Why not just use MXNA's idea -- have two ColdFusion fees. There is a regular, "static" ColdFusion feed, and theres a "we think these are ColdFusion posts" ColdFusion feed (Robin's idea). That way you can allow people to choose.
On 19/08/06, Scott Barnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This whole thread cracks me up, as I've been sitting on this idea since > first reading it and I wanted to wait and see if anyone else had something > similiar or close to it. I think it was Mark who came closest. > > Ok, some agree that the "AS-IS" model for the F-Goog works kinda ok? (I for > one find the "leave it be" approach to be suffice for my RSS digestion) - > Yet - others want a more focused approach, like Dale - "If i ask for > Coldfusion, serve it too me". > > Now Robin has indicated that there is a multitude of ways in which we could > technically make all this happen, latest being the Bayesian algorithms - > which does sound quite interesting. > > So here's the thing... Geoff makes a change as per Robins posts, what > happens? - I dare say, he could quite easily alienate a large portion of the > F-Goog population in one hit. He could ignore it? but now that Dale's come > out and stated that he finds it off-topic too much ( my blog is guilty at > times ) others may flock to his banner and agree - more negatives. > > So Geoff will now need to choose the lesser of both evils? or he could > simply steal a page or two out of Digg.com. > > Why not simply allow folks to click on a feature under each thread in the > "free-for-all" category that allows the community, the very people who focus > their attention on F-Goog to promote certain feeds into certain categories > of global choice. This will allow the wider population of F-Goog to > determine what is context and what is noise. > > Sometimes, the power of the end-user is enough. Never forget your consumers > as they are your eyes, ears, voice and mind :) > > > > > On 8/18/06, Robin Hilliard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On 18/08/2006, at 8:31 AM, Geoff Bowers wrote: > > > 2) its not computationally trivial to work out what is a good and not > > so good post > > Just FYI Chip Temm has an interesting comment on our blog about using > Bayesian algorithms (often used in spam filters) to automatically > categorise content - here is a link to the article he wrote in CFDJ > about this a while back: > > http://au.sys-con.com/read/154232.htm > > To make this work we need a large sample of posts in various > categories. To this end I wrote a CF script this evening that > visited the 468 feeds aggregated by the Goog and built a distinct > list of dc:subject tag values on the feed items (see my blog comment > for the list). > > I figure that if we can map the various subjects used on these blogs > for CF, Flash, Flex etc (there typically seem to be about 4-8 > variations for each product) to products we should be able to visit > the original articles, and assign each to the correct sample (CF, > Flash, Trash etc) based on the subjects allocated by the author at > post time. With this data (basically a word frequency table) we > should be able to look at any article or web page and with some > modest number crunching get a pretty good indication of how relevant > it would be to a particular product. It will be fun to see if it > works anyway... > > ______________ > > Robin Hilliard > > > On 18/08/2006, at 8:31 AM, Geoff Bowers wrote: > > > > > Dale et al, > > > > Dale Fraser wrote: > >> I recently dropped all my favourite feeds in Google and put in > >> Fullasagoog > >> Coldfusion Blend instead. > >> > >> Wow, am I disappointed. I'm not sure what's going on, but I'm > >> wasting my > >> time here. I think someone at Fullasagoog should do something > >> about it. > >> Here's the current top 9 Coldfusion Blend Entries > > > > First thing to say is generally I agree. I'm not a great fan of "off > > topic" posts myself but they clearly don't annoy me as much as they > > annoy some. > > > > There needs to be a bit of a reality check: > > 1) anecdotally -- about an equal proportion of people *want* to see > > non-technical posts from CF insiders. They feel it humanises the > > community and so on. > > 2) its not computationally trivial to work out what is a good and not > > so good post > > 3) not everyone has a category that is relevant -- if i only take CF > > posts from a blogger do I miss the posts they might have on JS, Flash, > > Flex, SQL etc? Many bloggers have many technical interests. CF > > itself > > has many satellite subjects that should be of interest to CF > > developers. > > > > I have plans for the next generation Goog to provide some degree of > > social interaction to widen the scope for users to be editors and hone > > the relevance of posts. I also have a variety of ideas on how to do > > this computationally. > > > > There are some 500 hand picked blogs on Fullasagoog. And a waiting > > list of about half that. I review each blog before adding it. I even > > remove some blogs I find to be reliably bad. This is a very > > subjective > > and time consuming process. Bloggers tools change, their posting > > habits change, there are a multitude of human variables associated > > with > > maintaining a good feed. > > > > I will endeavour to find more time to address the concerns you have > > raised. But in the end, Fullasagoog is not cash flow positive and is > > heavily subsidised by Daemon [1]. It's a bit of a hobby that was > > built > > to scatch an itch of *mine* several years ago and at the moment I've > > got some sort of St. Vitus dance going on trying to reach all the > > other > > itches. > > > > -- geoff > > http://www.fullasagoog.com/ > > > > [1]: http://www.daemon.com.au/ > > > > > > > > > -- > Regards, > Scott Barnes > http://www.mossyblog.com > > > > -- Darryl http://www.acheron.org/darryl/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "cfaussie" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
