Subscribe: Comments on: Don’t Find Feeds for Me – Help Me Cut Them
Added By: Feedage Forager Feedage Grade A rated
Language: English
aggregator  cut  don  features  feed items  feed  feeds  filter  folks  items  jon  mark  marking  much  navigation  richard  uninteresting 
Rate this Feed
Rate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feed
Rate this feed 1 starRate this feed 2 starRate this feed 3 starRate this feed 4 starRate this feed 5 star

Comments (0)

Feed Details and Statistics Feed Statistics
Preview: Comments on: Don’t Find Feeds for Me – Help Me Cut Them

Comments on: Don’t Find Feeds for Me – Help Me Cut Them

because technology is just another ecosystem

Last Build Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2018 07:46:06 +0000


By: James Governor's MonkChips

Thu, 09 Mar 2006 14:53:49 +0000

On Feed Culling: Ask Someone Else to do it Stephen recently said junkies like us need help culling, rather than finding, feeds. So why not make it a game? Nominate one of your regular readers or buddies and ask them to decide a feed or three for you to cut...

By: Keith Gaughan

Fri, 03 Mar 2006 23:26:32 +0000

I'm in kind of the same position myself, and have written about it in the past. What I'd *love* is an aggregator that allows me to mark mark feed items as 'uninteresting', and the aggregator was later able to use that to filter out similar items statistically, just as modern statistical spam filters do. Ideally this would just be part of a larger filtering mechanism where 'uninteresting' would just be another tag applied to individual feed items. It could also filter on other topics like 'botswana' or 'programming'. The items marked 'uninteresting' would still be there, but could be ignored as the aggregator would show a view of items displaying only those matching certain criteria such as 'unread' and not 'uninteresting'. Expanding that further, and you could build some of the features Merlin said he'd like ( on top of that. If you kept marking items from a particular feed as 'uninteresting' or if the filter kept marking them as 'uninteresting', it'd eventually guess that you no longer wanted to be subscribed to that feed and ask you if this was so. I just wish I'd the time to write an aggregator like that!

By: stephen o'grady

Fri, 03 Mar 2006 21:20:19 +0000

Richard: i think everyone's got a different threshold or appetite for dead feeds, but when i'm looking to pare down my tremendously overpopulated list feeds that are updated very infrequently are more likely to be cut. interestingly, however, i did cut some feeds that published *too* much. how's that for contradictory ;) but in any event, folks i know - such as you - are exempt from such matters. folks that don't publish much that i don't know add value, they're more likely to go. Jon: navigation is a *huge* deal, fully agreed on that score. whether or not my small pruning job is going to make navigation easier is certainly open to debate, but it's a start.

By: Jon Collins

Fri, 03 Mar 2006 14:18:47 +0000

I was only just thinking how "navigation" is a major blog issue, so yes, absolutely.

By: Richard Veryard

Fri, 03 Mar 2006 07:01:54 +0000

I don't know why infrequent posting should be a bad thing. For my part, I am very happy to subscribe to a blog that has a great post every three months, and remains silent between. I think that's what RSS was built for.