The whole vintage thing is proof enough that the FOTM is exactly that. People get all excited about the new gear....then it gets old cause everyone has them....then it turns into a large portion of the people moving on to something newer, while what was formerly new starts getting boring...then sometime much later, that gear that was once the FOTM and new and exciting has become "vintage"....people try out said vintage gear and realize, "wow, this stuff is great!" lol Just goes to prove that, like Obob said, this isn't computer software that becomes obsolete ever six months. Audio technology doesn't change overnight, and often times you'll find older gear that sounds as good or better than newer gear.
One of the most radical examples of that is the LCD-2. It came out to extravagant praise--'one of the finest headphones ever' etc. Then the Rev2 came along and suddenly the original was passe--and worse, riddled with faults like dark, muffled, narrow soundstage, you name it. The Rev2 was the one to have. Then the LCD-3 came out and the Rev2 was passe. Funny thing though, I have the Rev1 and it still sounds great. Given its myriad faults, well documented in these pages, and all the "better" products that have come out since, it should sound like crap, but somehow it doesn't--it still sounds like it did when I got it--like music. I can't explain it, but it's true.
Having read the entire LCD-2 and LCD-3 threads up to a point (I stopped some months ago), those criticisms of the original LCD-2s and the R2s were voiced from the beginning. I think though that those comments about them were more prevalent when people were discussing comparisons between the new and old versions, or the LCD-2s and 3s. Many people seem to prefer the LCD-2s over the 3s. There was even an LCD-2 vs. HD-800 thread, which became very heated.
What I observed going through various headphones with a radically different frequency response, such as Denons, then Grados and from that HD-800s and LCD-2s is that it is possible for one's brain to adapt. I used, for example, to find Audio Techinca headphones to be unbearable to listen to, but now don't. Likewise the original LCD-2s were wrong for me at the start, but I got used to them, and so on.
I think one common theme amongst the criticisms here has to do with a general desire for simple answers to everything, when audio is really a very complex subject. From this, we see people wanting to be told that one model of headphones is better than another definitively, or something is worth it or not worth it. My pet peeve with this is people who post about science who have no practical exprience or understanding of it, instead imaginging it as some kind of arbiter of truth. Again though, it is the same aspect of human nature -- the desire for simple answers for things that are not and will never be simple.
One of my favourite quotes sums it all up though. It was written almost 2000 years ago (pause and think about that for a second). Considering that, nothing has ever really changed.
"Men are disturbed not by the things which happen, but by their opinions about the things" --Epictitus (AD 55-135)