inthe00s
The Pop Culture Information Society...

These are the messages that have been posted on inthe00s over the past few years.

Check out the messageboard archive index for a complete list of topic areas.

This archive is periodically refreshed with the latest messages from the current messageboard.




Check for new replies or respond here...

Subject: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: Baltimoreian on 05/07/16 at 1:48 pm

This is a site where everyone posts about their nostalgia from any phase. Yet, there's barely anything from the actual 1970s, 1980s, 1990s, 2000s and so on. I just think this site is like a Buzzfeed clone, except there isn't a lot of nostalgia for the early 2000s and it's a message board. Not to mention that we talk more about the 2016 presidential election, anything that's recent from 2010-2016, political issues, and etc. I only joined this website so that I could finally talk about my childhood, where I wouldn't get upset by people that I don't like.

When I joined here, I was alright. People were still talking about stuff from previous decades, while I shared my own. But ever since the start of 2016, we talked about how the 2000s were different than the 2010s. Especially when we put in charts about them. Now I see more posts about why the 2010s is the greatest decade, more than posts who talk about nostalgia in general. If people like Red Ant saw our posts, then they would think that we're ruining this website. I could agree with him, if he could stop fudging people.

I don't want to talk about how the 2010s are great (since I obviously hate the decade). I want to talk about past decades, since that's what this website was made for. I want to talk about how I loved watching TV back then, before I thought it wasn't good anymore since the early 2010s. Can people just stop with that and focus more on nostalgia? I'm not discouraging their beliefs on how the 2010s are okay, but it doesn't seem orthodox to the old users.

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: 2001 on 05/07/16 at 2:26 pm

:( I didn't know my 2010s love was upsetting anyone. The 2000s board is still the most active board, isn't it?

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: Baltimoreian on 05/07/16 at 2:31 pm


:( I didn't know my 2010s love was upsetting anyone. The 2000s board is still the most active board, isn't it?


I posted this on the 2000s board, because I thought it would remind people on the past. That and I really thought people should know why Red Ant is giving us negative karma.

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: 2001 on 05/07/16 at 2:37 pm


I posted this on the 2000s board, because I thought it would remind people on the past. That and I really thought people should know why Red Ant is giving us negative karma.


I've somehow managed to avoid his/her fudge despite saying some really stupid sh*t  :o

I don't think s/he's fudging people posting in 2010s topics though. Most of it is actually in 90s/2000s boards with the decadeology stuff.

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: Eazy-EMAN1995 on 05/07/16 at 3:10 pm

I've gone back and looked at old threads, and they were ALWAYS nostalgic for things! I think one of the contributing factors is older people quitting this site one by one.

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: Toon on 05/07/16 at 3:34 pm

Seemed like most of this website was nostalgic. Didn't get any hints that people weren't on here.


:( I didn't know my 2010s love was upsetting anyone. The 2000s board is still the most active board, isn't it?


Keep that love going!

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: SpyroKev on 05/07/16 at 4:17 pm

I noticed to. I'm still on this site for that reason. Every thread I posted is nostalgia based aside from one that's still a reference. You don't see me actively in the 2010s discussions if not to do with my threads recommended to be posted in said section.

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: Baltimoreian on 05/07/16 at 4:20 pm


I've gone back and looked at old threads, and they were ALWAYS nostalgic for things! I think one of the contributing factors is older people quitting this site one by one.


True. But there are some people who are nostalgic for stuff. It's just not widely discussed.


Seemed like most of this website was nostalgic. Didn't get any hints that people weren't on here.


Except for when we talk about the 2010s.

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: 2001 on 05/07/16 at 4:27 pm


True. But there are some people who are nostalgic for stuff. It's just not widely discussed.

Except for when we talk about the 2010s.


Well you don't have to go to the 2010s board if you don't want to.  ??? You can stay and make topics in the 2000s board.

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: SpyroKev on 05/07/16 at 4:29 pm


True. But there are some people who are nostalgic for stuff. It's just not widely discussed.

Except for when we talk about the 2010s.


I been itching for the What was life like as a kid in the early 2000s to return exactly on topic for awhile now, man. Haha I really want that thread to restore. Not calling out anyone. Just the subject that changed the thread is worth its own thread.

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: Baltimoreian on 05/07/16 at 4:31 pm


Well you don't have to go to the 2010s board if you don't want to.  ??? You can stay and make topics in the 2000s board.


Well okay. I just go on the 2010s boards because there isn't that much people here.

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: #Infinity on 05/07/16 at 4:36 pm

I don't think s/he's fudging people posting in 2010s topics though. Most of it is actually in 90s/2000s boards with the decadeology stuff.

Yes, just like a lot of other old school members who grew disgusted by an over saturation of decade categorization threads. There was another instance like Red Ant, albeit without any fudging, in that long thread about whether 2009 was a 2000s year, in which somebody who loved the site back in its old days came back only to be appalled that there was a thread like that that was over 20 pages long.

If anything, I kind of think the lurking vendetta against d-word threads may be a big reason a lot of people here don't post more in the 90s and 2000s threads. Oftentimes, regular threads will go on tangents of year categorization, but otherwise, people seem not to touch upon these periods for a reason. I kind of enjoy discussing what distinguishes the early, mid, and late periods of a decade from each other, so long as what I have to say is of actual substance (not just 2009 is like 1995-type nonsense), but I dare not bring up the topic on my own unless it's really warranted.

The problem is that it's hard to know exactly when you're crossing the line in the eyes of old school boarders. Some cases are more obvious, but then what if you simply bring up the fact that you thought society suddenly became much worse for a bunch of reasons beginning in 2003? You can technically argue that that's an example of the d-word, since it's implying that pre-2003 was a different era than post-2003, but it's also a much more substantive and personal perspective than just randomly comparing any two unrelated years to each other. Personally, I don't think there's anything wrong with a statement like this, as it gives insight into the individual who posted it, and it would be really unfair, in my opinion, to decry it as being just as meaningless as "2009 has 1995 vibes."

But actually, I personally haven't even noticed that much of an imbalance on this site aside from the complete drought of threads in the sections for the 1980s and earlier. If you came to this board simply to discuss your childhood, then you're not going to get primarily what you want. Sure, conversations about childhood tv shows, video games, commercials, movies, etc. are part of this site, but they're only one slice of a broader range of subjects that a site dedicated to previous popular culture focuses on.

In fact, I haven't seen the threads about people's childhood in the 90s and 2000s slow down at all since the turn of 2016, even though the more chart-oriented threads are less prevalent. Even the thread I started in the 2010s sub-board about Nintendo supposedly announcing the discontinuation of the Wii U by the end of 2016 (the news of which was corrected just during the first page), quickly turned into a general thread, now nearly 40 pages long, about Nintendo, partially about their current failures but also why we loved them so much more while we were growing up.

Personally, I was more interested in this site because I wanted to specifically talk about the adolescent trends, as well as geopolitical shifts that took place in decades past, as opposed to just bantering about the latest shallow trend. Frankly, I can relate to your disillusionment with all of the 2010s threads, but for different reasons. I'm not nearly as interested simply in talking about my childhood so much as exchanging opinions and perspectives about the more adolescent and historical elements from decades past, hence my user title. I guess ultimately, different individuals visit In the 00s for completely different reasons, which makes for an interesting melting pot of ideas and conversations.

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: 2001 on 05/07/16 at 4:43 pm


Well okay. I just go on the 2010s boards because there isn't that much people here.


I will try to most more 2000s stuff if it makes you feel better. :( it's just that I'm older compared to most posters here... So different life cycle stages in different eras. I don't think Megas XLR when I see the mid-2000s, I think Lost, Desperate Housewives, Prison Break etc. Most people here haven't watched them. The "TV shows of the 2000s" thread is full of spider webs..

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: Baltimoreian on 05/07/16 at 4:49 pm


I will try to most more 2000s stuff if it makes you feel better. :( it's just that I'm older compared to most posters here... So different life cycle stages in different eras. I don't think Megas XLR when I see the mid-2000s, I think Lost, Desperate Housewives, Prison Break etc. Most people here haven't watched them. The "TV shows of the 2000s" thread is full of spider webs..


No, it's okay. I don't really think I relate to you a lot. I mean, you were born in 1993 while I was born in 1999. You were already in school when I was born. So, why should I really care if my childhood was in the mid-late 2000s, while yours was in the late 90s/early 00s?

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: Howard on 05/07/16 at 5:43 pm


I posted this on the 2000s board, because I thought it would remind people on the past. That and I really thought people should know why Red Ant is giving us negative karma.


Why is he giving a lot of us negative karma?  ???

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: Toon on 05/07/16 at 5:46 pm


Why is he giving a lot of us negative karma?  ???


I'm noticing that as well. On the front page of this forum I'm seeing people getting negative karma on posts that're around a month or two old. Kind of strange.

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: #Infinity on 05/07/16 at 5:49 pm


Why is he giving a lot of us negative karma?  ???


Because decadeology was explicitly banned due to its repetitive and meaningless nature, and also because it was spammed incessantly several years back. I'd like to believe it's at least okay to compare specific events from two years to frame them in an interesting light, or to specifically describe how the onslaughts of notable occurrences or changes during a certain period of time made a significant impact on future events, but it's not always clear where the boundary specifically lies, especially since the definition of decadeology seems to vary by person.

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: 2001 on 05/07/16 at 6:09 pm

These meta threads like "end of topics?", "are we decadeologists?", and now this one, kind of bring me down. If anyone ever has a problem with whatever I posted, then always feel free to PM me. I don't want to feel like bringing the enjoyment of this board down for anyone else.

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: Baltimoreian on 05/07/16 at 6:23 pm


These meta threads like "end of topics?", "are we decadeologists?", and now this one, kind of bring me down. If anyone ever has a problem with whatever I posted, then always feel free to PM me. I don't want to feel like bringing the enjoyment of this board down for anyone else.


No, it's just that I don't find this site to be sincerely nostalgic for me. Despite the fact that I made over 4,000 posts as of this one, I still find it to be misinforming.

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: gibbo on 05/07/16 at 6:38 pm

There was quite a close community here that often reminisced about the 60's, 70's and 80's. Most don't post regularly now. It's true ... People of my age (I was born in 1960), get turned off with all these comparisons between decades, years etc. But I guess it's a natural progression to have younger people coming here who naturally would wish to discuss their childhood years (1990's onwards).

It's a bit like when I always bought my clothes from a certain shop. One day I went in there and could find nothing I wanted to buy to wear. Basically, I got older in my clothes choices while the shop remained current to their buying demographic age.

I still pop in here almost daily ... but there are very few topics that I am tempted to join and contribute to. They simply don't interest me and sometimes make me a little sad. I either turn off ... or turn TROLL!  ;)

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: Baltimoreian on 05/07/16 at 6:42 pm


There was quite a close community here that often reminisced about the 60's, 70's and 80's. Most don't post regularly now. It's tue ... People of my age (I was born in 1960), get turned off with all these comparisons between decades, years etc. But I guess it's a natural progression to have younger people coming here who naturally would wish to discuss their childhood years (1990's onwards).

It's a bit like when I always bought my clothes from a certain shop. One day I went in there and could find nothing I wanted to buy to wear. Basically, I got older in my clothes choices while the shop remained current to their buying demographic age.

I still pop in here almost daily ... but there are very few topics that I am tempted to join and contribute to. They simply don't interest me and sometimes make me a little sad. I either turn off ... or turn TROLL!  ;)


Yeah, I wish people here could reminisce more about the 2000s. Not saying that you should join, but your post is a great example on how this website used to be great for nostalgic people. Now, I don't feel nostalgic whenever I go here. It's just really repetitive over and over again, with all these decade comparison threads. It never stops.

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: #Infinity on 05/07/16 at 7:07 pm

Hang on, I've looked at the list of most recent smites, and it looks like Red Ant is just giving people fudges for the sake of it, not just for decadeologic posts. How are this and this decadeology, or even worthy of smiting in the first place? They're just threads about specific years in music, something that isn't banned at all. Even the thread explaining why decadeology is banned explicitly states it's okay to post threads like "why was great," or hell, even something like "what did people think of the 80s in the 90s" (which is pretty similar to this thread). "Histories and timelines" are also given the okay, again sort of tracing back to my point about outlining how things evolved from one year to another, i.e., the numerous changes from late 1996 to mid-1997 that, at least in my opinion, brought society from the peak of mid-90s culture into the basic framework of the 21st century. Even though there are multiple threads on this site dedicated to different respective years over the same general topic, that doesn't automatically make them decadeology! Besides, most of these posts are really old, so it's not like they're even relevant at this point. I'm just all the more confused now, unsure really of what to expect.

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: 2001 on 05/07/16 at 7:32 pm


Hang on, I've looked at the list of most recent smites, and it looks like Red Ant is just giving people fudges for the sake of it, not just for decadeologic posts. How are this and this decadeology, or even worthy of smiting in the first place? They're just threads about specific years in music, something that isn't banned at all. Even the thread explaining why decadeology is banned explicitly states it's okay to post threads like "why was great," or hell, even something like "what did people think of the 80s in the 90s" (which is pretty similar to this thread). "Histories and timelines" are also given the okay, again sort of tracing back to my point about outlining how things evolved from one year to another, i.e., the numerous changes from late 1996 to mid-1997 that, at least in my opinion, brought society from the peak of mid-90s culture into the basic framework of the 21st century. Even though there are multiple threads on this site dedicated to different respective years over the same general topic, that doesn't automatically make them decadeology! Besides, most of these posts are really old, so it's not like they're even relevant at this point. I'm just all the more confused now, unsure really of what to expect.


He tagged those threads with 's', which I'm guessing means spam.

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: #Infinity on 05/07/16 at 8:00 pm


He tagged those threads with 's', which I'm guessing means spam.


They're still not technically banned and certainly aren't comparable to a phone advertisement or something like that. Those threads, while plentiful, all talk about something meaningful within themselves and aren't just trivial, subjective comparisons for no clear reason.

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: meesa on 05/07/16 at 8:16 pm


Hang on, I've looked at the list of most recent smites, and it looks like Red Ant is just giving people fudges for the sake of it, not just for decadeologic posts. How are this and this decadeology, or even worthy of smiting in the first place?  I'm just all the more confused now, unsure really of what to expect.


Chucky summed up once what decadeology is and why it is banned, and it was a perfect way to do it. I can't remember it word for word but here is the gist of it: Imagine that instead of years we are talking about garden trowels. And you see 10-20 posts that say "How is a green trowel like a red trowel?" "How is a blue trowel like a purple trowel?" "I think the purple trowel is better than the red trowel." "Compare the red, green and blue trowel to the orange, purple and white trowel, which are more alike? Which is better?" When you replace the years with trowels, you see how ridiculous it becomes.

In other words, if you can replace the year with another year many times on a post and proceed to make multiple threads in this manner it is decadeology. Comparing early 80s to early 2000s (in one thread only) is fine, but comparing 1980 to 2000 then 1981 to 2001 then 1982 to 2002 etc etc is unnecessary. Also, arguing over whether 2000 is really part of the 90s compared to the early thousands , and making a bunch of posts about it arguing over and over again after a while becomes annoying.  Arguing over when a decade really began and really ended is also unnecessary when there are several topics about it as well.

Admittedly, I do not post often, and go for periods of not much visiting except to moderate, and we mods have been advised to take it easy on people instead of coming down on decadeology; so who am I to criticize? you asked, so I have tried to illustrate. Hopefully it helps.

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: 80sfan on 05/07/16 at 8:56 pm

I'm not innocent. I do post decadeology. However, I do only post like three comments on a thread that involves decadeology, because of peer pressure.  :-X

Then I leave. I don't go five whole pages talking about how 1995 was like 1994.

I do honestly wish that people would post more titles such as ,"Weren't video games in 2005 great?" without comparing years. Or a title such as "Why was the New Jack Swing era so fun?"

I'll admit, a few sprinkles of decadeology here, and there, every few months is okay, but EVERY post, and EVERY DAY? It's boring and not that interesting.

I wonder how much that the those born 1985 and after are trying to be original, or different, from those before them? I mean, there aren't many original ways to say "1992 was kind of still 80's in its own way,' or, "1979 had some previews of the 1980's." I get it, younger generations want to distinct themselves from the older generations, but decadeology can be repetitive!

Now, I'm hungry. I'm going to get some McDonald's!

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: #Infinity on 05/07/16 at 9:50 pm

In other words, if you can replace the year with another year many times on a post and proceed to make multiple threads in this manner it is decadeology. Comparing early 80s to early 2000s (in one thread only) is fine, but comparing 1980 to 2000 then 1981 to 2001 then 1982 to 2002 etc etc is unnecessary. Also, arguing over whether 2000 is really part of the 90s compared to the early thousands , and making a bunch of posts about it arguing over and over again after a while becomes annoying.  Arguing over when a decade really began and really ended is also unnecessary when there are several topics about it as well.

The former examples are pretty obvious, but I kind of feel torn about the latter point. First off, topics of all sorts are constantly recycled, usually to the benefit of newer generations of posters who missed the original threads (although you could dig deep into the archive to find a nine-year-old thread about a certain year).

Second, I think depending on how you go about it, asking about when a cultural decade (or sub-era) started, peaked and ended can actually produce a lot of meaningful, insightful points. In particular, it gives a specific outline of how a certain member personally experienced or perceives a specific era of time, even if not all of us agree with their boundaries. Jordan, for example, constantly defines the "Y2K/late 90s/early 2000s" era as spanning the whole period from 1998-2002, which is primarily shaped by the trends he noticed in music and other categories, including the end of Beavis & Butthead (a huge part of his life in the mid-90s), the rise of nu-metal and Enema of the State-esque pop punk, and the first wave of Southern rap (before the rise of crunk in 2003). It's a perspective to be taken with a grain of salt, really, but you also learn a lot about Jordan through the points he makes.

Me personally, I can never totally categorize 2002 with 1998 to 2000 because I personally remember things changing a lot around 2001 (I'd also categorize 1997 with 1998-2001 instead of 1993-1996 because it feels like so many huge events and shifts occurred around the 1996-1997 school year), but again, that's just my own recollection of how popular culture changed, not a precise definition. All that said, I try to be self-aware, and so I make "1997 is late 90s"-type posts at least somewhat sparingly. I realize that I've already made that opinion of mine clear and elaborated on it. I went into great detail about my thoughts 1997 after ArcticFox made a long and heavy-handed response to when I asked why he called it a mid-90s year (which really surprised me, because I thought he always agreed with me before), but I tried to at least make points that brought something meaningful to the discussion without taking things too seriously. I'm sure not everybody here was the least bit interested in the lengthy debate we had, and it's not the type of thing I feel I should do on a frequent basis, but I was still intrigued to understand better where ArcticFox was coming from when he made so many fervent points against what I personally took for granted.

Another point I should make about these types of thread is that you could basically change the name of a decadeologic discussion into something non-decadeologic, i.e., "is 1997 a late 90s year?" becomes "why 1997 was so significant," and still get practically the same results. Reminiscing about a certain year in the past naturally leans towards at least some form of categorization, since if you're highlighting what stands out about the year, then you're simultaneously distinguishing it from other years. If I, for example, said something like "1997 was a fascinating year because even though it still had that retro vibe, it also saw the breakout of Spicemania, not to mention the rise of No Limit, Puff Daddy, the Internet, several new shows, and 4-player pizza party video games," I'm also implicitly declaring 1997 a very different year than 1996, even if I don't specifically call it the true start of the late 90s.

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: JordanK1982 on 05/07/16 at 10:15 pm

I just like to talk about my teen & young adult years when I'd skate and go to Pop Punk shows. I don't even really argue as much over cultural boundaries (sometimes, yes, I'm guilty) because I agree that it gets very tiring but, for the most part, I just get nostalgic and talk about the cool stuff I (still) like that was current way back when. Shooting the sh!t, really. I agree with somethings like stupid topics such as "xxxx year cultural debate" and "1996 is the new 2022 and 1941 is the new 1641" are pretty lame and that a lot of arguments just repeat themselves go around and around in circles. There is a point where enough is enough and you gotta realize when to stop but at the same time, if someone is comparing years, freaking out over it as if they said something that was racist or threatening is insane.


The former examples are pretty obvious, but I kind of feel torn about the latter point. First off, topics of all sorts are constantly recycled, usually to the benefit of newer generations of posters who missed the original threads (although you could dig deep into the archive to find a nine-year-old thread about a certain year).

Second, I think depending on how you go about it, asking about when a cultural decade (or sub-era) started, peaked and ended can actually produce a lot of meaningful, insightful points. In particular, it gives a specific outline of how a certain member personally experienced or perceives a specific era of time, even if not all of us agree with their boundaries. Jordan, for example, constantly defines the "Y2K/late 90s/early 2000s" era as spanning the whole period from 1998-2002, which is primarily shaped by the trends he noticed in music and other categories, including the end of Beavis & Butthead (a huge part of his life in the mid-90s), the rise of nu-metal and Enema of the State-esque pop punk, and the first wave of Southern rap (before the rise of crunk in 2003). It's a perspective to be taken with a grain of salt, really, but you also learn a lot about Jordan through the points he makes.

Me personally, I can never totally categorize 2002 with 1998 to 2000 because I personally remember things changing a lot around 2001 (I'd also categorize 1997 with 1998-2001 instead of 1993-1996 because it feels like so many huge events and shifts occurred around the 1996-1997 school year), but again, that's just my own recollection of how popular culture changed, not a precise definition. All that said, I try to be self-aware, and so I make "1997 is late 90s"-type posts at least somewhat sparingly. I realize that I've already made that opinion of mine clear and elaborated on it. I went into great detail about my thoughts 1997 after ArcticFox made a long and heavy-handed response to when I asked why he called it a mid-90s year (which really surprised me, because I thought he always agreed with me before), but I tried to at least make points that brought something meaningful to the discussion without taking things too seriously. I'm sure not everybody here was the least bit interested in the lengthy debate we had, and it's not the type of thing I feel I should do on a frequent basis, but I was still intrigued to understand better where ArcticFox was coming from when he made so many fervent points against what I personally took for granted.

Another point I should make about these types of thread is that you could basically change the name of a decadeologic discussion into something non-decadeologic, i.e., "is 1997 a late 90s year?" becomes "why 1997 was so significant," and still get practically the same results. Reminiscing about a certain year in the past naturally leans towards at least some form of categorization, since if you're highlighting what stands out about the year, then you're simultaneously distinguishing it from other years. If I, for example, said something like "1997 was a fascinating year because even though it still had that retro vibe, it also saw the breakout of Spicemania, not to mention the rise of No Limit, Puff Daddy, the Internet, several new shows, and 4-player pizza party video games," I'm also implicitly declaring 1997 a very different year than 1996, even if I don't specifically call it the true start of the late 90s.


And the Pro Skater series. Don't forget that! ;)

This was a great post. Like most things, it really is subjective what cultural era ends where. Nothing is set in stone and people perceive things a lot differently depending on their experiences, likes/dislikes among other things. You really do learn a lot about someone, like I know you're a big fan of the DDR games and euro-dance music and how that's affected your viewpoint on certain things just from reading your posts.

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: 2001 on 05/07/16 at 10:28 pm

I either turn off ... or turn TROLL!  ;)


Uh-oh!  :o


I'm not innocent. I do post decadeology. However, I do only post like three comments on a thread that involves decadeology, because of peer pressure.  :-X


You will post more decadeology! Join us!


Now, I'm hungry. I'm going to get some McDonald's!


No, you will not! You're on a diet! What the hell?!

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: 80sfan on 05/07/16 at 11:15 pm


Uh-oh!  :o

You will post more decadeology! Join us!

No, you will not! You're on a diet! What the hell?!



It's my cheat meal. I'm not going to go off the deep end, and eat a whole buffet.  :)

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: JordanK1982 on 05/08/16 at 12:00 am


You will post more decadeology! Join us!


Decadeology is the one true study. I am taking college courses on it so I can get my PhD just like Howard. Decade doctors unite! 8)

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: Eazy-EMAN1995 on 05/08/16 at 12:10 am


Yeah, I wish people here could reminisce more about the 2000s.

Well..... the 2000s just aren't seen as retro cool though,but kinda dated. When the 2020s start is when you'll most likely start seeing HUGE amount of reminiscing.

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: 2001 on 05/08/16 at 12:16 am


It's my cheat meal. I'm not going to go off the deep end, and eat a whole buffet.  :)


Cheat day and you eat McDonald's? I like to eat Popeye's when I've given up on life.


Decadeology is the one true study. I am taking college courses on it so I can get my PhD just like Howard. Decade doctors unite! 8)


What are you going to write for your dissertation?

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: JordanK1982 on 05/08/16 at 12:19 am


What are you going to write for your dissertation?


About how the 2010s have strong 847392719 BC vibes. 8)

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: 2001 on 05/08/16 at 12:22 am


About how the 2010s have strong 847392719 BC vibes. 8)


I'm afraid I won't be one of the 1.5 people who will read that.

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: 80sfan on 05/08/16 at 12:25 am


Cheat day and you eat McDonald's? I like to eat Popeye's when I've given up on life.

What are you going to write for your dissertation?


:-[

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: 80sfan on 05/08/16 at 12:26 am


Decadeology is the one true study. I am taking college courses on it so I can get my PhD just like Howard. Decade doctors unite! 8)


No, I won't give in! I can't give in!  >:(

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: JordanK1982 on 05/08/16 at 12:29 am


I'm afraid I won't be one of the 1.5 people who will read that.


>:(


No, I won't give in! I can't give in!  >:(


You don't wanna join the league of super decade doctors?

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: 80sfan on 05/08/16 at 12:30 am


>:(

You don't wanna join the league of super decade doctors?


I gave into the dark side before. I will not join the dark side!

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: JordanK1982 on 05/08/16 at 12:30 am


I gave into the dark side before. I will not join the dark side!


The dark side is pretty rad. We play Pro Skater 3 all day and discuss which cultural era said play takes place. Being a decade doctor is the life. 8)

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: Howard on 05/08/16 at 3:19 pm


Decadeology is the one true study. I am taking college courses on it so I can get my PhD just like Howard. Decade doctors unite! 8)


I don't have a PhD, I was in Special Ed half my life.

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: Baltimoreian on 05/08/16 at 3:37 pm


Well..... the 2000s just aren't seen as retro cool though,but kinda dated. When the 2020s start is when you'll most likely start seeing HUGE amount of reminiscing.


Or the very late 2010s, which either would come first.

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: JordanK1982 on 05/08/16 at 4:05 pm


I don't have a PhD, I was in Special Ed half my life.


It's ok, Howard. Everyone knows you got the PhD in Decadeology. 8)

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: Baltimoreian on 05/08/16 at 4:58 pm


I don't have a PhD, I was in Special Ed half my life.


I think he was joking.

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: JordanK1982 on 05/08/16 at 7:40 pm


I think he was joking.


Yeah, I was. There is no Decadeology PhD. :P

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: mach!ne_he@d on 05/09/16 at 9:25 pm


I will try to most more 2000s stuff if it makes you feel better. :( it's just that I'm older compared to most posters here... So different life cycle stages in different eras. I don't think Megas XLR when I see the mid-2000s, I think Lost, Desperate Housewives, Prison Break etc. Most people here haven't watched them. The "TV shows of the 2000s" thread is full of spider webs..


Yeah, there's been a bit of a "demograpic shift", I suppose you could say, as of late around here. As recently as four or five years ago I was still one of the younger people that posted frequently on the decade boards, and now I'm one of the older ones.

Truthfully, I don't really mind it all that much, though. I'll admit it was a bit strange at first to see so many people reminiscing about cartoons that were popular when I was in college, but getting to see different voices and different perspectives represented here has generally been a good thing. If anything, you could probably argue that five years ago there were actually too many '80s babies on the decade boards, and we were all spending too much time posting about the same things over and over back then, too (like how much better '90s cartoons were than '00s cartoons, how awesome Pogs were, how Power Rangers was better when Tommy was still in the cast, etc.).

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: Red Ant on 05/11/16 at 8:32 am

some people got smites because they had none, some got them for decadeology stuff. relax, a minus one there aint gonna kill ya. i come here mostly for the parody sections. way back when, i was a lead moderator... i wouldnt have fudged, i'd have banhammered.

Ant

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: 2001 on 05/11/16 at 12:49 pm


Yeah, there's been a bit of a "demograpic shift", I suppose you could say, as of late around here. As recently as four or five years ago I was still one of the younger people that posted frequently on the decade boards, and now I'm one of the older ones.

Truthfully, I don't really mind it all that much, though. I'll admit it was a bit strange at first to see so many people reminiscing about cartoons that were popular when I was in college, but getting to see different voices and different perspectives represented here has generally been a good thing. If anything, you could probably argue that five years ago there were actually too many '80s babies on the decade boards, and we were all spending too much time posting about the same things over and over back then, too (like how much better '90s cartoons were than '00s cartoons, how awesome Pogs were, how Power Rangers was better when Tommy was still in the cast, etc.).


You can never have too many 80s babies.... I think.  :o

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: whistledog on 05/11/16 at 4:19 pm


This is a site where everyone posts about their nostalgia from any phase. Yet, there's barely anything from the actual 1970s, 1980s, 1990s


The reason for that is because a lot of those who were actually around in those decades no longer like posting here because it's not fun for them anymore.  Decadeology is running the boards, and that's really sad.  You complain about the inactivity, when you might be part of it's cause. 

https://sidoxia.wordpress.com/files/2009/09/pot-kettle-black.jpg

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: #Infinity on 05/11/16 at 4:36 pm


The reason for that is because a lot of those who were actually around in those decades no longer like posting here because it's not fun for them anymore.  Decadeology is running the boards, and that's really sad.  You complain about the inactivity, when you might be part of it's cause. 

https://sidoxia.wordpress.com/files/2009/09/pot-kettle-black.jpg


It's just such a shame, in my opinion at least, that there's such a huge stigma against the newer generation of boarders who actually do make a lot of earnest conversation here, albeit in a different and occasionally technical way. Not all posts are even about decade sub-eras, either, and just because a few people would like to debate the boundaries of a cultural era they remember fondly (or not so fondly) shouldn't imply this place is completely toxic.

There's a reason a lot of people here, including myself, refuse to use the word 'decadeology' or simply refer to it as the d-word. It truly feels like a derogatory slur directed mostly at younger boarders who have different manners of conversation or different trains of thought. The fact that even the administration seems to treat a majority of current board members as practically Internet vagrants is really hard and unfair to a lot of us, especially when none of us are actual trolls except for a new member once in a while. If nothing else, we can certainly at least distinguish between delving into deep technical talk and deliberate thread spamming/trolling, and being told it's all our fault that these boards were ruined is the last thing anybody here needs.

All of this almost makes me feel there should just be a separate board from inthe00s, where the limitations on new-school type of topics aren't so strict and so that the administration here doesn't have to constantly mark people down for topics they consider undesirable.

Subject: Re: Has anybody noticed that this site is barely nostalgic?

Written By: Baltimoreian on 05/11/16 at 4:41 pm


The reason for that is because a lot of those who were actually around in those decades no longer like posting here because it's not fun for them anymore.  Decadeology is running the boards, and that's really sad.  You complain about the inactivity, when you might be part of it's cause. 

https://sidoxia.wordpress.com/files/2009/09/pot-kettle-black.jpg


Well, I'm sorry for causing InThe00s to be a trainwreck. *sarcasm* It's just that I can't find a certain website that talks about 2000s nostalgia.

Check for new replies or respond here...