



<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why not add comments to pages?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.peoplepersonpower.com/2009/06/20/why-not-add-comments-to-pages/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.peoplepersonpower.com/2009/06/20/why-not-add-comments-to-pages/</link>
	<description>The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of Communicating Person-to-Person</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Jul 2010 18:23:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Toby</title>
		<link>http://www.peoplepersonpower.com/2009/06/20/why-not-add-comments-to-pages/comment-page-1/#comment-105</link>
		<dc:creator>Toby</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2009 15:51:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.peoplepersonpower.com/?p=155#comment-105</guid>
		<description>Well said, Eli!  

I believe it may be time to get rid of this old &quot;no comments&quot; standard of website interaction, particularly on content-specific pages (i.e. sub-pages).  

Is there still merit in limiting comments on main landing pages, though?  For example, in what ways might the U of M benefit by allowing (or not allowing) comments on www.umn.edu?  

Allowing comments increases overhead for content managers, but it also increases interaction, decreases bounce rates, and gives visitors a better link to finding information/answers - isn&#039;t that the whole goal of websites?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well said, Eli!  </p>
<p>I believe it may be time to get rid of this old &#8220;no comments&#8221; standard of website interaction, particularly on content-specific pages (i.e. sub-pages).  </p>
<p>Is there still merit in limiting comments on main landing pages, though?  For example, in what ways might the U of M benefit by allowing (or not allowing) comments on <a href="http://www.umn.edu?" rel="nofollow">http://www.umn.edu?</a>  </p>
<p>Allowing comments increases overhead for content managers, but it also increases interaction, decreases bounce rates, and gives visitors a better link to finding information/answers &#8211; isn&#8217;t that the whole goal of websites?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eli Sagor</title>
		<link>http://www.peoplepersonpower.com/2009/06/20/why-not-add-comments-to-pages/comment-page-1/#comment-103</link>
		<dc:creator>Eli Sagor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2009 14:22:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.peoplepersonpower.com/?p=155#comment-103</guid>
		<description>I totally agree--the vast majority of web pages should, IMO, allow commenting. Commenting engages readers with the content, opening up space for better ideas, elaboration or refutation (or both) of the original content, etc.  This is a big part of what we want to do as we rebuild a U of MN Extension forestry website (http://www.myminnesotawoods.org), and I would like to see many others adopt this approach.
-eli</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I totally agree&#8211;the vast majority of web pages should, IMO, allow commenting. Commenting engages readers with the content, opening up space for better ideas, elaboration or refutation (or both) of the original content, etc.  This is a big part of what we want to do as we rebuild a U of MN Extension forestry website (<a href="http://www.myminnesotawoods.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.myminnesotawoods.org</a>), and I would like to see many others adopt this approach.<br />
-eli</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
