Uh, not so sure about the 1/10th comment; I'd say most of the sites I visit regularly feature just about 1 in 10 articles I actually feel the need to click on. Even the one site I regularly click on most articles, Cracked, features, I'd say, 1 in 10 articles would normally interest me; I just trust the writers and editors on that site to make me interested in whatever they're writing about.
Kind of an awkward time to make the argument for "lots of new content is best," but the recent lack of updates (given the nature of the site, totally understandable that that'll happen sometimes) does help to illustrate the theory; if there wasn't a hiatus, do you think this article would be getting this many comments otherwise?
Uh, not so sure about the 1/10th comment; I'd say most of the sites I visit regularly feature just about 1 in 10 articles I actually feel the need to click on. Even the one site I regularly click on most articles, Cracked, features, I'd say, 1 in 10 articles would normally interest me; I just trust the writers and editors on that site to make me interested in whatever they're writing about.
Kind of an awkward time to make the argument for "lots of new content is best," but the recent lack of updates (given the nature of the site, totally understandable that that'll happen sometimes) does help to illustrate the theory; if there wasn't a hiatus, do you think this article would be getting this many comments otherwise?