As usenet stumbles off into the night and FaceBook absorbs those who
find blurting out single phrase with a picture a great treade-off, Amy
Scattergood ponders the demise of Chowhound. I use to post
occasionally on Chowhound, and root around for answers to questions,
more frequently about restaurants than cooking. I even attended a
get-together with about 30 hounds, at a local restaurant. But I always
found the web interface a big hassle.

In fact it's likely the main reason that myriad discussion sites have
turned me off: Each has their own unique and incomprehensible user
interface which must be mastered so that you can spend 30 minutes
getting two minutes of info. Sunflower seeds produce more payback.

Usenet via google strikes me the same way. But many are cut off enough
from others (cooks in this case as well as humans with which you can
faux bond), that they don't mind the labor. The labor at rfc has become
simply unacceptable for the regular day-to-day involvement I've
preferred in usenet discussions. But I find no suitable replacement.
Period.

Seemingly an interface redesign has pounded a stake through the heart
at Chowhound in LA:

http://tinyurl.com/puyzkcv

Chowhound

I wanted to post a resto review there about 2 weeks ago - and, lo and behold, it seems that it only touches on a few large cities. Screw THAT. Off to tripadvisor went I.

On 10/10/2015 3:05 PM, gtr wrote:

> Seemingly an interface redesign has pounded a stake through the heart at
> Chowhound in LA:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/puyzkcv

Coincidentally, I went onto chowhound this morning to look
up a restaurant and to browse in general and WTH is this?
and I can only see the original post and not the responses.

What a mess. Darn.

nancy

gtr wrote:
> The labor at rfc has become simply unacceptable for the regular
> day-to-day involvement I've preferred in usenet discussions. But I find
> no suitable replacement. Period.


Try Skype.

On Saturday, October 10, 2015 at 9:05:14 AM UTC-10, gtr wrote:
> As usenet stumbles off into the night and FaceBook absorbs those who
> find blurting out single phrase with a picture a great treade-off, Amy
> Scattergood ponders the demise of Chowhound. I use to post
> occasionally on Chowhound, and root around for answers to questions,
> more frequently about restaurants than cooking. I even attended a
> get-together with about 30 hounds, at a local restaurant. But I always
> found the web interface a big hassle.
>
> In fact it's likely the main reason that myriad discussion sites have
> turned me off: Each has their own unique and incomprehensible user
> interface which must be mastered so that you can spend 30 minutes
> getting two minutes of info. Sunflower seeds produce more payback.
>
> Usenet via google strikes me the same way. But many are cut off enough
> from others (cooks in this case as well as humans with which you can
> faux bond), that they don't mind the labor. The labor at rfc has become
> simply unacceptable for the regular day-to-day involvement I've
> preferred in usenet discussions. But I find no suitable replacement.
> Period.
>
> Seemingly an interface redesign has pounded a stake through the heart
> at Chowhound in LA:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/puyzkcv


A lot has changed in the last 20 years. The way people access websites has changed radically. The site might look like a confusing mess but it's designed to be viewed on a mobile device. My website was optimized to be viewed on a 640 X 480 CRT screen. I think it's time for a rebuild, don't you?

On 2015-10-10 23:38:00 +0000, Qbert said:

> gtr wrote:
>> The labor at rfc has become simply unacceptable for the regular
>> day-to-day involvement I've preferred in usenet discussions. But I find
>> no suitable replacement. Period.
>
>
> Try Skype.

First I'll try a cheeseburger.

On 10/11/2015 10:55 AM, gtr wrote:
> On 2015-10-10 23:38:00 +0000, Qbert said:
>
>> gtr wrote:
>>> The labor at rfc has become simply unacceptable for the regular
>>> day-to-day involvement I've preferred in usenet discussions. But I find
>>> no suitable replacement. Period.
>>
>>
>> Try Skype.
>
> First I'll try a cheeseburger.
>

Do as you're told.

On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 20:49:11 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
wrote:

> On Saturday, October 10, 2015 at 9:05:14 AM UTC-10, gtr wrote:
> > As usenet stumbles off into the night and FaceBook absorbs those who
> > find blurting out single phrase with a picture a great treade-off, Amy
> > Scattergood ponders the demise of Chowhound. I use to post
> > occasionally on Chowhound, and root around for answers to questions,
> > more frequently about restaurants than cooking. I even attended a
> > get-together with about 30 hounds, at a local restaurant. But I always
> > found the web interface a big hassle.
> >
> > In fact it's likely the main reason that myriad discussion sites have
> > turned me off: Each has their own unique and incomprehensible user
> > interface which must be mastered so that you can spend 30 minutes
> > getting two minutes of info. Sunflower seeds produce more payback.
> >
> > Usenet via google strikes me the same way. But many are cut off enough
> > from others (cooks in this case as well as humans with which you can
> > faux bond), that they don't mind the labor. The labor at rfc has become
> > simply unacceptable for the regular day-to-day involvement I've
> > preferred in usenet discussions. But I find no suitable replacement.
> > Period.
> >
> > Seemingly an interface redesign has pounded a stake through the heart
> > at Chowhound in LA:
> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/puyzkcv
>
>
> A lot has changed in the last 20 years. The way people access websites has changed radically. The site might look like a confusing mess but it's designed to be viewed on a mobile device. My website was optimized to be viewed on a 640 X 480 CRT screen. I think it's time for a rebuild, don't you?

Sounds like it. Maybe Google or Facebook and buy Chowhound and insert
the needed $$$.

--

sf

On 10/11/2015 1:31 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
> Chow is dead.
>
> -sw


You should be too.

On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 20:49:11 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 wrote:

> A lot has changed in the last 20 years. The way people access
> websites has changed radically. The site might look like a
> confusing mess but it's designed to be viewed on a mobile device.

As usual, your complete lack of knowledge and your signature
half-asssed speculation on anything technical has made you a babbling
idiot again.

The new Chowhound interface has nothing to do with mobile devices. On
the contrary, the majority of complaints about the new interface are
coming from mobile users. The new design is a result of ignorance
regarding the efficient use of screen space on any device.

Do you actually know anything about anything? Or do you just make up
all this crap as you go along and trick gullible people into believing
what you say?

On Mon, 12 Oct 2015 15:20:27 -0500, Usenet Support Personnel
> wrote:

> On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 20:49:11 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 wrote:
>
> > A lot has changed in the last 20 years. The way people access
> > websites has changed radically. The site might look like a
> > confusing mess but it's designed to be viewed on a mobile device.
>
> As usual, your complete lack of knowledge and your signature
> half-asssed speculation on anything technical has made you a babbling
> idiot again.
>
> The new Chowhound interface has nothing to do with mobile devices. On
> the contrary, the majority of complaints about the new interface are
> coming from mobile users. The new design is a result of ignorance
> regarding the efficient use of screen space on any device.
>
> Do you actually know anything about anything? Or do you just make up
> all this crap as you go along and trick gullible people into believing
> what you say?

Stop projecting.

--

sf

On Mon, 12 Oct 2015 15:20:27 -0500, Usenet Support Personnel
> wrote:

>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 20:49:11 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 wrote:
>
>> A lot has changed in the last 20 years. The way people access
>> websites has changed radically. The site might look like a
>> confusing mess but it's designed to be viewed on a mobile device.
>
>As usual, your complete lack of knowledge and your signature
>half-asssed speculation on anything technical has made you a babbling
>idiot again.
>
>The new Chowhound interface has nothing to do with mobile devices. On
>the contrary, the majority of complaints about the new interface are
>coming from mobile users. The new design is a result of ignorance
>regarding the efficient use of screen space on any device.
>
>Do you actually know anything about anything? Or do you just make up
>all this crap as you go along and trick gullible people into believing
>what you say?

Time has proven that it's the latter. Why anyone would bother doing
that, I have no idea.