<?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: Are Any Social Networks for Life Scientists Gaining Traction?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://comprendia.com/2010/02/11/social-networks-for-life-scientists-gaining-traction/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://comprendia.com/2010/02/11/social-networks-for-life-scientists-gaining-traction/</link>
	<description>Communicating the Business of Science</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Apr 2012 19:56:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Crotty</title>
		<link>http://comprendia.com/2010/02/11/social-networks-for-life-scientists-gaining-traction/comment-page-1/#comment-21221</link>
		<dc:creator>David Crotty</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Feb 2010 17:25:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://comprendia.com/?p=30845#comment-21221</guid>
		<description>The numbers CiteULike states for traffic are quite different from what you&#039;ve got here:
http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2010/02/10/are-publisher-linking-networks-choking-to-death-on-spam/#comment-7685
Note that they make their data publicly available for analysis:
http://www.citeulike.org/faq/data.adp

It&#039;s not clear what either set of numbers mean.  The NSF lists some 5.5 million working scientists in the US alone, with 16 million additional people working in related fields.  128K means roughly a 2% usage rate.  Should that be considered traction?  How much of that 128K is from Google searches where the visitor was a non-scientist who immediately left the site?  Perhaps a more meaningful analysis would be looking at growth in usage and membership over time. Many of these sites are 5 years old if not older, so one would think we&#039;d be able to see if they&#039;re really catching on.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The numbers CiteULike states for traffic are quite different from what you&#8217;ve got here:<br />
<a href="http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2010/02/10/are-publisher-linking-networks-choking-to-death-on-spam/#comment-7685" rel="nofollow">http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2010/02/10/are-publisher-linking-networks-choking-to-death-on-spam/#comment-7685</a><br />
Note that they make their data publicly available for analysis:<br />
<a href="http://www.citeulike.org/faq/data.adp" rel="nofollow">http://www.citeulike.org/faq/data.adp</a></p>
<p>It&#8217;s not clear what either set of numbers mean.  The NSF lists some 5.5 million working scientists in the US alone, with 16 million additional people working in related fields.  128K means roughly a 2% usage rate.  Should that be considered traction?  How much of that 128K is from Google searches where the visitor was a non-scientist who immediately left the site?  Perhaps a more meaningful analysis would be looking at growth in usage and membership over time. Many of these sites are 5 years old if not older, so one would think we&#8217;d be able to see if they&#8217;re really catching on.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew</title>
		<link>http://comprendia.com/2010/02/11/social-networks-for-life-scientists-gaining-traction/comment-page-1/#comment-20650</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Feb 2010 17:26:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://comprendia.com/?p=30845#comment-20650</guid>
		<description>Mary, thank for truly living the charge of open discourse.  Your willingness to share data and valuable information does not go unnoticed!  Keep it up.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mary, thank for truly living the charge of open discourse.  Your willingness to share data and valuable information does not go unnoticed!  Keep it up.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mary Canady</title>
		<link>http://comprendia.com/2010/02/11/social-networks-for-life-scientists-gaining-traction/comment-page-1/#comment-20558</link>
		<dc:creator>Mary Canady</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Feb 2010 00:26:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://comprendia.com/?p=30845#comment-20558</guid>
		<description>Thanks @Jo and @Mrgunn for your comments! @Jo, it is not possible to get traffic to the scientist groups on FriendFeed. The Compete.com tool is only for standalone domains. I&#039;ve also heard mixed things about FriendFeed&#039;s usage--when Facebook bought it, several assumed it was going away and said they were going to stop using it. 

Thoughts?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks @Jo and @Mrgunn for your comments! @Jo, it is not possible to get traffic to the scientist groups on FriendFeed. The Compete.com tool is only for standalone domains. I&#8217;ve also heard mixed things about FriendFeed&#8217;s usage&#8211;when Facebook bought it, several assumed it was going away and said they were going to stop using it. </p>
<p>Thoughts?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mr. Gunn</title>
		<link>http://comprendia.com/2010/02/11/social-networks-for-life-scientists-gaining-traction/comment-page-1/#comment-20107</link>
		<dc:creator>Mr. Gunn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2010 22:27:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://comprendia.com/?p=30845#comment-20107</guid>
		<description>Hi Mary!  Great post.  As I mentioned, I&#039;m not sure exactly what to make of the traffic stats, but I think the numbers in general are fairly encouraging.  I also like the idea of using the latent networks to bootstrap the networking, but it&#039;s important to have flexibility, because those you trust to recommend papers to you are not the same as those you&#039;ve published with.

Also, a small correction about Mendeley - it does have a web interface, and their building social features which I&#039;m already finding useful. More to come in that respect you can be sure.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Mary!  Great post.  As I mentioned, I&#8217;m not sure exactly what to make of the traffic stats, but I think the numbers in general are fairly encouraging.  I also like the idea of using the latent networks to bootstrap the networking, but it&#8217;s important to have flexibility, because those you trust to recommend papers to you are not the same as those you&#8217;ve published with.</p>
<p>Also, a small correction about Mendeley &#8211; it does have a web interface, and their building social features which I&#8217;m already finding useful. More to come in that respect you can be sure.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mary Canady</title>
		<link>http://comprendia.com/2010/02/11/social-networks-for-life-scientists-gaining-traction/comment-page-1/#comment-20081</link>
		<dc:creator>Mary Canady</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2010 15:44:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://comprendia.com/?p=30845#comment-20081</guid>
		<description>You&#039;ve gotta love scientists...turns out a few others were doing something very similar to this analysis, and they&#039;ve got a more complete spreadsheet. Check out our discussion on FriendFeed http://ff.im/fMiCa</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;ve gotta love scientists&#8230;turns out a few others were doing something very similar to this analysis, and they&#8217;ve got a more complete spreadsheet. Check out our discussion on FriendFeed <a href="http://ff.im/fMiCa" rel="nofollow">http://ff.im/fMiCa</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jo Badge</title>
		<link>http://comprendia.com/2010/02/11/social-networks-for-life-scientists-gaining-traction/comment-page-1/#comment-20075</link>
		<dc:creator>Jo Badge</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2010 14:02:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://comprendia.com/?p=30845#comment-20075</guid>
		<description>Did you consider FriendFeed in your network selection? I see you posted there for input! http://ff.im/fMiCa</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Did you consider FriendFeed in your network selection? I see you posted there for input! <a href="http://ff.im/fMiCa" rel="nofollow">http://ff.im/fMiCa</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

