Nautilus has been great but, aren't they shotty with their content updates?
I meant "shoddy" as insom pointed out. Someone told me their news wasn't "recent" so to speak, like National Geographic as opposed to the Economist. This may lend itself to an eventual spiral into repetitive and empty stories, like NatGeo.
I think in this context, he means "shoddy"? As in, their updates aren't always top-notch, frequent, consistent, etc.
Oooh -- I was like, shorty? Shot...s? PS I just got internet back after some sort of modem failure but I read your "job quitting postcript" from a few days ago at work and couldn't comment but I LOVED it, loved hearing the details. Y'all who throw time at hubski, it's always good to hear you're doing well.
I did mean shoddy, pardon my lack of brain cells.