Just when you thought this topic was dead, I’m here to drudge it back up again. I’ve attempted to analyze my commenting behaviour; I want to explain the situations in which I’m more likely to comment on original blog posts versus on FriendFeed.
A lot is still being made of the discussions happening in FriendFeed that some feel should belong on the actual post. Recently, the discussion over "fragmented comments" has been revived in posts from Fred Wilson, Matthew Ingram, and Allen Stern. Allen suggests that when FriendFeeders see the content, they should go back to the original post, comment there, and then have their comment pulled back into FriendFeed. I still don’t agree with centralizing comments on the blog post or any one place, and here’s why:
Marshall McLuhan (a Canadian) coined the phrase "the medium is the message" to describe that the profound impact of television and other media on society was more important than the impact of the content itself. Recently, a lot of discussion has been taking place about FriendFeed‘s noise versus its signal. I contend that the impact that FriendFeed has on the Social Web is greater than that of the content it aggregates. Excuse me as I coyly coin the phrase: “FriendFeed is the signal.”
I just read about this on Regular Geek via Corvida and Rob Diana. The service allows you too see comments on your post across a variety of services including Digg, Disqus, FriendFeed, Mixx, StumbleUpon, Technorati, and WordPress blogs, with plans for expansion.