Reply
Fri 18 Feb, 2005 06:38 am
Wondering if they switch it over to the old beehive code.....
Well, let's hope they treat about.com with considerably more TLC & respect than poor old Abuzz got!
Did Abuzz go down hill mainly because it was no longer being moderated?
I never posted on that sight, so I'm unfamiliar with what happened to it.
Partly that, after most of the staff was sacked. Also the equipment was allowed to run down & outages were a very common occurrence. Abuzz died of neglect.
It seems like such a shame. People seemed to have enjoyed it, much like A2k.
Paula, many of us LOVED Abuzz with a passion! It was really sad, watching it die by a thousand cuts.
From CNN money:
Quote:The New York Times Co. (Research), whose newspapers include the New York Times and the Boston Globe, said it will expand About.com's content and visibility and use the site to market its products.
Source
Quote:The deal is the latest example of major media companies buying up Internet properties to increase their exposure to the fast-growing online advertising business. Recently, Washington Post Co. bought the online magazine Slate from Microsoft. Earlier this year, Dow Jones completed its acquisition of financial news publisher MarketWatch.
[...]
Citing statistics from Nielsen//NetRatings, the Times said that About.com, which reaches 22 million monthly users, will combine with the Times' current base of 13 million users to form the 12th-largest company on the Internet.
Source
It's just business and only for money - Abuzz <sniff> was different and thus shut down - besides other reasons <sniff, sniff>
Imposters? So a person could pretend to be someone else and raise havoc? Thats not good, what a mess that must have created.
Was Abuzz as popular and well laid out as A2k?
Oooooooooooooh, it got very very ugly, the imposter thing!
I am msolga, and I approve that post. This post.
(trying to look antipodean)
bookmark
Well, no avatars, and no posting of pictures. Also no advertising. Abuzz had one cool feature I still miss. It would flag any activity in any thread you had posted in. Somehow, it seemed easier to work with than a2k's 'your posts', though I'm not sure what was better about it at this time.
You could not tell who was the most recent poster without opening the thread, and that was a serious failing compared to a2k. Opening those threads could be a big investment in time, especially the long ones, as it wasn't broken into pages. You could click a topic and go for coffee. Okay, on a long topic, you could go for dinner.
It's funny - I only have dial-up, and things were never that lengthy for me.
Don't play dumb with US, puppykicker!
The Abuzz software is still in use by boston.com. I bop in every now and then to take a look at those pretty periwinkle pages.
You all are a riot, and I believe your observations are quite on the mark. Except yours Deb......I had a devil of a time on my dialup.
While it is interesting that there is some evidence that advertising revenue is up for online venues, compared to late 2000-2001, and that this acquisition buys NYT's a new set of prospects to mine (little overlap); I am more than a little struck by the fact that it is again another "knowledge site."
Also, from the article, it appears that Neisenholtz (spelling?) is back at the helm.
Wonder if they will keep their paid experts?
Not only were the mods canned, but the way that the site was written, more than one person could take on the same Abuzz "handle". As a result, there were imposters galore, and after awhile, it was hard to tell who posted what. The worse it got, the more the good people left, and the wilder it got..............and on and on.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace