Comments on: The New Bloglines–Day 2 http://weblogg-ed.com/2004/the-new-bloglines-day-2/ The Read/Write Web in the Classroom Fri, 21 Nov 2008 00:26:09 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: Alan Levine http://weblogg-ed.com/2004/the-new-bloglines-day-2/#comment-854 Alan Levine Mon, 12 Jul 2004 16:02:16 +0000 http://weblogg-ed.com/?p=1116#comment-854 <a></a>No good answers to this problem. I meant more like scaning headlines and the first and second paragraphs of content. If the headlines are poorly written then I might miss stuff. Or I won't come back. My perusals are sometimes thorough and other times casual. Sometimes I click to the blog and explore what is linked, manny other times I just scan the feeds. I also so some mental notetaking on stories that are blogged on repeated sites that I respect. When it comes down to it there is this human aspect of gleaning that scripts, amchines, and bots can never do for me. Never. Like a circle of friends, I put more weight in referrals and stories from blogs I "know" (from past good experience), at the same time, I troll for other sites worth adding to my own "inner circle" What I do NOT like: * blogs that just echo a copied blurb from elsewhere (e.g. no editorial context or why a referred web site is "cool". You do an excellent job of placing context around sites you blog about. * blogs that refer to other sites, but their feeds force you to go to the blog site just to get a URL. No good answers to this problem. I meant more like scaning headlines and the first and second paragraphs of content.

If the headlines are poorly written then I might miss stuff. Or I won’t come back. My perusals are sometimes thorough and other times casual. Sometimes I click to the blog and explore what is linked, manny other times I just scan the feeds. I also so some mental notetaking on stories that are blogged on repeated sites that I respect.

When it comes down to it there is this human aspect of gleaning that scripts, amchines, and bots can never do for me. Never.

Like a circle of friends, I put more weight in referrals and stories from blogs I “know” (from past good experience), at the same time, I troll for other sites worth adding to my own “inner circle”

What I do NOT like:
* blogs that just echo a copied blurb from elsewhere (e.g. no editorial context or why a referred web site is “cool”. You do an excellent job of placing context around sites you blog about.
* blogs that refer to other sites, but their feeds force you to go to the blog site just to get a URL.

]]> By: Will R. http://weblogg-ed.com/2004/the-new-bloglines-day-2/#comment-853 Will R. Thu, 08 Jul 2004 12:07:50 +0000 http://weblogg-ed.com/?p=1116#comment-853 <a></a>Alan...I understand exactly what you mean, but I've found that scanning headlines requires people to write really good headlines, something that doesn't happen as often as it needs to. So do I save more time by scanning heds while missing some good content, or do I spend more time and maybe give myself a better chance of finding most of the good stuff? Alan…I understand exactly what you mean, but I’ve found that scanning headlines requires people to write really good headlines, something that doesn’t happen as often as it needs to. So do I save more time by scanning heds while missing some good content, or do I spend more time and maybe give myself a better chance of finding most of the good stuff?

]]> By: Alan Levine http://weblogg-ed.com/2004/the-new-bloglines-day-2/#comment-852 Alan Levine Thu, 08 Jul 2004 11:54:55 +0000 http://weblogg-ed.com/?p=1116#comment-852 <a></a>I love Bloglines and actively promote it to faculty as the best stepping stone into usiing RSS and building resources-- yet I never use it to monitor the hundreds of sites I track-- it is not really an interrface that allows easy scanning of headlines, as eacy feed requires a click and web transaction to even get to the content, and it is the full content. A desktop aggregator allows me to scan ALL headlines from all sources with no transaction delay, and it is more efficient timewise. I do agree with your weill written points about the 10% that really get's some of your attention-- the art must be in guessing which is the best 10%. Even if the old stuff "depractes" you have a record, and for students, it is a record that they can reflect upon. I love Bloglines and actively promote it to faculty as the best stepping stone into usiing RSS and building resources– yet I never use it to monitor the hundreds of sites I track– it is not really an interrface that allows easy scanning of headlines, as eacy feed requires a click and web transaction to even get to the content, and it is the full content.

A desktop aggregator allows me to scan ALL headlines from all sources with no transaction delay, and it is more efficient timewise.

I do agree with your weill written points about the 10% that really get’s some of your attention– the art must be in guessing which is the best 10%.

Even if the old stuff “depractes” you have a record, and for students, it is a record that they can reflect upon.

]]> By: Paul http://weblogg-ed.com/2004/the-new-bloglines-day-2/#comment-851 Paul Thu, 08 Jul 2004 11:15:41 +0000 http://weblogg-ed.com/?p=1116#comment-851 <a></a>You struck a nerve: "I'm searching my own site for ideas that are in there (which needs to lead to another post about how blogs really don't do a great job of making old ideas readily accessible.)" Is there some sort of qualitative research software of an Nud*ist variety that could create a synergy within blog posts? Do you ever get the feeling that yesterday's posts somehow depreciate in value just because there are newer posts forthcoming? Perhaps that is just the nature of the beast. Good thoughts, Will. You struck a nerve: “I’m searching my own site for ideas that are in there (which needs to lead to another post about how blogs really don’t do a great job of making old ideas readily accessible.)”

Is there some sort of qualitative research software of an Nud*ist variety that could create a synergy within blog posts? Do you ever get the feeling that yesterday’s posts somehow depreciate in value just because there are newer posts forthcoming? Perhaps that is just the nature of the beast. Good thoughts, Will.

]]>