Comments on: Full vs Partial feed argument returns http://www.blogherald.com/2005/11/27/full-vs-partial-feed-argument-returns/ The leading source of news covering social media and the blogosphere. Mon, 13 Feb 2012 06:52:13 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Easton Ellsworth http://www.blogherald.com/2005/11/27/full-vs-partial-feed-argument-returns/comment-page-1/#comment-73763 Easton Ellsworth Fri, 02 Dec 2005 16:20:10 +0000 http://www.blogherald.com/2005/11/27/full-vs-partial-feed-argument-returns/#comment-73763 I want to know more about this whole full / partial feeds argument. (Where can I go to read more?) I can see the merits of both - and I feel like a bit of a fence-sitter at the moment. The blogger in me prefers partial feeds because they encourage traffic, and as Duncan pointed out, they let me see which posts people are most interested in (because they bothered to open up the full post to read it all). But the feed reader in me prefers full posts out of a desire for pure speed. At any rate, as long as I know what's going on as a reader, I don't feel offended. That is, if a site offers me a partial feed and makes that fact obvious, I'm not upset. As for my own blog, I'm experimenting with both ways and hopefully will get down on the right side of the fence soon - if there is a right side! I want to know more about this whole full / partial feeds argument. (Where can I go to read more?) I can see the merits of both – and I feel like a bit of a fence-sitter at the moment. The blogger in me prefers partial feeds because they encourage traffic, and as Duncan pointed out, they let me see which posts people are most interested in (because they bothered to open up the full post to read it all). But the feed reader in me prefers full posts out of a desire for pure speed. At any rate, as long as I know what’s going on as a reader, I don’t feel offended. That is, if a site offers me a partial feed and makes that fact obvious, I’m not upset. As for my own blog, I’m experimenting with both ways and hopefully will get down on the right side of the fence soon – if there is a right side!

]]> By: Billy The Blogging Poet http://www.blogherald.com/2005/11/27/full-vs-partial-feed-argument-returns/comment-page-1/#comment-72976 Billy The Blogging Poet Mon, 28 Nov 2005 11:48:04 +0000 http://www.blogherald.com/2005/11/27/full-vs-partial-feed-argument-returns/#comment-72976 Using full feeds is tantamount to giving away the cow to someone who came to borrow a cup of cream. Why would anyone bother to read a blog when they get the entire content in their RSS Reader? The reason for having an RSS feed is to INCREASE traffic TO your blog-- full feeds defeat that purpose thus rendering RSS useless to the blogger posting to his or her blog. Do you want more advertisements in RSS feeds? That's what will come if too many bloggers submit to this notion that they should run full feeds. Is that what we want blogs to look like? Don't get me wrong: I've got nothing against advertisers, but there has to be an end to their access to us. I've been asked by no less than 6 ad agencies to run their ads in my feeds. So far I've resisted but running full feeds would force me to do so. Using full feeds is tantamount to giving away the cow to someone who came to borrow a cup of cream. Why would anyone bother to read a blog when they get the entire content in their RSS Reader? The reason for having an RSS feed is to INCREASE traffic TO your blog– full feeds defeat that purpose thus rendering RSS useless to the blogger posting to his or her blog.

Do you want more advertisements in RSS feeds? That’s what will come if too many bloggers submit to this notion that they should run full feeds. Is that what we want blogs to look like? Don’t get me wrong: I’ve got nothing against advertisers, but there has to be an end to their access to us. I’ve been asked by no less than 6 ad agencies to run their ads in my feeds. So far I’ve resisted but running full feeds would force me to do so.

]]>