I'm a huge fan of web feeds, I'm using RSS Feeder.net at the moment which is a great tool, it syncs to Outlook, unlike something like RSSBandit which includes a web browser, I'd have to pop up a new window to actually view the content - that's kind of annoying. Of course ideally the feed will contain all of the content - then I can just read the whole lot within Outlook. The BBC annoys me the most, they send down a clip of the feed and force me to click on a URL and open a web browser to read it, they're not a commercial site they're not losing any ad revenue so there's no excuse not to send the whole thing down. For commercial sites it's obviously a different story.

Now I have full feeds for all the blogs here, the actual semi-commercial-ish sites I have send down partial content and force the user to go look at the web page. I'm considering beefing it up to the whole article being sent down. However that would cut into the money coming in from the adverts on the webpage. I'm a huge believer it not irritating your users to hell with pop-up ads and things that flash and move around (what Bill Hill would call a priority-zero interrupt in the human perception system), nothing is worse then trying to read a page and having all this crap fly around on the screen. Which is why I only have plain text adverts.

The RSS world at the moment is, let's face it full of geeks, the kind of people that probably never click on an advert, and go to huge lengths blocking all the annoying ones. So I'm debating to open the feeds up and send everything down now, worry about the revenue loss later, when the feeds become more mainstream, and then possibly include adverts within the feeds, but the trouble with that is if the adverts didn't work, if I changed my mind at a later date and wanted to go back to a clip of the article, there would be a lot of annoyed people.

Don't know what to do.... Hmmm!