8 ms·

Twitter has disabled RSS this month too. Is RSS too open for the big players?

by lignuist 14y ago

snsr 14y ago
Less control of presentation == fewer ads.
- craftman 14y ago
  Yes, I think this is exactly what all of this is about.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
baby 14y ago
I disabled it on my blog a long time ago because I want people to actually come to my website to read my posts. See the "related" posts and the "comments" section etc... I guess it's even more obvious if you have ads on the website.
- craftman 14y ago
  Dont know your site, but be sure I would never come back to it if you dont have a RSS feed (and leave it within 2 secs if there is any ad on it).
  - baby 14y ago
    I know this is some people's problems. But I believe it is the minority. So I've made my decision. I also don't support old IE browsers.
    - krzyk 14y ago
      But why disable something that you don't have to even support, most (if not all) blog time sites provide an easy way to provide RSS. You are alienating maybe a minority, but I think maybe a more valuable part of you readers - large part of HN readers use RSS (at least it seams so based on latest Google Reader deprecation). There is no value in removing RSS, you are just crippling your site.
- streptomycin 14y ago
  You can have an RSS feed that doesn't include the full post, just a title and maybe the first sentence or two. A lot of sites do that (Salon.com comes to mind immediately).
  - baby 14y ago
    But that's also not what I want. I want people to come check regularly (or not) if something is new. That's a way to create loyal visitors.
    - mindcrime 14y ago
      It's also a great way to piss people off and have them go "fuck this guy and his shitty blog with no RSS feed" and mentally assign it to bin 13 and never come back. When I visit a blog or site with no RSS feed, I know my first thought is something like "What a bunch of amateurs, why would I waste my time with this?" Now, of course, people like me (and other HN readers) may not be your target audience, and your decision may actually work out best for you in the long run. It's your choice, I just hope it was made with full consideration for how some people will react to it. :-)
      - baby 14y ago
        I feel like you're over reacting. It's really not a game changer feature. I know I'll hurt the feeling of 1% of my visitors by not including it, the clever rest of the RSS users will first judge whether the content is worth it or not.
        mindcrime 14y ago
        Could be. But lots of people "overreact". Not everyone who reacts differently than you expect or anticipate is "overreacting". But, again, if you've made a conscious decision that it's OK to alienate a certain subset of potential visitors, and your business can withstand that, then you've made a rational - and possibly quite correct - decision. I don't begrudge you the right to make that decision, although I might say I dislike it or whatever.
- jms18 14y ago
  If you don't have a news feed, how would a reader know to check for new posts? If you expect readers to check your site daily, that doesn't scale very well. I follow 200+ blogs; I would never be able to remember/bookmark all of them to visit regularly.
- icebraining 14y ago
  That's what Yahoo! Pipes is for.
streptomycin 14y ago
No they didn't. Still works: https://api.twitter.com/1/statuses/user_timeline.rss?screen_name=SeinfeldToday https://api.twitter.com/1/statuses/user_timeline.rss?screen_... They have said they're planning to get rid of it sometime soon, though. Sucks for people like me who used Google Reader to keep track of Twitter RSS feeds, ha. Google Reader is really easy to replace, at least. I'm much more upset about Twitter.
- icebraining 14y ago
  Building bridges is not really that hard. I have a few transforming closed "feeds" into RSS running on my VPS.
- saraid216 14y ago
  What exactly is it about Twitter that's indispensable for you?
  - streptomycin 14y ago
    Who said anything about indispensable? There are lots of things I like that aren't indispensable. One of those things is being able to follow a few people on Twitter in the same place that I follow all the rest of my RSS feeds. I don't think I'll kill myself if I can no longer do that, though.

Twitter has disabled RSS this month too. Is RSS too open for the big players?

snsr 14y ago

Less control of presentation == fewer ads.

craftman 14y ago
Yes, I think this is exactly what all of this is about.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

baby 14y ago

I disabled it on my blog a long time ago because I want people to actually come to my website to read my posts. See the "related" posts and the "comments" section etc... I guess it's even more obvious if you have ads on the website.

craftman 14y ago
Dont know your site, but be sure I would never come back to it if you dont have a RSS feed (and leave it within 2 secs if there is any ad on it).
- baby 14y ago
  I know this is some people's problems. But I believe it is the minority. So I've made my decision. I also don't support old IE browsers.
  - krzyk 14y ago
    But why disable something that you don't have to even support, most (if not all) blog time sites provide an easy way to provide RSS. You are alienating maybe a minority, but I think maybe a more valuable part of you readers - large part of HN readers use RSS (at least it seams so based on latest Google Reader deprecation). There is no value in removing RSS, you are just crippling your site.
streptomycin 14y ago
You can have an RSS feed that doesn't include the full post, just a title and maybe the first sentence or two. A lot of sites do that (Salon.com comes to mind immediately).
- baby 14y ago
  But that's also not what I want. I want people to come check regularly (or not) if something is new. That's a way to create loyal visitors.
  - mindcrime 14y ago
    It's also a great way to piss people off and have them go "fuck this guy and his shitty blog with no RSS feed" and mentally assign it to bin 13 and never come back. When I visit a blog or site with no RSS feed, I know my first thought is something like "What a bunch of amateurs, why would I waste my time with this?" Now, of course, people like me (and other HN readers) may not be your target audience, and your decision may actually work out best for you in the long run. It's your choice, I just hope it was made with full consideration for how some people will react to it. :-)
    - baby 14y ago
      I feel like you're over reacting. It's really not a game changer feature. I know I'll hurt the feeling of 1% of my visitors by not including it, the clever rest of the RSS users will first judge whether the content is worth it or not.
      - mindcrime 14y ago
        Could be. But lots of people "overreact". Not everyone who reacts differently than you expect or anticipate is "overreacting". But, again, if you've made a conscious decision that it's OK to alienate a certain subset of potential visitors, and your business can withstand that, then you've made a rational - and possibly quite correct - decision. I don't begrudge you the right to make that decision, although I might say I dislike it or whatever.
jms18 14y ago
If you don't have a news feed, how would a reader know to check for new posts? If you expect readers to check your site daily, that doesn't scale very well. I follow 200+ blogs; I would never be able to remember/bookmark all of them to visit regularly.
icebraining 14y ago
That's what Yahoo! Pipes is for.

streptomycin 14y ago

No they didn't. Still works: https://api.twitter.com/1/statuses/user_timeline.rss?screen_name=SeinfeldToday https://api.twitter.com/1/statuses/user_timeline.rss?screen_... They have said they're planning to get rid of it sometime soon, though. Sucks for people like me who used Google Reader to keep track of Twitter RSS feeds, ha. Google Reader is really easy to replace, at least. I'm much more upset about Twitter.

icebraining 14y ago
Building bridges is not really that hard. I have a few transforming closed "feeds" into RSS running on my VPS.
saraid216 14y ago
What exactly is it about Twitter that's indispensable for you?
- streptomycin 14y ago
  Who said anything about indispensable? There are lots of things I like that aren't indispensable. One of those things is being able to follow a few people on Twitter in the same place that I follow all the rest of my RSS feeds. I don't think I'll kill myself if I can no longer do that, though.