On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 16:53:24 +0100, Roy Schestowitz
>Big Bill wrote:
>> Roy, what good does it do you that more and more people subscribe to
>> your site? I'm looking for specifics here (pretty please) as I think
>> there are distinctions which mean that RSS is simply inappropriate for
>> a lot of people who are over-enthusiastically embracing it - paying
>> for being told how to use it, too.
>You raise an important point. Some people are repelled by feeds since people
>use them to avoid site layouts, ads and promotions. However, they help you
>get visitors back and, in your case, perhaps admire you as an SEO expert.
>Feeds also assist modem users who cannot afford the time it takes to load
>your pages. Unlike bookmarks, feeds are active (like newsgroups) and are
>not invoked from bookmarks in 'passive mode'. Feeds will soon be able to
>incorporate AdSense within.
This has been partly the focus of my interest, actually.
> However, me and many others never intend to
>incorporate the same filth (commercials) that visitors try to avoid.
>Think carefully what you have to gain and what you have to lose. I add an
>"?rss" stub to all URL's in my feeds so that, if ever these become
>necessary, I can learn about users' behaviour. BBC and many others do
>likewise. They have done that since 2004 and the number of feeds has only
>been extended since. I think it can teach us a lesson or two.
My main interest has been for one of my ex-clients who I'd like to be
a client again. They're big enough in their field to be able to do a
running articulate commentary on their industry and it would assist in
the potential client's eye with associating the company with the
generic brand, like you think chocolate you think Cadbury, so what's
that worth? Bucks, and that's what I'd like to help them initiate. Not
got them interested so far though.
I think having RSS incorporated in every desktop with IE7 will be a
seo that watches the river flow...