<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.5" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Daily links â?? delicious or not?</title>
	<link>http://transmissionmarketing.ca/?p=325</link>
	<description>Montreal new marketing coach: blogging, social media, Give + Take Marketing</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 10 Sep 2010 21:52:02 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.5</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Mark</title>
		<link>http://transmissionmarketing.ca/?p=325#comment-45786</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Dec 2007 13:06:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://transmissionmarketing.ca/?p=325#comment-45786</guid>
					<description>Well stated, Drew. The "screener" reasoning is a big one for me. For example, when Kris links to something, I know it'll usually be to a story or article that I haven't seen, simply because his interests are a little different than mine. Without him pointing to them, it would be information I would miss altogether. So he distills the important stuff down and passes it on.

Pretty lucky for us, if you ask me!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well stated, Drew. The &#8220;screener&#8221; reasoning is a big one for me. For example, when Kris links to something, I know it&#8217;ll usually be to a story or article that I haven&#8217;t seen, simply because his interests are a little different than mine. Without him pointing to them, it would be information I would miss altogether. So he distills the important stuff down and passes it on.</p>
<p>Pretty lucky for us, if you ask me!
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Drew McLellan</title>
		<link>http://transmissionmarketing.ca/?p=325#comment-45736</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Dec 2007 05:00:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://transmissionmarketing.ca/?p=325#comment-45736</guid>
					<description>Mark,

It's been an interesting discussion.  You're right...I very rarely do a links only post.  About once a month, I will highlight 3-4 posts that really caught my attention and I try to link out to relevant posts within my own posts.

Here's my take:

1) If we all did it exactly the same way, what a snore.
2) I view those of you who do include link posts to be like screeners, out there looking for the best to share with me.
3) I, like many of other commenters, appreciate it when you link lovers give me a sentence or two highlight, so I can decide if I want to click.
4) I think the success and popularity of blogs like yours, Greg's, Scott's, Matt's and Kris' suggests that readers do value the links.  So why rock the boat.

Bottom line -- everyone adds value in their own way.  Subscribers, comments, traffic etc. are pretty clear indicators of what's working and what is not.

I'm grateful that we all bring different things to the party.  Just because I don't do it that way doesn't mean I don't value that you do.

Drew</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mark,</p>
<p>It&#8217;s been an interesting discussion.  You&#8217;re right&#8230;I very rarely do a links only post.  About once a month, I will highlight 3-4 posts that really caught my attention and I try to link out to relevant posts within my own posts.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s my take:</p>
<p>1) If we all did it exactly the same way, what a snore.<br />
2) I view those of you who do include link posts to be like screeners, out there looking for the best to share with me.<br />
3) I, like many of other commenters, appreciate it when you link lovers give me a sentence or two highlight, so I can decide if I want to click.<br />
4) I think the success and popularity of blogs like yours, Greg&#8217;s, Scott&#8217;s, Matt&#8217;s and Kris&#8217; suggests that readers do value the links.  So why rock the boat.</p>
<p>Bottom line &#8212; everyone adds value in their own way.  Subscribers, comments, traffic etc. are pretty clear indicators of what&#8217;s working and what is not.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m grateful that we all bring different things to the party.  Just because I don&#8217;t do it that way doesn&#8217;t mean I don&#8217;t value that you do.</p>
<p>Drew
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Mark</title>
		<link>http://transmissionmarketing.ca/?p=325#comment-45647</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2007 15:49:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://transmissionmarketing.ca/?p=325#comment-45647</guid>
					<description>Right, Cam, I think the link post title is one of the key shortcomings of these posts. The title is so important for helping people filter their feeds and decide on what to read.

But when it comes down to it, as Scott mentioned, it really does come down to the individual's choice. If they have time. If they're interested. If they're curious. Not everyone wants the deep thoughts behind the link, they only want to scan through to find the compelling headlines within the link posts to generate their own ideas.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Right, Cam, I think the link post title is one of the key shortcomings of these posts. The title is so important for helping people filter their feeds and decide on what to read.</p>
<p>But when it comes down to it, as Scott mentioned, it really does come down to the individual&#8217;s choice. If they have time. If they&#8217;re interested. If they&#8217;re curious. Not everyone wants the deep thoughts behind the link, they only want to scan through to find the compelling headlines within the link posts to generate their own ideas.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Cam Beck</title>
		<link>http://transmissionmarketing.ca/?p=325#comment-45643</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2007 15:21:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://transmissionmarketing.ca/?p=325#comment-45643</guid>
					<description>Although that's not the track I USUALLY follow, I do OCCASIONALLY do a link-only post. 

I have nothing against them. In fact, I'm subscribed to several blogs that are primarily about the links they find. No commentary at all. It's like an RSS feed that constantly changes, opening up a whole range of experiences I might not ordinarily find on my own.

But with a fixed amount of time and all the blogs I read these days, there has to be something about the headline and/or explanation that makes me believe it will be worth my while to click over.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Although that&#8217;s not the track I USUALLY follow, I do OCCASIONALLY do a link-only post. </p>
<p>I have nothing against them. In fact, I&#8217;m subscribed to several blogs that are primarily about the links they find. No commentary at all. It&#8217;s like an RSS feed that constantly changes, opening up a whole range of experiences I might not ordinarily find on my own.</p>
<p>But with a fixed amount of time and all the blogs I read these days, there has to be something about the headline and/or explanation that makes me believe it will be worth my while to click over.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Mark</title>
		<link>http://transmissionmarketing.ca/?p=325#comment-45580</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2007 02:48:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://transmissionmarketing.ca/?p=325#comment-45580</guid>
					<description>Greg: Yeah, I look at the balance between link posts and regular posts the same way. However, I will say this: if you're busy and don't have time to put together a post that meets your standards, then at least your link post tells your readers that you're still paying attention. I can't think of anything worse than leaving a blog completely fallow when you're busy. (And that's an opinion based on experience.)

Scott: Beautifully stated, my friend!! I really believe that yours is the perfect answer to this debate. As Christopher Penn stated in the comments over on Mitch's post:

"The unsubscribe button is one click, too.

Because there's no email address to ping, once someone unsubscribes from an RSS feed using a feed reader...

-= you have no way of reaching out to them to get them back =-

The attention economy is entirely based on value you provide. No value, no attention."</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Greg: Yeah, I look at the balance between link posts and regular posts the same way. However, I will say this: if you&#8217;re busy and don&#8217;t have time to put together a post that meets your standards, then at least your link post tells your readers that you&#8217;re still paying attention. I can&#8217;t think of anything worse than leaving a blog completely fallow when you&#8217;re busy. (And that&#8217;s an opinion based on experience.)</p>
<p>Scott: Beautifully stated, my friend!! I really believe that yours is the perfect answer to this debate. As Christopher Penn stated in the comments over on Mitch&#8217;s post:</p>
<p>&#8220;The unsubscribe button is one click, too.</p>
<p>Because there&#8217;s no email address to ping, once someone unsubscribes from an RSS feed using a feed reader&#8230;</p>
<p>-= you have no way of reaching out to them to get them back =-</p>
<p>The attention economy is entirely based on value you provide. No value, no attention.&#8221;
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Scott Monty</title>
		<link>http://transmissionmarketing.ca/?p=325#comment-45579</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2007 02:34:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://transmissionmarketing.ca/?p=325#comment-45579</guid>
					<description>Mark: great points here. Mitch certainly raised some valid points &#38; counterpoints on his own blog and here, but I have to side with you. I actually put this question to my readers a couple of months ago, and opinions were split (of those who chose to comment).

Bottom line: social media, if nothing else, is about choices. Never before has it been so easy to give your audience a variety of ways to consume content. Mitch or you are I are not so omniscient that we can presume how every reader prefers to consume content. So why not give them everything and let them choose?

Blog posts, del.icio.us links, Google Reader shared item, Twitter streams - it's all fair game!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mark: great points here. Mitch certainly raised some valid points &amp; counterpoints on his own blog and here, but I have to side with you. I actually put this question to my readers a couple of months ago, and opinions were split (of those who chose to comment).</p>
<p>Bottom line: social media, if nothing else, is about choices. Never before has it been so easy to give your audience a variety of ways to consume content. Mitch or you are I are not so omniscient that we can presume how every reader prefers to consume content. So why not give them everything and let them choose?</p>
<p>Blog posts, del.icio.us links, Google Reader shared item, Twitter streams - it&#8217;s all fair game!
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Greg Verdino</title>
		<link>http://transmissionmarketing.ca/?p=325#comment-45578</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2007 02:29:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://transmissionmarketing.ca/?p=325#comment-45578</guid>
					<description>Hey Mark - Your post actually nailed my thinking EXACTLY. I most definitely see link posts as a supplement to my original posts (although when my volume of output is low, as it has been since US Thanksgiving, it might look otherwise.) I also like to use my link posts to (1) give readers an idea of some things I'm interested in and paying attention to, but don't quite feel would make for a compelling enough post, or (2) occassionally thread together multiple posts on a single (or set of related) topics.  I also don't feel compelled to roll links every day.  Some weeks I may not link at all; other weeks I might roll a couple of link posts, but if you ever see more link posts than 'real' posts in a given week, you know that I'm having a rough time. :-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Mark - Your post actually nailed my thinking EXACTLY. I most definitely see link posts as a supplement to my original posts (although when my volume of output is low, as it has been since US Thanksgiving, it might look otherwise.) I also like to use my link posts to (1) give readers an idea of some things I&#8217;m interested in and paying attention to, but don&#8217;t quite feel would make for a compelling enough post, or (2) occassionally thread together multiple posts on a single (or set of related) topics.  I also don&#8217;t feel compelled to roll links every day.  Some weeks I may not link at all; other weeks I might roll a couple of link posts, but if you ever see more link posts than &#8216;real&#8217; posts in a given week, you know that I&#8217;m having a rough time. :-)
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Mark</title>
		<link>http://transmissionmarketing.ca/?p=325#comment-45577</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2007 02:16:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://transmissionmarketing.ca/?p=325#comment-45577</guid>
					<description>Mitch: All's good. If someone is only posting these daily links, I would probably give up on 'em as well. And rightfully so. Insights, opinion + passion are what I look for in a blogger. Links and links alone aren't going to cut for me either.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mitch: All&#8217;s good. If someone is only posting these daily links, I would probably give up on &#8216;em as well. And rightfully so. Insights, opinion + passion are what I look for in a blogger. Links and links alone aren&#8217;t going to cut for me either.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Mitch Joel - Twist Image</title>
		<link>http://transmissionmarketing.ca/?p=325#comment-45575</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2007 02:09:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://transmissionmarketing.ca/?p=325#comment-45575</guid>
					<description>Thanks for responding Mark. I think we're in violent agreement. The Google Shared items idea is only a tactic - not a strategy.

It's the strategy that still doesn't work for me - the fact that Bloggers are doing this instead of Blogging, not to supplement their Blog. This was the major topic of my Blog postings... and my feelings.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for responding Mark. I think we&#8217;re in violent agreement. The Google Shared items idea is only a tactic - not a strategy.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s the strategy that still doesn&#8217;t work for me - the fact that Bloggers are doing this instead of Blogging, not to supplement their Blog. This was the major topic of my Blog postings&#8230; and my feelings.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Mark</title>
		<link>http://transmissionmarketing.ca/?p=325#comment-45569</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2007 01:40:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://transmissionmarketing.ca/?p=325#comment-45569</guid>
					<description>Colin: I think the hybrid approach is interesting too. Wouldn't it be great if delicious made this a little easier? For one, let us title these posts without having to edit them once they've been posted. Secondly, maybe a higher character limit for our comments would encourage some people to add more thorough commentary as we're bookmarking. Not sure this is a solution, but it would allow us to offer a more "hybrid" solution.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Colin: I think the hybrid approach is interesting too. Wouldn&#8217;t it be great if delicious made this a little easier? For one, let us title these posts without having to edit them once they&#8217;ve been posted. Secondly, maybe a higher character limit for our comments would encourage some people to add more thorough commentary as we&#8217;re bookmarking. Not sure this is a solution, but it would allow us to offer a more &#8220;hybrid&#8221; solution.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
