Subscribe in a reader
« Your Virtual Photo-Editing April 15th |
| Just Posted: 'Reserving Judgment' »
The people have spoken: full feeds have been restored. That's the whole post, so if you see this in a feed, don't think these are just the first two lines of a longer article!
Posted on Thursday, 25 September 2008 at 06:34 AM | Permalink
| Digg This
ah... that's much better.
Thursday, 25 September 2008 at 06:37 AM
Andreas Manessinger |
Thursday, 25 September 2008 at 06:54 AM
Thursday, 25 September 2008 at 07:25 AM
I am glad to hear that. I didn't object before, because I think it is your choice, but I am happy that full feeds are back.
Btw. I wouldn't feel bothered by ads in the feed, so this option sounds good, just a matter of when you move to the top of the queue.
Mariano Kamp |
Thursday, 25 September 2008 at 08:00 AM
Much better, thank you.
BTW, even with full feeds I open your page in my browser to read / post comments :)
Thursday, 25 September 2008 at 08:05 AM
Thanks - much appreciated!
Jon Read |
Thursday, 25 September 2008 at 08:16 AM
Many thanksm Mike. Lesson learnt, however, I will certainly stop by the main site more often. If I make it my homepage, does that help you out?
Thursday, 25 September 2008 at 08:52 AM
This is great news. Thanks!
Dibutil Ftalat |
Thursday, 25 September 2008 at 08:53 AM
I'll chime in, too! Hooray! I much prefer full feeds, even though I ALWAYS wind up clicking through to the actualy TOP website. As someone said in an earlier comment, I just like the TOP layout better. I hate looking at pictures on a white background. Yet I also dislike partial feeds. (I'm not claiming this is rational or logical, it's just the way I work...)
I also endorse the idea of putting ads in the feeds. Doesn't bother me in the least, and it can be a source of additional income to you. (Isn't that gracious of me/us?*)
Thursday, 25 September 2008 at 08:54 AM
Yay! The peasants rejoice.
Thursday, 25 September 2008 at 09:18 AM
Thank you so much!
Mark Probst |
Thursday, 25 September 2008 at 10:09 AM
Let's celebrate! FWIW, I also wouldn't mind ads in the feed.
Thursday, 25 September 2008 at 10:11 AM
Paul Butzi |
Thursday, 25 September 2008 at 10:13 AM
While i hit the site proper(after using the RSS feed to show if there's a new article) from my laptop, my iPhone thanks you greatly:)
I've seen a few sites with 'Sponsored Feeds' - check out daringfireball.net for an example, perhaps an option for you.
Thursday, 25 September 2008 at 10:27 AM
Thank you for restoring the full feeds. I wasn't going to unsubscribe if you only sent a sentence or two and I wouldn't be bothered by ads in the feed but I do enjoy the full feed approach much more.
And, as fork said above, I still end up coming to the site if I want to leave a comment.
Tommy Williams |
Thursday, 25 September 2008 at 10:55 AM
Thank you. I do actually browse the site too (and follow the full feed links quite a bit too) but this is much better.
Gordon McGregor |
Thursday, 25 September 2008 at 11:12 AM
Thursday, 25 September 2008 at 11:43 AM
So I guess, after so many people "added their two cents" about this issue... ;)
Charles Lanteigne |
Thursday, 25 September 2008 at 12:29 PM
See, this is why democracy does not work!
Thursday, 25 September 2008 at 01:15 PM
"So I guess, after so many people "added their two cents" about this issue... ;)"
Much as I appreciate those of you who contributed two cents (and yes, a number of people did!), that number was really only meaningful if *everyone* did it. If the revenue were sorted among those who contributed voluntarily, each person would have had to contribute about $600.
But that's looking a gift horse in the mouth, which is bad manners. (And bad karma? Yo, Earl.)
I will say I was completely surprised by the number of people who made cash donations yesterday--to date about 11 people had made donations during 2008, and yesterday about twice that number did. I don't know whether that was because I "talked poor" in that post (I try not to do that, not always successfully), or whether it was because I pointed out the feed reader button on the site and it happened to be right next to the tip jar--or if it's just because I have the best readers of any site on the internet. Probably that last!
Mike J. |
Thursday, 25 September 2008 at 01:41 PM
Yes, that is much better. I ran into the same problem a while back since I started to have huge posts with lots of photos and since my blog posts are also automatically posted over at another site I didn't want to make everyone else have to wait for the page to load so what I did was install a plugin on Wordpress and use the more tag on the post...just for the long posts :)
Luis Murillo |
Thursday, 25 September 2008 at 03:45 PM
Thursday, 25 September 2008 at 04:14 PM
For more than one reason, I think you made the right decision. Nevertheless, I think you ought to ban the IP address of the folks who threatened never to read TOP anymore if the feed stayed partial.
Thursday, 25 September 2008 at 05:55 PM
Thanks. You almost lost me. Also, if you post lots of non-text media (as you are wont to do) then my newsreader doesn't display it very well so I end up coming to your site fairly regularly. Also, I enjoy the option of being able to read posts offline if I get stuck somewhere without an internet connection, and full feeds is the only way for me to do this.
s d |
Thursday, 25 September 2008 at 06:48 PM
To Mike: Thanks you for the website. To the "you almost lost me" people: get over yourselves. Geez.
Chris Y. |
Friday, 26 September 2008 at 07:51 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.