Someone should commission a study on bloggers who choose to syndicate the full text of their posts in RSS feeds vs. those who abstain. Something tells me they're read more. Consider the contrasts between these two bloggers.
Exhibit A: Leon Ho from Lifehack.org
In a little over a year and a half, Leon grew his blog from zero to 12,000 subscribers. This includes 474 subscribers on Bloglines. He credits a full-text feed.
"The feed entry needs to give something readers can read," he says. "You must give some special privileges to the regular readers. Save their time by reading your posts on the feed. I love full feed, and I am holding back myself on subscribing to partial feeds." Good advice.
Exhibit B: Donna Bogatin's DIgital Markets Blog
If you haven't perused it lately, Donna Bogatin's blog is really good. She puts a ton of compelling content out there - and quite often. However, her feed is only partial text. I suspect this limits her feed subscribers. On Bloglines she has 12 subscribers (a full report of her feed subscribers is unavailable; Donna I am sure will correct me if I am wrong.)
Now it's not quite fair to compare these two, I will admit. However, it's becoming more apparent to me that the bloggers who syndicate full text are among the most well-read. Take a look at the Technorati Top 100. A lot of these bloggers are full-texters. Anyone up for a little analysis?
