What a nice looking website. There's a bit too much random whitespace above the article, but it's all very nice and clean. The width is just right. Thoughts?
2008 should certainly be in the title, because this argument is woefully out of date. If it were right, Facebook would be well into a Friendster-like decline now.
But everybody has adapted. To my eye, it looks like a combination of better features on Facebook's part (hiding users, quiet unfriending, friend lists to control content distribution, auto-filtering of feeds to people it thinks you care about, etc); more skillful users; wider uptake of good social network etiquette; and people just getting used to the fact that everybody is on Facebook.
I look forward to the day that somebody will find a way to challenge Facebook, but I don't believe this is any longer a route.
I'm not sure what device you were using to read it, but it was far too wide for my tastes. Averaging five random lines showed a character count of 113, but that's 1.5x to 2.5x the "ideal width". That's obviously a subjective measure (heyo!), but I usually follow the "two alphabets" (52 characters) mnemonic as a guide and it seems to work well.
From Wikipedia: "The measure of a text influences legibility. Long lines are hard to read, short lines are more easily read. 45–75 characters per line are regarded as the ideal range for the measure. For multiple column setups, 40–50 characters are often preferred. 66 is sometimes considered ideal for one column setups. Generally, if the measure is wide, the leading of a text should be increased—if the measure is short, it is can safely be decreased. Reverse text, i.e. white text on black also requires more leading."( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measure_(typography) )
Also, 2008 should definitely be in the title.