-
Website
http://nbrightside.com/blog/ -
Original page
http://www.nbrightside.com/blog/2006/05/26/partial-versus-full-fe -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
oraclebase
8 comments · 7 points
-
michaeltwofish
10 comments · 12 points
-
Daniel Ha
2 comments · 405 points
-
jgarry
2 comments · 1 points
-
Lee Probert
3 comments · 2 points
-
-
Popular Threads
-
travelogue - Blog in isolation
3 days ago · 1 comment
-
inside the open source confessional - Blog in isolation
2 weeks ago · 6 comments
-
why Linux will never succeed in the mainstream - Blog in isolation
1 week ago · 2 comments
-
in praise of Killing Joke - Blog in isolation
1 week ago · 2 comments
-
travelogue - Blog in isolation
That's why they publish partial feeds, forcing the interested reader along to the site and incrementing the precious stat counter by one."
No, no, no ... you're so wrong, as far as I'm concerned. The real reason I publish a partial feed is because I don't like clogging up Orablogs (for example) with a really long posting that a lot of people might not be interested in. So, far from it being ego-driven, as you seem to be suggesting, I'd say it's the opposite - I don't want to impose reams of my rubbish on people who might not want it.
But I'll think about what you're saying here and I'm definitely going to look at my own reading arrangements.
And you know, looking at what you and oracledoug said, bloggers use partial feeds for so many reasons. But I agree that for some, desperately wanting to know if one's content is good enough can play a big factor.
In fact, that's probably one of the only good things about partial feeds - when bloggers realise no-one's really reading their crap, then they're forced to improve :P
"partial feeds" vs "full feeds" statistics