I would like to inform you all about a new website we developed that we hope to help all of us.
More and more Amiga users/enthusiasts create their personal blog where they write interesting articles describing their beloved Amiga computer and guides on how to do things, based on their personal experience. Unfortunately, many of these articles are doomed to be invisible to readers, because it is lost among many other articles in the web. As a result the blogger loses his interest on writing new stuff.
We had the idea to create AmigaBlogs.net, were the visitor can read interesting articles and discover a blog that he never knew it's existence. We collect all the latest posts talking about Amiga computers and AmigaOS from various blogs. We do not want to steal anyone's work but to help the bloggers to promote their content to a global website with a broader and more targeted audience.
None of the included articles was authored by our team, as these are property of their respective authors and owners. That's why we provide in every single article the blog name with a link to it. We also provide the blog post original link at the end of the texts. We never edit the texts or the images of the articles, and this means that we are not responsible for their content and we do not totally agree with all of them.
The website works really nice on tablets and smart mobiles, so that you can read it anywhere you are. If you like our website and idea, use the contact form to inform us about your blog or propose what you would like to add or change.
A convenient blog agregator is quite agood idea, but should you really be re posting the entire blog?
I would think it would be more appropriate to post the abstract and link out to the original.
I would cetainly want that if my blog was included (it's not amiga related very often so not quite relavent) and that's the way most rss agregating pages I've used work.
Good point from broadblues, blog owners like to see hits on their page - The "aggregator" may get a frosty reception if it is seen to be robbing hits away from the actual blogs.
@broadblues, @ddni The AmigaBlogs.net uses only the RSS from each blog to collect the articles. If a blog provides the full article, then that's what it stores.
Idea good, but imho, pressing on "read more" should just jump on the original site with original content. Now it just looks like re-post of originals in another place.
@kas1e I am open to proposals. This can be done, if people would like it. I could also show only the titles, and view a website with only titles. But this would be ugly and not helpful.
I believe that if you provide RSS content, you do that because you want someone to read the whole article from anywhere, and not only from your blog site (RSS readers for example).
Also, it is better for SEO to have as much content as possible, that will help search engines to lead readers to discover those articles.
Also, if someone prefers his blog not being aggregated by AmigaBlogs.net, then this can be done by asking from the contact form of the site. I can remove his content.
This seems like a very good idea, and I see no problems with the way it is currently implemented (if their RSS feed contains whole posts, then showing whole posts is obviously allowed).
EDIT: Well, Kas1e's suggestion that "Read More" should take you to the original website does seem to make a lot of sense. If you want to allow people the option to read the whole thing on your website, then I guess you could have a "Cached" link like Google does, which would work like your "Read More" link currently works.
I did a change today. I placed the "Source link" link above the main text and renamed it to "Original Post". Also I make it visible at the first page with the teaser list. That way, the user has the choice to go instantly to the blog post or continue reading it at the AmigaBlogs.net using the read more link.
walkero wrote: @kas1e I am open to proposals. This can be done, if people would like it. I could also show only the titles, and view a website with only titles. But this would be ugly and not helpful.
I agree, having just the titles would be bad. Quoting the first paragraph as well would be a better idea. Some RSS feeds do this already, but not all website software has this feature (I still need to figure out how to do this with Silverstripe).
The easiest way would be for the "Read more" button on the main page to go to the original blog instead of the copy on AmigaBlogs.net. That way, the original blogs would get more traffic while AmigaBlogs.net still serves its purpose: helping people find Amiga related blogs.
Quote:
I believe that if you provide RSS content, you do that because you want someone to read the whole article from anywhere, and not only from your blog site (RSS readers for example).
RSS feeds are usually intended to allow people with RSS readers to stay up-to-date. It isn't a blank license for other websites to republish their content.
Quote:
Also, it is better for SEO to have as much content as possible, that will help search engines to lead readers to discover those articles.
The SEO value is very limited due to it being duplicate content. Google has become very good at detecting duplicate content across the internet, and filtering it out of their page-rank calculations. You can thank marketers who used article spinning to artificially boost their rankings for that.
Quote:
Also, if someone prefers his blog not being aggregated by AmigaBlogs.net, then this can be done by asking from the contact form of the site. I can remove his content.
True, but it would be better if you asked blog owners for permission before adding their blog to your aggregator. After all, it's their copyrighted content that you want to use.
We had a similar discussion regarding people uploading other people's software to os4depot. If you want to use/distribute/republish someone else's content/Intellectual-Property (IP), then it's your responsibility to get permission before you use it. Yes, even if the said IP is available for free.
Hans
P.S., It might be an idea to create an invite page for bloggers where they can apply to have their blog included. That would address both the permission issue, and reduce the need for you to go out and find all the blogs yourself. You would have to have some method of checking that the applicant is the blog owner though, or it could get abused.
@walkero even with new change its change not that much , as you still repost whole articles, which autors want to be reads on their blogs (more content to show and co).
imho real and one solution just as Hans say: just remove that original source link, keep first paragraphs as it now on first page, and when ppl press on read more, they go to autors site. then there will be no reposts, and generator will not looks like it feel a sie by copyrighted content (remind me black seo :) )
RSS feeds are usually intended to allow people with RSS readers to stay up-to-date. It isn't a blank license for other websites to republish their content.
I'm afraid I'd have to disagree: An RSS feed contains the "summary" of your post, which you are implicitly allowing to be shown anywhere & everywhere that uses RSS feeds. If that "summary" is the entire post, then that indicates they don't care about people visiting their original site, and only care about people reading their posts.
If RSS feeds aren't allowed to be republished fully on websites, then why aren't people complaining about that on Google Reader, Feedly, Digg Reader, etc etc? Those all have websites were people can view RSS feeds in full.
In short: If you want people to visit the original post/article, don't put the entire post/article in your RSS feed.
@walkero Your change is a GREAT improvement. I prefer to read posts in their original context (original web site), and your change now allows me to easily do that.
RSS feeds are usually intended to allow people with RSS readers to stay up-to-date. It isn't a blank license for other websites to republish their content.
I'm afraid I'd have to disagree: An RSS feed contains the "summary" of your post, which you are implicitly allowing to be shown anywhere & everywhere that uses RSS feeds. If that "summary" is the entire post, then that indicates they don't care about people visiting their original site, and only care about people reading their posts.
No, an RSS feed most certainly does NOT grant you a right to republish elsewhere; end of story. Note, the operative word is republish. This isn't an opinion, it's copyright law (link and link).
Quote:
If RSS feeds aren't allowed to be republished fully on websites, then why aren't people complaining about that on Google Reader, Feedly, Digg Reader, etc etc? Those all have websites were people can view RSS feeds in full.
The websites that you list are effectively RSS feed reader apps that run via a web-browser. People create accounts, and choose which feeds to read. That's no different from using an RSS feed reader.
Providing an RSS reader service is different from publicly republishing RSS feed content on a website. Republishing requires permission, and the existence of an RSS feed is NOT implicit permission.
Hans
P.S. Just to be clear, I do think that amigablogs.net is a good idea.
RSS feeds are usually intended to allow people with RSS readers to stay up-to-date. It isn't a blank license for other websites to republish their content.
I'm afraid I'd have to disagree: An RSS feed contains the "summary" of your post, which you are implicitly allowing to be shown anywhere & everywhere that uses RSS feeds. If that "summary" is the entire post, then that indicates they don't care about people visiting their original site, and only care about people reading their posts.
If RSS feeds aren't allowed to be republished fully on websites, then why aren't people complaining about that on Google Reader, Feedly, Digg Reader, etc etc? Those all have websites were people can view RSS feeds in full.
Disagree if you want but you would be wrong. The content of a feed remains the copy right of the author. You cannot reproduce it on your site without explixit permission from them.
Correct me if I'm wrong Google Reader etc are not public website in the same sense as the one we are discussing, as you have an account and read the feeds on your onwe private page. They are thus online rss reading apps, which is not the same as publicly republishing.
Quote:
In short: If you want people to visit the original post/article, don't put the entire post/article in your RSS feed.
That is ofcourse good advice and many feeds do that but not doing does not give permission to use the feed wholesale.
The primary purpose of my own feed for example is to feed contant into facebook notes (til they removed the feature) myspace (same) and lastfm (still works I believe). (But I do limit the feed to an abstract and link).
News feed
OS4 Feedback forum
OS4Depot Feedback forum
Amigabounty forum
OpenAmiga forum
AmiCygnix forum
ABC shell forum
AmiKit forum
Cinnamon Writer forum
CodeBench forum
Digital Universe forum
Dopus 5 forum
E-UAE forum
Gnash forum
Ibrowse forum
JAmiga forum
Odyssey forum
OWB forum
Qt forum
SmartFileSystem forum
Timberwolf forum
TouchDevice forum
TuneNet forum
Unsatisfactory Software forum
Donate
