slashdot, although that's what drew me here in the first place. It's about you not putting rational thoughts together in a way to actually back up your claims. Same thing with your "what I hate about Apple" piece.


chromatic
2007-09-10 11:14:11
Perl was the first scripting language, and great at what it does, btw.


Actually, various shells came first. REXX predates both Perl and Tcl. I'm not sure when elisp came about.


It was a first solution for generating dynamic content on the web, well maybe the only solution, in the 90's and it was often used as Perl/CGI.


To my knowledge, Slashdot never used CGI. Maybe Chips & Dips did. I don't remember. Certainly in 2001 when I wrote the Slash book, Slashdot didn't use CGI.


You seem to get a lot of criticism for careless regard for facts.

Noah Gift
2007-09-10 11:18:00
chromatic/Love me or Hate me, you still pay attention to me. That is why we are such a beautiful couple :)
pudge
2007-09-10 11:23:19
Noah: yes, which is exactly what Dvorak or most trolls would say. Not admit -- or even appear to care -- about being wrong, just say "look at me! look at me!"
Aristotle Pagaltzis
2007-09-10 11:36:03
The original Quit Slashdot.org Today! movement (heh) is from February 2000(!).


The site has sucked for a very long time indeed. Of course there’s the occasional gem in all that tripe, but I prefer to be linked to it directly by other people who (inexplicably) still care.

Noah Gift
2007-09-10 11:36:11
Actually, I was trying to lighten things up a bit. My point was specifically that I think Slashdot isn't as good as it used to be. In regard, to this specific post, I have noticed that sometimes when people don't address the main point and address a sub, non-related point, it is often because they can't or are too angry to respond.


The post isn't about when Perl was invented, or TCL, or how good it is. The title of the post is, "When Was The Exact Day Slashdot Jumped The Shark?". I gave several reasons why I think this, and it unfortunately angered some people, like perhaps Chromatic.


I guess my response is, I am sorry you get angry so easily. It is my opinion, and I am entitled to it, even if it isn't popular. When you blog, you give your "opinion". That is the whole point. Pudge, I would be more than delighted if you worked with others at Slashdot to improve the quality of the site. I was a huge fan in the early 2000's.


Lets face it, criticism is tough to take. If there was not at least some truth in it, you wouldn't have replied to my posting as many times as you have. At the end of the day, don't take it personally. It is just another day living in the Web 2.0 Wild West.


I get criticism all the time, and I work on improving as a result of the criticism I receive. Calling someone a "Troll" because they have criticism of something you do seems a tad juvenile. I guess that is the whole "Slashdot Gag", so if that is the case, then I suppose you have to use it. I am just a little tired of hearing the word "Troll". Every time I hear the term as an adult now, it makes me laugh a bit and think back of when I was a kid in elementary school and how us grown ups don't really change much.

adrian
2007-09-10 11:36:43
I don't know if the anonymous poster is the same person or not, but there are others posting here that you either decline debate with or respond too with childish attacks - and yes I compared your opinion to scratching my ass, but I did respond to your arguments as well.
sidenote-this was on slashdot-the firehose very often carries stories that don't make the main page, even stories critical of slashdot, it was voted down by the slashdot community, but we did see your moment of glory, however brief.
What is clear:
You do not understand "jump the shark" - as is clear from other posters.
You do not understand "trolling" - but you practise it well.
You are not willing to stand by your statements and defend them when they are attacked. In fact you will completely abandon them and instead put forth new positions that are 'what you intended to say all along'.
The most interesting news site on the web for you is your own personal blog - which makes sense if you are as ego-centric, close minded, self-aggrandizing as it appears.
With the lack of evidence and arguments in your post, which hasn't been remedied by your later responses to comments, this story is left to stand on : "I woke up this morning and realized Slashdot sucks."
I'm glad that you are such a talent to spot this incredibly complex and subtle story. I wonder what gems will drop from your mind to the keyboard tomorrow? Could you be the first to break the earth shattering stories "Heels elongate my calves?" or "Pink fuzzy bunny slippers make my feet sweat?"
Noah Gift
2007-09-10 11:46:59
Adrian,


Thanks for the laughs. I think your taking things much too seriously. I am but one person who thinks Slashdot sucks. I don't think you should feel so threatened by me. It is a blog posting, and sometimes you will read things that you won't like. All you have to do, is decide not to read my blog posting if it offends you.


I have decided to not read Slashdot as I was bored, if your angry, bored, etc, then feel free to skip my post next time :) Seriously, lets keep the tone a little lighter guys. This is a family show, not a scene from 300.



pudge
2007-09-10 11:56:44
My point was specifically that I think Slashdot isn't as good as it used to be.


So why did you back that up with lots of evidence (some of it false, of course) that Slashdot hasn't changed? Which one is it? It's changed, or it hasn't?



In regard, to this specific post, I have noticed that sometimes when people don't address the main point and address a sub, non-related point, it is often because they can't or are too angry to respond.


No. That's a cop-out. When you make a claim, you can't later complain that people responded to that claim.



The post isn't about when Perl was invented, or TCL, or how good it is. The title of the post is, "When Was The Exact Day Slashdot Jumped The Shark?". I gave several reasons why I think this


Yes, for a nonstandard and illogical definition of "jumping the shark." Oops, our ratings went down because the Super Bowl was opposite us; by your definition, we jumped the shark. Nonsense.


And besides, your initial post seemed to assume Slashdot did something to "jump the shark," but your new definition, and your further arguments, imply no such thing at all: they imply only that people stopped coming to Slashdot such that there was a decline in readership (which, incidentally, is also false).



I guess my response is, I am sorry you get angry so easily.


I'm not angry. Where'd you get that silly idea?



It is my opinion, and I am entitled to it, even if it isn't popular.


Yes, just as I am entitled to mine. Please don't be so hypocritical. It's unbecoming.



I would be more than delighted if you worked with others at Slashdot to improve the quality of the site.


How would you know, since you clearly don't pay attention, since there have been significant improvements over the years? For example, the major overhaul to the discussion system, and the firehose.



Lets face it, criticism is tough to take.


Yes. For example, you seem incapable of dealing with it.



If there was not at least some truth in it, you wouldn't have replied to my posting as many times as you have.


There is no logical or rational sense in that statement. Please.



Calling someone a "Troll" because they have criticism of something you do seems a tad juvenile.


I agree. But even worse is pretending that I called you a troll because you were criticizing something I do. It's not that you criticized Slashdot, it's that you made nonsensical arguments and then pretended that the fact people read your post and responded to you (mostly with disagreement!) proved you were right. That is being a troll.



I am just a little tired of hearing the word "Troll". Every time I hear the term as an adult now, it makes me laugh a bit and think back of when I was a kid in elementary school and how us grown ups don't really change much.


Shrug. I think being a troll is a lot worse than calling someone a troll. And damn, especially after you just spent a bunch of time whining about how people were ignoring your main point: now you complain about the word I used, and don't address my actual point. More hypocrisy.


pudge
2007-09-10 12:05:37
Yes yes, "lighten up." All we are doing is criticizing you, and it drew out personal attacks from you. More hypocrisy.
Noah Gift
2007-09-10 12:07:47
Pudge,


I am going to address your response as "yelling". When you calm down a bit in a few hours, maybe we can talk. To be honest, I have work to do, and the specific conversation with you keeps running in circles and focuses on personal attacks on me, which is fine if that is what you want to do, but it doesn't at all address material people have posted today about "Why" Slashdot jumped the shark.


Usually, when a loud angry guy starts yelling, I tend to walk in the other direction, so maybe we can finish this sometime tonight. I get the impression that the conversation may never end and will constantly evolve into, I am a troll because I criticized Slashdot.


Sighhh. I think I might as well talk to a brick wall. Lets just agree to disagree.


Robert
2007-09-10 12:21:14
@Luke


Thanks for showing us what a typical /. comment looks like.

pudge
2007-09-10 12:24:10
I am not yelling, and I am calm. I am yelling no more than you are. And I made no more personal attacks on you than you did on me. More hypocrisy.


And you're not fooling anyone with this nosense about "maybe we can talk." You've abjectly refused to respond to my rebuttals to most of your claims. You are uninterested in talking.


it doesn't at all address material people have posted today about "Why" Slashdot jumped the shark.


Neither do your attacks on me address my rebuttals of you. More hypocrisy.


Usually, when a loud angry guy starts yelling


Shrug. I never yelled, nor am I angry. You realy have a lot to learn about this "Internet" thing. You think because someone is calling you on your false claims, they are "yelling" or "angry." You think because people look at you, that means they agree with you.


I am a troll because I criticized Slashdot.


You're a liar. I never called you a troll because you criticized Slashdot, as the record plainly shows, and when you last made that allegation, I corrected you. That you continue to make this claim without addressing my rebuttal makes you a liar.


Sighhh. I think I might as well talk to a brick wall.


Yes. A brick wall won't point out when you're full of crap.



Slashdot UID #357
2007-09-10 12:32:20
1) Slashdot has been going downhill since the day Rob Malda registered "Slashdot.org" as a domain name.


2) Slashdot runs no negative stories about Slashdot. Or positive stories about Slashdot. If you want a site full of self-referentialism, check out Digg. Or Kuro5hin. Noah, you are the perfect Kuro5hin reader. Ask Rusty. He'll agree.


3) Pudge does not speak for Slashdot. Pudge doesn't even speak for Pudge. Pudge is totally sick due to Perl *&* O'Reilly overexposure, as this video proves.


4) Still don't believe me about Pudge? Listen to more of his music.


5) Many people think Slashdot should have a large "for amusement purposes only" disclaimer on it. I am one of those people. Slashdot should not be taken too seriously. Humor-impaired l00zrz should avoid it in the interest of their own mental health.


6) Phht!

Adrian
2007-09-10 13:08:23
It's ok, I'm not mad at you, I understand where you are coming from.
http://slashdot.org/~noahgift/
slashdot uid 987791


I see people don't put a lot of mod in your comments, though it must suck to always make the same grammar errors and get called on them. you are = you're / not your
The lack of positive Karma could act like a cancer in your soul. Sucking away everything good and geeky about you and leaving you a reader of the WSJ. If you meta-modded a little, filtered the firehose, and made some constructive comments in discussion, you could have a positive impact on the Slashdot community, and I think it would be good for you too.


It boils down to this, you picked a target, said 'it sucked', and didn't provide a lot of proof backing yourself up. That's what I've always understood to be trolling - but then I joined slashdot well before your enlightened presence came on the scene.
You then express surprise, and shock when that community objects to your (unfair in their opinion) characterization of them sucking. In the case of Slashdot - you attacked the codebase, the story quality, the editors, and the comments, and all because you decided 'it sucked', which is your privilege. Others can disagree with you, or ask for better evidence and argumentation of your opinion, which you don't have to (and haven't) provided.
I think Surf boards are flimsy, with 1960's tech, and surfers are illiterate sand suckers. I even recall the exact moment when surfing 'Jumped the Shark', though I'm not going to tell you about it or prove it. Flame on surfers, flame on.
giggle, you're so silly Noah. Just stop fighting it, I think you got up on the wrong side of the bed and it's not too late for you to start over. I'll even add you to my slashdot friends list and give your (non-troll) comments the odd mod point. Let's fix Slashdot,...Together.

RobM
2007-09-10 13:17:59
Noah, I wasn't accusing you of 'slamming' perl, because I didn't think you did so in the first place and I really couldn't care anyway in the second place.


My point was that swinging for it because of how the site is driven is, well, irrelevant. I _agree_ with you that slashdot sucks. I _never_ liked it. But the platform it is built upon is totally irrelevant to whether or not it's a good website.


There are plenty of websites out there using every single web 2.0 gadget meme in existence that suck despite (actually, often because) of this.


There are websites out there that use (sit down for this) boring old HTML that are absolutely fantastic and invaluable resources. The platform doesn't matter, what matters is what you do with it.


Fact is, I agree with your introduction but you forgot to write the rest of the essay.