Sitting in the airport on my way to tonight's poker game, which Jason (Davis) is kindly hosting to benefit the ERE Foundation, I saw that John (did I hear that you might be joining us in Amsterdam?) Sumser weighed in on the new Recruiting.com site this morning, and Jason (Goldberg) seems pissed (of course, being the gentleman that he is, he will deny it).

Clearly this will be the talk of our game tonight.

In reading John's article, I see two main points, both of which John seems to see as a negative:

1. The new version of recruiting.com changes the site from a personal publishing-centric platform to one that is technology-centric.
   
   
2. The new version reduces Jason (Davis') personal involvement in the site in place of the voting system.
   

Since Jason (Goldberg) has invited debate over the merits of the site, here's my two cents on John's points (as I see them):

1. Convergence has changed the game. Ten years ago, media companies did not consider community to be part of the core of their business.  Today, with eBay and Craig's List devastating newspapers' classifieds and News Corp.'s acquisition of myspace.com seen as a masterstroke, they all do.  Advertising, traditionally the core of the revenue model for media companies, has become a huge revenue stream for software companies, and the line between the two continues to blur.  Google (software) counts Yahoo! (media) and Microsoft (software again) as its two biggest competitors. 
   
   In today's environment, there are literally millions of sources of information, any of which may or may not be credible.  Digg's community and technology-centric approach to identifying the "best" (I use the quotes here because I do not believe that mob rule is always the best filter for our information) information out there caught more traditional news organizations like CNET flatfooted.  Is Digg a media company?  A software company?  Their site is a product of the interaction between the community and the code, and they are not so easily categorized.  Will Digg replace CNET?  I doubt it.  Has it proven itself as a useful tool?  In my mind absolutely.
   
   
2. Every entrepreneur (and both Jasons are clearly very entrepreneurial guys) wants to create something larger than themselves.  By definition, this means learning to rely on other people's skills and contributions.  As a breed, entrepreneurs are often control freaks (after all, we left the security of a 9 to 5 in order to be the boss), so this can be difficult, but if the company or product is to have a lasting impact, it has to stand for something more than "Jason Davis' thought of the day."
   
   That said, I agree with John here.  I think that Jason and Anthony's viewpoints often get lost on the new site, and I miss Jim's thoughts there.  Michael, I think you're a lot more truthy and fun as an independent (and that's a compliment)! 
   
   IMHO, Jason's personal charm and evangelism was/is responsible for much of the success of the site, and I think that ideal balance has not yet been found between the different voices on the new site.

So here's my bottom line on the new Recruiting.com: 

Is it a shameless Digg rip-off?  Yes.

Is it going to make Jobster's investors happy?  Not by itself, but that was never the plan. 

Is it a useful tool for the recruiting community?  Absolutely.

People vote with their feet, and the traffic numbers speak for themselves.  I give both Jasons credit for being the first to fill this niche in the recruiting industry.

Let's do a podcast!