---
title: "I Need Your Human Aggregated Content"
date: 2009-06-29
description: "$( document ).ready(function() { // Handler for .ready() called. $("
canonical_url: https://idratherbewriting.com/2009/06/29/i-need-your-human-aggregated-content/
---
# I Need Your Human Aggregated Content
Here's what the Yahoo Pipes feed looks like at the moment.

!["Writer River Yahoo Pipes feed](https://s3.us-west-1.wasabisys.com/idbwmedia.com/images/yahoopipes21.jpg)

It's simple compared to other Yahoo Pipes feeds. Basically the pipe takes RSS feeds from as many sources as I add here, sorts the posts by the date published, filters out any duplicate titles, and then merges all the information into one RSS feed. Writer River then displays this RSS feed on its home page. When you subscribe to the Writer River [RSS feed](http://feeds.feedburner.com/writerriverall) (or when you subscribe to Writer River's [email delivery](http://www.feedburner.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=2089410&loc=en_US) or [Twitter updates](https://twitter.com/writerriver)), you're also subscribing to this same Yahoo Pipes feed.

I'm convinced that human-assisted aggregation and filtering, with the help of such tools as Yahoo Pipes, is the trend for managing the deluge of information online. Since everyone is an author, publishing on separate sites, RSS is the only way to keep up. And people are publishing like mad, pushing out about [a million posts a day](https://idratherbewriting.com/2007/01/19/technorati-blogosphere-report-13-million-new-posts-per-day-so-what-are-people-writing-about/). 

Post titles are often hit and miss in terms of quality, so some human filtering is necessary. We need people to pick and choose the good content from the poor. People are naturally doing this all the time. I'm just trying to leverage those efforts in an effortless way to pull all of this good information into one running feed. This is what Writer River is all about. It attempts to gather all of this worthwhile content and help you find better information more quickly. If enough people participate, the quality of content flowing through Writer River could easily surpass the quality of any print publication.

Here's an example. I like [UXMatters](http://uxmatters.com/), but I missed the latest articles published on it because I have hundreds of feeds in my feedreader and I don't sit there watching feeds all day. However, [Alistair Christie](http://itauthor.com) saw an interesting [UX Matters article by Mike Hughes](http://www.uxmatters.com/mt/archives/2008/11/pdf-manuals-the-wrong-paradigm-for-an-online-experience.php) and posted briefly about it in his [What I'm Reading category](http://www.itauthor.com/category/what-i-am-reading/). I saw it on Writer River because Alistair told me about his What I'm Reading feed, and I added it to the Yahoo Pipe that's feeding Writer River. I [checked out the article](https://idratherbewriting.com/2009/06/28/pdf-manuals-the-wrong-paradigm-for-an-online-experience-uxmatters/) tonight and immediately felt it was a valuable post. Without this human filtering and aggregation, I would have missed the post.

Now imagine if not just one or two people submitted similar What I'm Reading or What I'm Bookmarking feeds to Writer River, but dozens, even 100 people. It would be like having [100 researchers](https://idratherbewriting.com/2007/03/13/the-evolutionary-strategy-of-web-20--its-like-having-100-personal-researchers-working-for-you/) scouring the Internet for you, looking for the best posts available.

Here's a little more math. Let's say on average, the 100 researchers post one article a day to their What I'm Reading feed -- one article a day they feel is worthwhile. In one month, that would be 3,000 articles.