Comments on: Sorry Duncan, But Steve Does Get It

By: Scott Sehlhorst

Scott Sehlhorst — Thu, 23 Feb 2006 14:17:00 +0000

Just wanted to say thanks Kent!When I first started blogging, you and Scoble convinced me that my readers would appreciate full feeds, so that’s all we’ve ever had.I shouldn’t have been surprised when we got unsolicited thanks for having full feeds – it matters to our readers.Traffic has been growing, both in the feed and on the website. I believe that the full feed is helping the growth.Our main tactic to get RSS readers to the site is relevant cross-linking. We have a tight niche, and when there is relevant content, it gets linked within our posts. 60% of our readers read multiple pages per visit. This number used to be 70%, but as our google hits go up, transient visits are making up a higher proportion of the traffic.Anyway, thanks!Scottps: We do adsense on the site, not in the feed – and it’s growing too. People shouldn’t freak about full feeds cutting out revenue.

By: Russell Limprecht

Russell Limprecht — Thu, 23 Feb 2006 03:31:00 +0000

Big day, Kent.Two posts on the Memeorandum front page, and a link from Scoble.Way to go.

By: Easton Ellsworth

Easton Ellsworth — Thu, 23 Feb 2006 01:12:00 +0000

Kent, these are good thoughts. I appreciate learning your views on the full/partial debate. I’m still painfully sitting on the fence on this one!Printed newspapers resemble partial RSS feeds in that the reader frequently must go to another page to read the rest of an article. I’ve never minded having to switch pages, as long as the rest of the newspaper article is easy to find. So I suspect that many RSS users don’t mind partial feeds because they’re already used to that pattern. At least that might be another factor to consider.Do you know of any studies that have asked what percent of RSS users prefer full feeds? I’m interested in learning more about the current trends on this issue.