[_callcc]

I think we'll see more stratification on the internet in the coming years with subscriptions, etc.

There's probably even a market right now for a paid version of reddit or HN.

The sad fact is that the internet has gradually become a shithole as the entirety of humanity has joined in.

Twitter, for example, is being dragged down by low quality user accounts that add nothing but noise. It's actively hurting the stock price.

[anonnyj]

Perhaps it doesn't fit being like HN/Reddit, but Something Awful has been around for a good while, and requires $10 to get access.

At least personally, I feel it worked pretty well... but there was a drop in quality when they introduced probations (a temp ban), meaning breaking the rules stopped hurting your wallet (you could get back in as long as you paid, and didn't do something so bad you got a permaban)

[bitlax]

> The sad fact is that the internet has gradually become a shithole as the entirety of humanity has joined in.

In what year do you feel the Internet was better than it is now?

[wott]

Pre- or beside-Internet, the days of FidoNet; the days of Usenet before its decadence; the days before Web 2.0; the days before business shifted from traditional forms to Internet; the days before smartphones, etc.

There's no clear point, but when it was loosely "reserved" to a certain "elite" (financial, technical, cultural, scientific) which showed genuine interest in it, it was in a much better condition than now. It sounds terrible to say that, but as the masses joined in, the media dumbed down and what it carries dumbed down as well. Another step towards dumbness happened when kids were massively allowed to enter the arena. Again, this sounds harsh, but that's the pitiful reality of humankind. And businesses and capitalism know very well how to encourage the most vile behaviours in order to make more profit.

It also shifted from a confidence & collaboration mode to insecurity & defiance. Now it's "oh my God how this protocol / library is insecure, how could one design such a stupid thing?" Well, I am not sure who is most stupid.

Remember when a 'troll' was just someone who was just pulling a prank teasing a few other people? Well now the same word means a stupid, racist, hateful, mean guy who drowns out a forum or a site with his feces and whose attacks impact real life of its victims.

Which brings me to tell that another big difference is that when Internet was disconnected from real life, it was much better. That was a big turning point too. You used to be able to write everything under your real name and not fear some acquaintance, school mate, employer or any other peeping Tom or enemy would search for it.

So there's not a single year to point out, but during the last 15 (20?) years a series of steps gradually turned Internet in the shithole (and supermarket) it is now. And none of those steps was positive.

[pjc50]

The first time I got called a "troll" because someone disagreed with my criticism of a computer program was on FidoNet. That was probably over 20 years ago.

I'm not sure it's got worse intrinsically, but it has certainly got larger, so the badness has scaled along with it.

[mgkimsal]

You're on to something, but even if the 'badness' on an individual basis is the same as 20 years ago, the volume has gone up more than linearly. As more people have joined and been able to find other like-minded folks, they've become emboldened to contribute more. And I don't think this has just happened in 'bad' communities - I've seen it happen in all sorts of communities - people connecting to other folks online has seemed to have this multiplier effect all over.

[vivekd]

I think a big part of it is anonymity encourages people to let out the worst aspects of their personality. I think if a forum required people to use their real identities you would see much less objectionable contact (but probably also a lot less interesting ideas)

[pjc50]

No, you'd see (as with youtube and G+) people putting out objectionable content under their own names. While genuinely vulnerable people would tend not to get involved for their own safety.

The problem is one of "lawlessness"; adhoc reprisals from your fellow netizens aren't an improvement.

[CaptSpify]

My personal opinion: Before monetization. The Internet I remember was people volunteering their time, because they loved the project that they were working on. If some random blogger wrote an article about something, it was often shit, but it was also sincere. Now that there's money involved, it's less about feeling passionate about something, and more about what brings the most CPM.

This has led to walled-in gardens, where the noise is amplified. I'd even tentatively argue it's because having more users is seen as better, even if those users are fake, trolls, or non-contributers.

[FabHK]

1993, the "Eternal September".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September

[drdaeman]

1974 or few years after, maybe?

After that a law of large numbers must've kicked in (and I don't think human nature had changed any much in last 3-4 decades).

[tjr225]

http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/S/September-that-never-ended...

[Brakenshire]

The fundamental issue up to now is that sites need to make it as easy as possible to join, in order to attract a growing audience, but that invariably means almost complete anonymity, which makes it ruinously expensive or effectively impossible to moderate.

[YokoZar]

The Something Awful forums have charged 10 dollars for an account (and a few other features) for a long time now, and as a result there are basically no bots and higher quality posts.

It's comedy focused, but there's topical areas too. They remain one of the largest posting boards on the internet.

[ManFromUranus]

Isn't reddit already the paid version of reddit?

[anonnyj]

The key difference is that you can still read/post without ever paying.