> I don't speak for Syndic8, but as a user, the approval process is > useful as a way to narrow down searches in the feeds database to those > that are, or at least at one point were, really useful (i.e., not > broken).
Glad to hear from a user! What you point out is something we've long realized. Broken feeds are perhaps worse than no feeds at all. To have people come looking for feeds and then have them be unworkable in their reader of choice would be a bad thing for advancing the cause. > For example, I am currently looking for photography-related feeds for > a project I'm working on. I can click the Feeds link, then type > "camera" in the Match field, then click the checkbox next to Status > and set the status to "Syndicated" and then click the Filter button. > At the moment, that brings up 29 feeds that have a high probability of > being at least technically useful, which is a good first step since > then I can just evaluate them based on content. It would be > discouraging to find good-content feeds that ended up being unusable > due to technical flaws, such as not being able to be parsed. An excellent observation. > As a Reviewer, I try to log in regularly and review feeds to help get > them through the process. Lots end up marked for repair, but I've > still managed to get a couple hundred feeds to the Syndicated status. > In fact, I just added one to the results of the "camera" search. :-) Tell us how you'd like the reporting views arranged to make the task easier. > Anyway, there are thousands of Syndic8 users with the Reviewer role, > so perhaps all we really need is to do a bit of encouragement (and > education where necessary) to get those users to actively review > feeds. If each person with a Reviewer role reviewed just five feeds > per day, we could approve (or otherwise handle) over 30,000 feeds in > one day. That would quickly wipe out the bulk of the approval queue. We're working on stepping back from the poller's relentless pace of spidering for new feeds. We learn about hundreds of new feeds daily and for the past few months we've let the spider contribute them to the database. They're marked as such so you'll know they're not a user recommendation. We'd like, however, to get back to doing more of the submits based on individual contributions. It's a real chicken-and-egg sort of situation. Without fresh content people get bored, but with too much they get overstimulated. It's tricky finding an effective balancing point. It's also tricky avoiding the sort of mistakes that seriously polarize the overall audience. So, what would help to make it 'more interesting' to help cut down on the looming pile of feeds awaiting review? Thanks, -Bill Kearney Syndic8.com ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> $4.98 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Q7_YsB/neXJAA/yQLSAA/IRislB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> If you're getting "too much mail" then send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (this will tell it to stop sending you mail) To change your membership use THIS WEB PAGE: http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/syndic8/join (here you can set your mail to digest, no mail or LEAVE the list) To find more info about Syndicated XML newsfeeds visit http://www.syndic8.com/ Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/syndic8/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
