The "Featured Updates" feed is a pretty cool feature for WFG. Basically if you include your RSS feed in your entry and you get put on that list, when you update you show up on the feed. When I was publishing Pay Me, Bug!, I got visitors every time I updated from WFG specifically because of that feed.
Featured Updates does what it's supposed to do and I don't think it should be changed. But I wondered what it would look like if there was a page on the site that tracked EVERY update for EVERY listing on the site. This is NOT something that should go on the front page (the front page should be reserved for new, featured, and reviewed listings--any more than that and it would get too cluttered to read) but a dedicated page of its own... it would be interesting to be able to see how active the serial writing is, and see who is busy updating and who isn't. That list might encourage a little more exploration, because people would be able to see "oh, ok, this serial updated last week."
It might even be possible to get a little more complicated with it. What if there was a "recent updates" page that:
- listed every serial (that it can detect, I guess via the RSS feeds) that has updated, in order of update date, starting with the most recent.
- can track and display the dates of the last four or five updates
- gives the star rating (or no-rating) of serial
- lists how many reviews (or no reviews) of serial
So if someone sees a serial with four and half stars, 10 reviews, and notes that it's updated four or five times in the last two weeks, the reader might have some assurance that it's being actively maintained, and therefore worth the risk. Or they might want to try something new, and look specifically for serials with no reviews but have a track record of reliable updates.
Or it might reveal that there are only 8 or 9 stories that update with any regularity, and we'll all get depressed. But I don't know, I think it could be an interesting feature. The questions are "how difficult is it to implement," "how difficult would it be to maintain," and "does Chris even have time to consider it?" Which are all valid questions. I just thought it might a nifty new thing to think about, and it's potentially a new feature that doesn't require a lot of maintenance once it's up and running, which would fit in with Chris' stated desire to make the site a little less hands-on.