Full text feeds pay off for this blogger

Uncategorized 1 Minute

I love Amit Agarwal’s analysis on the full-text vs. partial text debate. I HATE partial text feeds. I am subscribing to a few now (Dan Farber, for instance) but I find I link to them far less often than people who give me full text feeds. What does that do? Well, read Amit’s analysis. And, yes, I did “steal” Amit’s content and put it on my link blog.

Published by Robert Scoble

I help entrepreneurs build their technology business' story, help with getting ready for investors, with other launch plans, and many other strategic things that can help your new startup. Call to talk: +1-425-205-1921 (text first).

Published

64 thoughts on “Full text feeds pay off for this blogger”

  4. A partial feed is like a good headline. It should tell you enough to entertain and make you want more. What’s wrong with it? It’s a good compromise. You get notification of content and the people get paid.

    Like

  6. A partial feed is like a good headline. It should tell you enough to entertain and make you want more. What’s wrong with it? It’s a good compromise. You get notification of content and the people get paid.

    Like

  7. Pingback: scenedance (dot com) » full and partial rss fight it out

  8. I find it humorous that someone that “HATES” partial text feeds, is one of the few(must be because it’s Scoble) that I always have to click to get the rest of the story.

    Like

  9. I find it humorous that someone that “HATES” partial text feeds, is one of the few(must be because it’s Scoble) that I always have to click to get the rest of the story.

    Like

  10. WHY DO SOME FEED READERS IMPORT PARTICAL TEXT INSTEAD OF FULL TEXT. I HAVE NOTICED THIS FOR QUITE SOME TIME. PLUS COULD YOU TELL US AGAIN WHY YOU LIKE GOOGLE READER OVER LIVE.COM. PLEASE THAT WOULD BE A GREAT CONVERSATION TO START. SORT OF LIKE WHAT YOU DID WITH THE SEARCH ENGINES

    Like

  11. WHY DO SOME FEED READERS IMPORT PARTICAL TEXT INSTEAD OF FULL TEXT. I HAVE NOTICED THIS FOR QUITE SOME TIME. PLUS COULD YOU TELL US AGAIN WHY YOU LIKE GOOGLE READER OVER LIVE.COM. PLEASE THAT WOULD BE A GREAT CONVERSATION TO START. SORT OF LIKE WHAT YOU DID WITH THE SEARCH ENGINES

    Like

  18. I agree with you Robert, and so I opened this post on your website after reading it in my aggregator 🙂

    Like

  19. I agree with you Robert, and so I opened this post on your website after reading it in my aggregator 🙂

    Like

  22. Pingback: Switching back to real full feeds « //engtech
  23. Pingback: Full Text RSS Feeds Kick the Butt of Partial Feeds | Marketing Pilgrim

  24. > It wastes my time.

    A page display takes 200-500 msecs, you must be very busy. And while that’s loading you scan to the next entry to see if it’s worth your time.

    Like

  25. > It wastes my time.

    A page display takes 200-500 msecs, you must be very busy. And while that’s loading you scan to the next entry to see if it’s worth your time.

    Like

  26. Robert your feed is full in Google reader for me as well. I also checked it in my backup, bloglines, and it’s full text there for me as well.

    Perhaps someone has their options set up incorrectly in bloglines? I hesitate to say that as I may get flamed, but I’ve made that mistake before.

    Like

  27. Robert your feed is full in Google reader for me as well. I also checked it in my backup, bloglines, and it’s full text there for me as well.

    Perhaps someone has their options set up incorrectly in bloglines? I hesitate to say that as I may get flamed, but I’ve made that mistake before.

    Like

  30. incomplete: most pages take seconds to load. But, yes, that wastes my time. Especially when I’m looking at 350 feeds and thousands of items every day. Most of the time there’s someone else who gives me full text that I’d rather link to.

    Like

  31. incomplete: most pages take seconds to load. But, yes, that wastes my time. Especially when I’m looking at 350 feeds and thousands of items every day. Most of the time there’s someone else who gives me full text that I’d rather link to.

    Like

  32. I think that full feeds are really important. I don’t come back to websites that don’t have a feed, and I hardly ever read partial feeds. I often click through on the full feeds.

    And really, how hard is it to put an ad in a feed??

    Zach
    take more photos

    Like

  33. I think that full feeds are really important. I don’t come back to websites that don’t have a feed, and I hardly ever read partial feeds. I often click through on the full feeds.

    And really, how hard is it to put an ad in a feed??

    Zach
    take more photos

    Like

  34. Couldn’t agree more. I’m reluctant to subscribe to partial text feeds; they’re a pain-in-the-@$$.

    Frankly, I’m not too thrilled with short postings, either. Personal preference. I’d rather get fewer, but longer postings: More analysis, less background noise. (Honestly, I really don’t care if a blogger is taking a trip to visit their mother — or even if they’ll be too busy to post over the next several days. Make a brief annotation to the final post prior to going on a trip rather than making a separate post that a trip is pending.)

    Like

  35. Couldn’t agree more. I’m reluctant to subscribe to partial text feeds; they’re a pain-in-the-@$$.

    Frankly, I’m not too thrilled with short postings, either. Personal preference. I’d rather get fewer, but longer postings: More analysis, less background noise. (Honestly, I really don’t care if a blogger is taking a trip to visit their mother — or even if they’ll be too busy to post over the next several days. Make a brief annotation to the final post prior to going on a trip rather than making a separate post that a trip is pending.)

    Like

  36. Robert… what do you think of full postings for commercial feeds (like newspapers, etc.). Frankly it drives me nuts to only get the first two sentences (see The Economist, or The New York Times…). I’d prefer to pay for the subscription and get an authenticated feed…

    Like

  37. Robert… what do you think of full postings for commercial feeds (like newspapers, etc.). Frankly it drives me nuts to only get the first two sentences (see The Economist, or The New York Times…). I’d prefer to pay for the subscription and get an authenticated feed…

    Like

  40. Pingback: No more partial feeds / summary feeds - Reaper-X .:[ ID ]:.

  41. Not that anyone read the feeds from my blog but after reading one of your rants on hating partial text feeds (I was guilty as charged putting partial feeds to drive additional traffic to my own little blog) I enabled full text so that those who do subscribe to my RSS don’t have have to go to the site but can consume what I put online from their RSS viewr of choice….. nof course hopefully what they consume wont give them an upset stomach. 😉

    Like

  42. Not that anyone read the feeds from my blog but after reading one of your rants on hating partial text feeds (I was guilty as charged putting partial feeds to drive additional traffic to my own little blog) I enabled full text so that those who do subscribe to my RSS don’t have have to go to the site but can consume what I put online from their RSS viewr of choice….. nof course hopefully what they consume wont give them an upset stomach. 😉

    Like

  43. Pingback: McGee’s Musings » Some new data to support the value of full text blog feeds

  44. Count me in the crowd that dislikes partial feeds. Perhaps more people should offer people both options.

    I also get the full feeds for this blog in every feed reader I have used (nowadays Google Reader)

    Like

  45. Count me in the crowd that dislikes partial feeds. Perhaps more people should offer people both options.

    I also get the full feeds for this blog in every feed reader I have used (nowadays Google Reader)

    Like

  48. Pingback: Lee Hopkins: Better Communication Results - business communication, online, blog and podcast consultant

  49. Paul: no reason, it’s just I’m not driven by the money that I could make and I’d rather you get just me on my personal blog.

    Like

  50. Paul: no reason, it’s just I’m not driven by the money that I could make and I’d rather you get just me on my personal blog.

    Like

  51. Of course, the delicious Irony for me here Robert is I’m still reading you blog in Bloglines via a part feed, not a full feed. Feel free to switch the full feed back on though 🙂

    Like

  52. Of course, the delicious Irony for me here Robert is I’m still reading you blog in Bloglines via a part feed, not a full feed. Feel free to switch the full feed back on though 🙂

    Like

  53. Duncan: again, WordPress.com publishes a full-text feed at http://scobleizer.com/feed/

    I never turned it off.

    If you can’t see a full-text feed at that address, maybe you need a better news aggregator. Google Reader shows full text there. So does NewsGator.

    Like

  54. Duncan: again, WordPress.com publishes a full-text feed at http://scobleizer.com/feed/

    I never turned it off.

    If you can’t see a full-text feed at that address, maybe you need a better news aggregator. Google Reader shows full text there. So does NewsGator.

    Like

  55. Wizz RSS also shows me partial feeds, and I changed from the WordPress, URL to the Scobleizer URL. Ah, well, it isn’t hurting me any. Perhaps Wizz will have it right the next time I use it.

    Like

  56. Wizz RSS also shows me partial feeds, and I changed from the WordPress, URL to the Scobleizer URL. Ah, well, it isn’t hurting me any. Perhaps Wizz will have it right the next time I use it.

    Like

  59. Pingback: gossiptable.com » Blog Archive » Getting Noticed by A-list bloggers vs Getting on Digg Front Pages

  60. It seems as if a few uninformed people think that getting partial text from a feed is the fault of the feed reader (See post #31 for example). A feed reader reads what is presented in the feed XML. If the publisher of the feed includes full text in the feed, the reader will show the full text. Conversely, if the publisher of the feed only includes partial text in the XML, the reader will only show partial text.

    Like

  61. It seems as if a few uninformed people think that getting partial text from a feed is the fault of the feed reader (See post #31 for example). A feed reader reads what is presented in the feed XML. If the publisher of the feed includes full text in the feed, the reader will show the full text. Conversely, if the publisher of the feed only includes partial text in the XML, the reader will only show partial text.

    Like

  64. Pingback: Switching back to real full feeds « Internet Duct Tape

Comments are closed.