So i thought about just posting a comment to the comment on a previous blog entry in order to clear things up after i discovered it was actually user error causing the weird behavior i attributed to feedburner. it turns out we had some templates set up wrong….
the reason i am putting the clarification front and center instead was that the throwaway comment generated a near instantaneous offer to help from the feedburner team. no trouble ticket in sight.
“Anything we can help with? We’re all about nipping wierd FeedBurner behavior in the bud, should it arise.”
thanks Matt! Why is this episode signficant? Because it looks to me like an example of architecture of participation, and feedburner is evidently living it. The tecosystems side of the RedMonk pond has been blogging on related issues of support and rate of innovation. But the fact i got an offer of tech support without even directly addressing the provider in question is very cool and somewhat counterintuitive. Now it may be that the furl and bloglines and feedburner companies are small enough that they can still give ad hoc help to their customers. Bigger software companies tend to have a lot more process involved, and perhaps too many customers to touch directly. Even if that is the case, doesn’t this say something about advantages of richness and diversity and customer choice? Economies of scale? What about the downside….
It seems there is something else at work – related to architecture of participation – that is culture of participation. The two are clearly related. here is a question to ask yourself: Am I open source?
Its maybe a question of attitude, not technology platform. As it is we found the issue ourselves. Hats off again though to the feedburner team for listening and offering to help.