Graphs Show How Reddit Got Huge by Going Mainstream
wired.com
wired.com
Its my personal opinion that this has really hurt the depth of content. Its still a fun site, just very different then when I first went there ~6 years ago.
EDIT: Not to say RES isn't a great project and super useful. I use it and really appreciate it. Its just interesting how ease of use can shape the content and culture of an online community.
While I do think RES is awesome, most of my non-tech friends who browse Reddit (usually on their phone) haven't even heard of RES.
My Gift to Reddit: I created an image hosting service that doesn't suck. What do you think? http://www.reddit.com/r/reddit.com/comments/7zlyd/my_gift_to...
Here's an AMA (ask me anything, reddit interview post) he did: http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/y81ju/i_created_imgur_...
Interesting quote from the AMA: "Imageshack tried to buy it 6 months after I made it". I'm sure everyone is glad he didn't sell. IIRC half of imageshack links were "bandwidth exceeded" messages
FYI MrGrim created imgur for both reddit and Digg. He now needs neither though.
Nah, nothing to do with RES, that's just how things tend to evolve without strict moderation. The race to the shortest, funniest thing always ends in images because it's easy to consume and upvote.
http://www.randalolson.com/2013/03/12/retracing-the-evolutio...
I don't know anyone in 'real life' who uses RES, but many who use reddit. I expect it's less than 10% and maybe much less of readers.
I honestly think that reddit would be better if they killed karma, or at least killed displaying it to the users. The obsession over it dominates the site with people posting cheap shit to get more of it, other people shitposting to see how far negative they can go, people complaining that one thing got karma while another thing did not, etc.
The main problem with these stacked graphs is spikes/dips on the bottom cause everything stacked on top of it to distort in weird ways, making things very difficult to see.
Also, the ones in this article are square shaped, so you can't even see total site growth over time, which would be interesting and relevant.
I came here to say that (although your other points are good, too). The title of the article is "Fascinating Graphs Show How Reddit Got Huge by Going Mainstream" but then they normalize away all of the growth info and make it completely impossible to see how traffic growth is related to anything they are displaying.
Not saying HN comment threads are the pinnacle of discourse, but they are an order of magnitude better than proggit's.
Proggit now seems to have been reduced to an HN mirror, but HN is something else too.
If Reddit did to subreddits what Pandora and Netflix did to music and movies (analyze and recommend,) it would pay off for them.
This graph is misleading because it shows number of posts as a percentage, not an absolute number. I'm sure there is just as much or more quality content in r/programming and other subreddits than there was in 2005.
I'm not so sure about the image overload thing. Maybe that is just a symptom of another problem. IMO, the standard settings of the main page should be "fixed". It would be nice if you saw posts from a dozen or so _random_ subreddits as a standard setting, instead of the current colorful goo mixed from the big catchall subreddits.
imo
"The site averaged over three billion pageviews each month in 2012, which is a 50% increase from the two billion the site reported for the month of December in 2011."
[1] http://www.slashgear.com/reddit-saw-37-billion-pageviews-in-...
Edit: the original blogpost by Randy Olson says he doesn't know either.
We are anyway moving towards the long October, where the number of new people using the (English) internet is roughly proportional to the number of new people.
I heard about eternal september last year and figured that eternal summer was a play on it.
If you delve deeper, it is actually that Reddit started entirely without subs, and happened to mostly be programming related, with a smattering of politics.
nsfw was created because, much like with the TLD debate on the same topic, it was a content category that people wanted to separate. As the "subless" Reddit started to get noisy with mainstream topics, that's when people started fracturing off to /r/programming.
Screenshot from 2005 of the home page: https://web.archive.org/web/20050804002153/http://www.reddit...
What is the "furthest thing from the truth"?
While you selectively chose a generalist front page, how about-
https://web.archive.org/web/20051204033222/http://reddit.com...?
A Ruby post up at number 1. Heck, almost all of the front page is exactly the sort of material you would find on HN.
Another 2005 day -
https://web.archive.org/web/20051230160447/http://reddit.com...?
Another day with four LISP front-pagers - https://web.archive.org/web/20051210015338/http://reddit.com...?
Every post wasn't always about programming specifically, but it was a site primarily populated by programmers and other IT professionals, which is how what would be fringe material topped the front page. But there was the other stuff, just as there is on HN.
Just to make an aside about something I found interesting on the archived reddit page - the header "reddit learns what you like as you vote on existing links or submit your own!". The premise was that Reddit would use clustering and other intelligent logic to individualize itself to the viewer. They abandoned that and went the "subscribe to subs you like" notion.
It took a while for all the cat picture morons to take it over.
First it was mostly hacking, startups, and some libertarian politics. Then there started to be more politics, and less hacking and startups. And more "outrage stories". And it went downhill fast enough that PG started Hacker News.
That's one of the reasons I loathe the political stories so much - they build a momentum of their own and wreck sites like this one.
Interestingly enough, you can see PG helping to get reddit off the ground:
https://web.archive.org/web/20050725010627/http://reddit.com...
"bugbear" is PG.
Edit, I think it was through this essay:
I believe HN was originally set up to be "like how reddit used to be"
It was poorly worded so I apologize for that. I meant that I heard the same thing as @corresation that it was mainly a porn site at first, which wasn't true at all.
FTA
That's the current graph, seemingly showing nsfw as 100% of Reddit content at the beginning of 2006.
> He notes that the site was never 100 percent NSFW; his graph leaves out /r/reddit.com for purposes of legibility.
This is a problem of poor axis labelling. It should be: "Fraction of posts submitted to Reddit.com (excluding /r/reddit.com)". The other issue is that the other graphs that include /r/reddit.com are hidden in the slideshow at the top.
It's clearer in the actual blog post: http://www.randalolson.com/2013/03/12/retracing-the-evolutio...