Aggregator used in a sentence

Aggregator in a sentence as a noun

Every site wants to be the aggregator, no-one wants to be aggregated. This is what we can't have good things.

"There's a site on the internet called Reddit, which is an aggregator of links with a large community, and I posted there to see&;&." No.

Didn't redirect to some shitty feed aggregator that throws out partial pages so you have to click through to a page stuffed with ads and tracking to get the full content. 3.

Apparently the only reason for Google to support RSS was that they had their own RSS aggregator. Classy move.

I hope it continues to feel this way, lest it really turn into a shitty link aggregator that you so wish it were.

I'm assuming it's the "demographic of people who know how to make a blog post and submit it to a popular news aggregator". But that's just my read of the comment.

RSS aggregators were also getting the "everything's fine" message. I thought I had a bug in my aggregator until I went to the site and realized it was down.

One man's "scrapper" is another man's "aggregator". How do you think Google would view my site if I wrapped Wikipedia's content, with back link and ran my own ads alongside that content?

I've just installed Firefox on all my home computers and my phone, for the first time since Chrome came out, and will be looking for a new RSS aggregator.

I remember that wonderful day in 2007 when I noticed that there was a little news aggregator bodged onto the back end of Paul Graham's essay blog and I thought to myself "wow, this is like /. only it doesn't suck so much".

The irony is that this news aggregator is being denied, yet someone could make a game called "Drone Wars" where you operate a drone on missions and Apple would have no problem with it.

Hmm, an aggregator of business-crippling 50+% off coupons directed squarely at one-time-use, entitled penny-pinchers is not doing well after they've run through most of the gullible small businesses in the US? Go figure.

Samsung's reputation is probably largely undamaged, other than among people who just read the headlines on news aggregator sites. Even searching for 'Samsung Key Logger' pulls up mostly articles about the false alarm situation.

Yelp is notorious for a corrupt and indeed outright criminal aggregating principle -- "we'll suppress bad reviews if you pay us and good reviews if you don't" -- but the same is true for any aggregator, whether they're aggregating based on good principles or bad, because aggregation is a form of authorship. I mean look at Hacker News vs Reddit vs Digg vs Slashdot.

My dream startup would be a Reddit-esque link aggregator, which favors the actual quality of submissions, instead of submissions which are lowest-common-denominator which are optimized for the hive mind.

When the title changes, it drastically changes the character of the discussion: while this website is also a link aggregator, I know of very few people who believe that that is its value; instead, people like Hacker News because of the comments: it is a discussion forum. You can't just change the title of the discussion forum while people are actively discussing things without causing a catastrophic situation.

The closest I think I've seen any site come to this is Tumblr, because it both allows for uniquely designed blogs and a central aggregator, but Tumblr is so bad at conversation that it makes holding lengthy conversations ugly and frustrating. The theoretical solution to this would be to let users define their own centers: give them controls for looking at information in a unique way of their choosing.