Does SL deserve to be on Time's worst 5 sites list?

As mentioned in the blog by Torley:

http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,28804,1638344_1638341_1633628,00.html

is a rather scathing blurb from time.com regarding SL. I do NOT think they're talking about SL's web-site... I think they're very clearly talking about all of SecondLife.

So far, 4 of 5 people at "wis.dm" say yes. (I said no).

Well? What do you say? Yes SL deserves to be on that list, or No ?

http://wis.dm/questions/180560

Nope. Not that SL doesn't have it's issues, but unless the person or persons who wrote that have been in-world consistently for at least a couple of months, they likely don't know enough about it to pass judgment.

The actual site, on the other hand, pretty much blows...they've made it far too difficult for Residents, particularly the newer ones, to find the answers they need. There's no cohesiveness with the blog here, the Support Portal there, and JIRA off someplace else. All IMHO, of course.

I don't know but I can understand why it could be consider one of worse for those who don't get it, aren't into creating content or being in a virtual world where there is quest, monsters and set things to do already or have to actually learn.
Yet sometimes SL is really annoying and overwhelming even when you feel its only thing on the web similar that allows you the freedom to create, or into SL and majorly addicted to it or no one would ever complain about it.
Sometimes even when you're enjoying SL it gets bit isolating and hard to figure out how to find information.
Yet I don't have the answers for that. It is difficult to even get more then certain number of people on sim to talk without lag or some type of chat fatigue for some people. The chat fatigue really isn't SL fault it has a lot to do with the indivual feeling overwhelmed when there is too many things happen at once, which can also happen in AOL or Yahoo chatroom for some.

I don't think SL deserves that particular title, but LL certainly deserves some bad press as a cold shower and wake-up call.

So Time thinks SL is worse than the thousands of phishing sites out there? Thanks for reminding me why I never waste my , er, time reading Time anymore. it doesn't even make good toilet paper.

They liked it when they printed this article:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1570708,00.html

Now that the buzz has faded, the want to bash SL with an article that calls it a website, and was written by someone who sounds like they have never logged on. Lame.

For more discussion on this topic:
http://forums.secondcitizen.com/showthread.php?t=15781

I'm having a hard time seeing why SL itself, not www.sl.com, should be on any website list. Good or bad...

well, there's no negative advertising, Time magazine is a load of crap well past it's heyday, of course it will be critical of new media...

and why exactlywould we care what a few so called "tastefull" ppl know what to put or not to put on a list?

Can I still have pie? I like coconut cream.

aw, I like Time magazine. I have a subscription. I agree that this is a stupid article, but then every publication has stupid articles once in a while. Stop hatin' on Time!

I stopped reading Time 10 years ago........who cares what they think.

...an the media hated the iPod once, too.

Mari

True. So do you get all your info from Fark.com and Entertainment Weekly like I do?

Nope. The Egyptian Guy at the Dunkin Donuts and from The Onion.com.

And from this Forum.

pretty much everything i read or see on tv regarding sl is the same old cybersex story anyways. at least this story was a little different!

Actually, you can go to the Associated Press website and to Google news for excellent headline services with very often the very same stories you will read in the newspaper the next day and see masticated to pieces in Time or Newsweek a week later. Pretty soon you can develop your own list of sites you trust for getting in-depth about areas you are interested in. There is also the place in SL (I forget its particulars just now) that collects news website links from all over - including Slate, which has a separate list in the many dozens. Before long, you will find yourself ahead of the curve on current events compared to most of the people you talk to.

well i never pay attention to those reviewer type guys. Half the time stuff is reviewed as horrible I actually like it so now I use reverse psychology and look more seriously at stuff reviewed as horrible. Have this problem with movies too some stuff given great reviews to me is total garbage while other stuff given horrible reviews is something I would buy for my video library and watch many times over the period of owning it.

The other small problem with this is second life is not actually a "site" per say. Its an intraweb thingy (my highly technical terminology is now showing through). Its also one of a few 'intraweb thingies" now in existance so to be fair it has to be compaired to active worlds. the sony home thing and well HiPiHi (still in beta) and outback online (hasn't actualy reached beta). Not sure if there are anymore of these platforms out there these are the ones I know of. So if i compair to the ones that are out of beta and on the market Second Life is still the bestest.

The actualy second life website works fine (mostly) and I dont consider it to be a horribly bad functioning site . The website "goes" it loads at a reasonable speed its fairly easy to navigate and has all the attributes of a decently layed out website so I have no idea how the website can be ranked as bad either.

Anyhow my 2 Lindens or cents

I also didn't vote in the poll cause there was no selection I could choose

Uh...you guys realize that it's WEB SITE was voted one of the worst...not SL itself.

And yes the web site is pretty bad. It's hard to find any useful info beyond the basics on the site. If it wasn't for the rest of the internet and the people in-world I know then I would have given up finding ANY info on the site.

I voted this poll as invalid since the OP either didn't have the right info to go off of or was starting another "SL sucks but I still use it all the time" thread.

Did you read the article? It does sound like they're talking about the in-world experience...which just makes them confused if they classify it as a 'website.'

They are clearly talking about the game/platform and calling the game a website which of course well invalidates all their opinions on everything in that article to me. If they are totally messed up on second life (the actualy application) then they are also going to be totally messed up about the other stuff.

There's just oen thing worse than being talked about, and that's not being talked about.

Seriously, the website is pretty shoddy, but the journo hack who wrote that seriously needs to learn the definition of website. What he was writing about wasn't the website.

I went back and read it again. I admittedly glanced through it and assumed they were talking about the web site since it's rating WEB SITES. Do they know the difference between a web site and a computer game? Why did they mention WoW??

Whoever wrote that article is just a fuggin idiot that doesn't know about any basics of technology. I generally get annoyed reading Time or Newsweek. It's usually a bunch of assholes that think they know what's going on in the world better than you (even in this case, without actually having enough experience in the subject they touch on). Nothing annoys me more than the "Why Iran is More Dangerous Now" type articles. That shit's for old people that leave their turn signals on when driving on the freeway. They haven't had any relevant commentary on current events in ages.

SL would have been more accurately reviewed as one of the 5 worst MMORPGS. At least then it would somewhat fit into the damn category.

I did like the blog post about it. I think they touched a nerve.

Re-read the text from Time.

There is no mistaking that they are talking about being "in world" not just browsing the web pages that are associated with SecondLife:

"[...] creating and personalizing this animated representation of yourself is tedious."

"Movements feel clunky and there can be a terrible lag."

"[...] there are crazy people around every corner — disruptive types that spread graffiti and get in your way and throw you off your groove."