Comments on: Figure Out Who Loves Ya, Baby

By: jenn.suz.hoy

jenn.suz.hoy — Wed, 12 Jul 2006 17:16:46 +0000

Actually, I get your articles as full text feeds to my Google Reader. I click to the site though, because I want to enjoy the design while I read the articles. I don’t care to see them in Google – I always click to “Show Original Item” so I get the full experience.

And, unfortunately, my site is still too new to get much love. That and the whole portfolio side of it isn’t even finished yet. :( I’m getting there, just takes time…

By: Sergey

Sergey — Thu, 15 Jun 2006 08:44:52 +0000

By the way, I do see your posts in full Chris in my RSS. And still prefer to reed it onsite (just to rest my eyes on good design one more time) :-)

By: Sergey

Sergey — Thu, 15 Jun 2006 08:41:05 +0000

There is one thing I want to point out Chris. I really do hope that you are not going to shave off your postings here knowing that you still have quite a bit of readers coming back to check what’s new. Remember also about us (those with RSS readers) coming back ONLY when you post new things.

Ok, I admit not only then (I do drop by sometimes without seeing new posts in my RSS reader) though old posts sitting there kind of remind me about your site.

Moral: keep up the good work and keep posting :-)

By: Sammy

Sammy — Fri, 26 May 2006 21:27:36 +0000

I see pros/cons to both full and partial feeds or posts.

But I definitely agree with you Devin about clicking on a post to get the full read and ber disappointed. It really pisses me off. Hmmm… maybe I should reconsider switching to partial listings. Waht if they… are disappointed when they click? (gasp)

OH WELL! It’s my blog. :)

By: Devin

Devin — Sat, 13 May 2006 19:38:56 +0000

Ah, okay Chris. In any case, I’m assuming a lot of those uniques are from the people who visit each time you post.

Mike, how many people don’t post full text? Don’t flatter yourself. Darren Rowse posts fulll text, Steve Pavlina posts full text. These people who are worthy of re-publishing still somehow make an awesome income. ;-)

By: Chris P.

Chris P. — Sat, 13 May 2006 04:48:09 +0000

Well, this site was absolutely created to be read within the context of the design.

I use visual styling cues, special formatting, and images to bring my posts to life, and if you’re reading through a monotone feed reader, you’re missing out on a lot of what I have to offer.

By: Mike

Mike — Sat, 13 May 2006 03:18:10 +0000

I read because you’re cute !

And I hate and will never publish full feeds.

Just asking for people to scrape your feeds, republish them on their nasty lil splogs and make $43.27 in AdSense earnings.

By: Chris P.

Chris P. — Fri, 12 May 2006 21:35:29 +0000

Well, I’ve left page views out of the argument here, and I actually wasn’t aware that my feeds weren’t full text feeds.

I have mucho improvements to make on the feed end of things, so I’ll tack that on to the end of my incredibly long list.

By: Devin

Devin — Fri, 12 May 2006 21:05:07 +0000

Keep in mind you’re driving the traffic to your site by not using full text feeds (very annoying). I don’t get many visitors becuase they’re all subscribers (and the rest are search refers).

In your site’s case, I may not love you, I may have just noticed an interesting headline and clicked.. only to be disappointed. In essence, I don’t love you.. but you think I did by clicking all those times.

..don’t worry though, I’m not disappointed yet. ;-)

By: Chris P.

Chris P. — Fri, 12 May 2006 20:20:39 +0000

That’s an excellent point, although there is always the possibility that the ratio will remain the same because of an associated increase in RSS subscribers and daily site visitors.

In fact, the ratio could even shrink!

Unless, of course, I post about Brangelina’s offspring, in which case my SE stats will invariably jump through the roof.

Thankfully, I don’t see that happening any time soon.