I consume a vast majority of content via Google Reader. Most of the sites I’m interested in offer RSS feeds and many of them offer their full RSS feeds – so it’s just the same as going to their websites. I love the convenience of this setup. The only reason I go to any site is based on their content and it is usually to leave a comment. That is why nothing irks me more than subscribing to a RSS feed and only receiving their partial feed. Why? Why? Why? Do this to your readers?
As a blogger I offer full RSS feeds to all my content and I don’t see how I’m losing anything in the process. Even big name, celebrity bloggers and content providers offer their full RSS feed for the most part. So when a small time local dude wants me to visit his/her site for their content, I choose to unsubscribe (for the most part), rather than go through that one last step.
Today I’m not going to give you all the arguments for or against providing partial or full RSS feeds. There was a great debate on this topic a few years ago and you can read up on it here if you wish. Today, I simply want to get a pulse on where you stand today. If you are content provider or content reader vote below and tell me which you prefer, a full RSS feed or a partial RSS feed:
- 4 Great Ways to Convert Partial RSS Feed To Full RSS Feed (maketecheasier.com)
- Combine Multiple RSS Feeds With Yahoo Pipes (ghacks.net)