5 ms·

Is that... normal? 2350 feeds seems like an astronomical amount of news feeds. Can I ask how much of that do you read?

disposition2 10y ago
Agreed, very curious how much of that actually gets even glanced over. I thought I was information overload with ~150 sites. I hope OP uses the 'focus' features so they can get a modicum of information from those 2350 feeds.
- pavel_lishin 10y ago
  It's possible that many of those could be discarded without being read. As an example, I'm subscribed to the Best Of Metafilter RSS feed, but if I'm on vacation for a week and come back to over a hundred posts, I just mark 'em all as read.
- platz 10y ago
  But is your intention really to read every post by every site you're subscribed to? Someone subscribed to over 1000 sites isn't trying to avoid missed posts - they're just dipping into the stream of sites they're interested in at any given moment.
  - disposition2 10y ago
    Read every post, no. But at least get a general idea of the posts for the sites I subscribe to. There are a couple of sites that I let over lapse, HN is a good example, but for the most part, I atleast read the headlines / tags of posts for sites. One nice feature of newsblur, which I don't use often and not sure if it is available in other readers, but the intelligence trainer would probably help in instances where you have a lot of sites and don't necessarily bother reviewing all posts. Maybe I just use RSS readers differently. But if I were just going to periodically review what a site has, I would probably go to the site periodically rather than clutter up my list of feeds.
  - aw3c2 10y ago
    I am in the same boat and I simply quickly go through the 50-100 posts of the sites per day. I actually open maybe 10% in the browser. Following small sites and blogs about your interests gives you the best quality of the web in my opinion.
- wslh 10y ago
  > I thought I was information overload with ~150 sites. It mainly depends of the feed volume, not how many feeds are you subscribed to. I cherry picked a lot of personal blogs that are not updated often.
  - disposition2 10y ago
    That was my perception, a lot of personal blogs, thank you for clarifying. Somewhat unrelated, but it would be neat if there was some kind of lost and found for RSS as I have sites from the early 00s that I followed which are no longer updated but I imagine the author just changed their site, etc.
    - wslh 10y ago
      Yes, I think this is one of the issues related to Internet archeology. Not equal but similar to the recovery of Usenet discussions.
    - conesus 10y ago
      NewsBlur has an organizer that provides this exact info. Just sort of last update (or even stories per month) and mass delete. It's somewhat new but it makes a world of a difference. The organizer is on web and just launched on iOS. See http://blog.newsblur.com http://blog.newsblur.com.
- GFK_of_xmaspast 10y ago
  You can add a lot of low-volume sites without having them pile up too much, also I break out my feeds in groups and that makes them a lot easier to go through.
user_666 10y ago
I have around 1500. Most are not active, though. And I wouldn't take the claim seriously that Google Reader was fast with that many feeds; I found that GR struggled with that feeds: http://the-digital-reader.com/2012/11/01/i-broke-google-reader-an-adventure-in-extreme-reading/ http://the-digital-reader.com/2012/11/01/i-broke-google-read...
wslh 10y ago
I think this is a good discussion to have. One thing is to be subscribed to thousands of feeds from major media sites where you receive a huge amount of articles every day and another to be subscribed to specific blogs with sporadic articles. I have more of the later. Only from VCs I have more than 200.

Agreed, very curious how much of that actually gets even glanced over. I thought I was information overload with ~150 sites. I hope OP uses the 'focus' features so they can get a modicum of information from those 2350 feeds.

pavel_lishin 10y ago
It's possible that many of those could be discarded without being read. As an example, I'm subscribed to the Best Of Metafilter RSS feed, but if I'm on vacation for a week and come back to over a hundred posts, I just mark 'em all as read.
platz 10y ago
But is your intention really to read every post by every site you're subscribed to? Someone subscribed to over 1000 sites isn't trying to avoid missed posts - they're just dipping into the stream of sites they're interested in at any given moment.
- disposition2 10y ago
  Read every post, no. But at least get a general idea of the posts for the sites I subscribe to. There are a couple of sites that I let over lapse, HN is a good example, but for the most part, I atleast read the headlines / tags of posts for sites. One nice feature of newsblur, which I don't use often and not sure if it is available in other readers, but the intelligence trainer would probably help in instances where you have a lot of sites and don't necessarily bother reviewing all posts. Maybe I just use RSS readers differently. But if I were just going to periodically review what a site has, I would probably go to the site periodically rather than clutter up my list of feeds.
- aw3c2 10y ago
  I am in the same boat and I simply quickly go through the 50-100 posts of the sites per day. I actually open maybe 10% in the browser. Following small sites and blogs about your interests gives you the best quality of the web in my opinion.
wslh 10y ago
> I thought I was information overload with ~150 sites. It mainly depends of the feed volume, not how many feeds are you subscribed to. I cherry picked a lot of personal blogs that are not updated often.
- disposition2 10y ago
  That was my perception, a lot of personal blogs, thank you for clarifying. Somewhat unrelated, but it would be neat if there was some kind of lost and found for RSS as I have sites from the early 00s that I followed which are no longer updated but I imagine the author just changed their site, etc.
  - wslh 10y ago
    Yes, I think this is one of the issues related to Internet archeology. Not equal but similar to the recovery of Usenet discussions.
  - conesus 10y ago
    NewsBlur has an organizer that provides this exact info. Just sort of last update (or even stories per month) and mass delete. It's somewhat new but it makes a world of a difference. The organizer is on web and just launched on iOS. See http://blog.newsblur.com http://blog.newsblur.com.
GFK_of_xmaspast 10y ago
You can add a lot of low-volume sites without having them pile up too much, also I break out my feeds in groups and that makes them a lot easier to go through.

user_666 10y ago

I have around 1500. Most are not active, though. And I wouldn't take the claim seriously that Google Reader was fast with that many feeds; I found that GR struggled with that feeds: http://the-digital-reader.com/2012/11/01/i-broke-google-reader-an-adventure-in-extreme-reading/ http://the-digital-reader.com/2012/11/01/i-broke-google-read...

wslh 10y ago

I think this is a good discussion to have. One thing is to be subscribed to thousands of feeds from major media sites where you receive a huge amount of articles every day and another to be subscribed to specific blogs with sporadic articles. I have more of the later. Only from VCs I have more than 200.