Comments on: The old link love she ain't what she used to be.

By: Scott O'Raw

Scott O'Raw — Thu, 15 May 2008 08:26:55 +0000

Nice post, Colin.

@Mark: I think a reasonably accurate estimate of how many people are on FriendFeed would be to look at how many people Robert Scoble is following

Last blog post..On Blog Post Hierarchy Part 2

By: Mark Dykeman

Mark Dykeman — Sun, 11 May 2008 00:30:30 +0000

How many users does Friend Feed have, anyway? 5,000? Seriously, I do wonder how many are there now and how many will be added.

Maybe this is not going to be a huge issue in the long run. We don’t know for certain if microblogging and lifestreaming are going to hit the mainstream or not. Unless the tool becomes so pervasive, perhaps the dispersion of comments is just a price to pay for using Friend Feed. Just a thought.

Last blog post..Catch the brainwaves of Mathew Ingram

By: Colin

Colin — Sat, 10 May 2008 21:43:36 +0000

I wouldn’t go as far as to say it is an obligation but it is certainly the decent thing to do, I will personally always do so. Don’t think I’m advocating link anarchy.

But, as is usually my way, I am asking the question “what if?”. The way we are going with social bookmarking sites, aggregators, etc. a lot of the action – and even focus – is being drawn away from the blog and perhaps it is something that may get worse.

By: Corvida

Corvida — Sat, 10 May 2008 20:12:46 +0000

It’s perfectly fine to link to other discussions, but I think it’s an obligation in a way to to link back to the original source for the reader’s convenience. It’s only fair and right. And shouldn’t we be doing what’s right instead of always going for what we feel like doing?

Even if users would feel the need to check out what the fuss is about, personally, I wouldn’t want to make that decision based on the amount of comments some one has left and on Friendfeed no less. I want to make that decision for myself. After reading the first opinion about the article, I wouldn’t need a second. I’d either go check it out or leave it alone. The amount of comments the article has elsewhere or even on it’s blog shouldn’t help me decide whether or not it’s worthy.

Last blog post..More Incredibly Unique Twitter Projects III

By: Kevin

Kevin — Sat, 10 May 2008 19:39:08 +0000

Ok, less about where comments should be (which is a related, but different issue) and more about response links.

If you post a good story, and I post a reaction to it, shouldn’t I be obligated to link to your original story, and not to an echo of it on some other site?

After all, that other site did not post the original content, you did. Seems like a basic attribution issue to me.

Kevin

By: David Risley

David Risley — Sat, 10 May 2008 12:11:22 +0000

Nice post. Just to clarify my point, though. The issue is not whether Scoble is denying Google juice (I kinda think that’s why Scoble didn’t link) but there is a more important matter of simply linking to the source. What Scoble did was link to the noise rather than link to the post which started it. And again, it would be like a newspaper doing all stories based on what people walking down the street said. It isn’t the source.

I think it is just a matter of common sense blogging.

I don’t think blogs are going anywhere. There will always be the opinion leaders and the readers. It is human nature.

Last blog post..No, Links are NOT Dead, Scoble and Gillmore