I think calling it the Hall of Fame/Shame is unjustified.

I certainly agree when we talk about hardware products, because having very short support periods for those just seems wasteful.

But it gets difficult when entering software, because it probably differs from user to user how fast they would like the software to evolve. I can think of software that I want to be boring and work forever the way it does now without changing (except security bug fixes ..). So support periods are long and consist only of patch releases. And then there is software where I am waiting eagerly for new features to be added and would like the maintainers/the company to focus their attention on it if possible, thus taking resources from the maintenance side of things and moving them to the feature-factory. So support periods may be short and major/minor release bumps happen frequently.

Having one of these products in the Hall of Fame and another rot in the Hall of Shame does not seem to add any informational value.