Caroline O’Donovan, on The Washington Post:
More than a decade later, even as other social platforms have undergone multiple reinventions, little has changed about Goodreads, a beige website where readers can rate books from one to five stars, write reviews and talk to other readers on old-school forums, some of which have tens of thousands of members.
Even back in the day, I recall preferring Shelfari over Goodreads. But it also was folded into Goodreads and forgotten.
But after Amazon bought Goodreads, it gradually became clear that the technology was old and the data not well organized, and that a significant investment would be required to bring the site up to speed, according to two former Goodreads employees.
Interesting if true. A failed data metrics extraction as the source of stagnation of the site.