17 Comments

  1. Mike Perlman

    Google hates aggregation (obviously).

    Reply
  2. Handy Rev

    Some great ideas here… Too bad it links to a site that only allows either Facebook or Twitter to sign up and comment / take part in any discussion. That sort of defeats the purpose of WordPress, doesn’t it? Only allow those willing to sacrifice privacy / individual preferences for the “lemming” crowd?

    Will be glad to lurk around and learn a thing or two, but wow… Now we’ve seen the future where the WP community just sells out to Facebook? No thanks…

    Reply
  3. John Blackbourn

    Why on earth did they call it ManageWP.org when their web service is called ManageWP.com? Do they not know of the confusion that exists around WordPress.org and WordPress.com?

    Reply

  4. @Handy Rev: Actually the reason is practical and that is fighting spam. Sites like these are exposed to thousands of spammers and we want our content to stay clean and curated. Banning a Facebook or Twitter account is much more effective than banning an email address (which is produced much more quickly).

    @John: It never confused me and actually made sense for the non-commercial site to be .org following that example

    Reply

  5. @Vladimir: Of course it makes sense for the non-commercial site to be .org, but I guess what John meant was that it doesn´t make so much sense to call it ManageWP. For instance, we all know that Torque is a WP Engine publication, even though it´s not called wpengine.org, which no doubt would be a bit confusing.

    It may look quite appealing to use your commercial brand for the non-commercial site as well, but I guess it will take its toll at the end.

    IMHO calling your new site WPManage.org could even be more confusing for some people than the WordPress case, where the .org site offers the free and open software used by the commercial site: In your case the .org site does not offer a free version of what is sold in your .com site, but general WP news.

    That said, I really welcome your new site Vladimir, I thank you for creating it and I´m pretty sure I´ll become one of your regulars.

    Reply

  6. @Vladimir Prelovac -

    @Handy Rev: Actually the reason is practical and that is fighting spam. Sites like these are exposed to thousands of spammers and we want our content to stay clean and curated. Banning a Facebook or Twitter account is much more effective than banning an email address (which is produced much more quickly).

    The Facebook/Twitter requirement is exactly the reason I don’t comment on WPMU.org blog posts. Sorry. I’m not connecting my Facebook account to anything (because Facebook can’t be trusted with my privacy), and I don’t connect my Twitter account to anything I don’t control.

    Reply

  7. @Chip Bennett – Totally understandable, and it is a shame that the power of few (spammer) are controlling what we can do, but that’s true. If we open it to email registrations it would become a spam fest in days.

    @Luis ManageWP.org also offers free service that we want to become open source as well. I do not see why it needs to necessarily offer the same service offered by .com (WordPress did not make that standard, its just the way it is). I felt ManageWP.org sounded good too, and would not mind calling this service in such way even if there was no ManageWP.com. Service on .org still help you manage your sites in a way (improve them etc) so ManageWP.org seems reasonable as well. And I wouldn’t mind wpengine.org magazine but I guess they wanted to distance their brand more.

    Reply

  8. Using .org is very odd IMO. I think a sub-domain of the .com would make a lot more sense.

    Reply

  9. After WPVote, I was waiting for an active community for WordPress, and ManageWP is doing it right…

    Reply

  10. I really like this idea. I just can’t get past the name, though. It has nothing to do with the content of the site. Why not something like “wpnews.com by ManageWP”. Easier to remember, represents the content and still gives the ManageWP brand a deserved boost.

    Easier to change it now than later. :)

    Reply



  11. I really like the overall concept and the ability to filter by type, but you only feature the one most recent post from each blog. I think it would be much more useful if you featured three or five of the most recent posts. After all, some of those authors publish more than once a day.

    Reply

  12. thanks for the sharing..as after WPVote, I was waiting for an active community for WordPress, and ManageWP is doing it right…!!!

    Reply

  13. After WPVote, I was waiting for an active community for WordPress, and ManageWP is doing it right…thanks…!!

    Reply

  14. I think it would be much more useful if you featured three or five of the most recent posts. After all, some of those authors publish more than once a day.thanks…!!

    Reply

Leave a Reply