-
Website
http://www.louisgray.com/live/ -
Original page
http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/06/changing-definition-of-subscriber.html -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
charlieanzman
59 comments · 11 points
-
Jesse Stay
209 comments · 66 points
-
Ari Herzog
43 comments · 21 points
-
ChangeForge | Ken Stewart
133 comments · 18 points
-
drewolanoff
63 comments · 48 points
-
-
Popular Threads
-
Finding Value Even If I Were the Last FriendFeeder on Earth...
2 days ago · 10 comments
-
How Facebook's News Feed Failed Me (And My Family)
1 week ago · 19 comments
-
Introducing My Own "Stealth" Startup: Paladin Advisors Group
1 week ago · 30 comments
-
Embrace Our Twitter Ad Overlords, Assuming Relevancy
5 days ago · 8 comments
-
The Chrome OS Release Is Not About Now, It's About Next.
5 days ago · 6 comments
-
Finding Value Even If I Were the Last FriendFeeder on Earth...
> potential people who would see my content if everybody who subscribed ...
> on RSS or FriendFeed actually kept their subscription going and active.
The potential is even higher since you tweet every post. I suppose people who watch your delicious.com link history are potential subscribers as well, though I don't think that is a common way to use delicious.
I didn't agree with friendfeed's decision to pass along subscriber numbers in their feed fetch. If friendfeed had done it from the beginning my opinion would likely have been different: the number would have grown slowly and not drawn attention. As I'd been on friendfeed more than a year when they started doing this, there had been enough time for the Google Analytics data to sink in: relatively few people click through links on friendfeed. The link either passes by unnoticed, or (sometimes) people read just the title and then start commenting.
I don't know what I would do without you sir!
If all the numbers are skewed
Maybe we should all just focus
on the Big 'C"
CONTENT!
Now we have a new "WWW" of Twitter and FriendFeed followers with the potential to visit a site, and cycle begins anew...?
Guess you can't win 'em all.