Practical guide
Curate a high-signal source list
Curate for contribution, not reputation alone. Read recent work, identify evidence role and incentives, compare overlap, and keep a source only when its marginal value justifies the attention.[1][2]
Why this gets difficult
Source curation is often treated as finding more good publications. The harder task is building a set whose members have distinct jobs and whose combined blind spots are visible.[1][2]
A practical way through
- Define the reader question and the evidence roles needed to answer it.[1][2]
- Review recent items for authorship, method, primary sourcing, and corrections.[1][2]
- Compare each candidate with the existing set for duplication and blind spots.[1][2]
- Trial the source, then keep, rotate, or remove it based on actual contribution.[1][2]
An example
The situation: A technology reader considers adding a popular newsletter that largely restates vendor announcements already received directly.[1][2]
What changes: Recent issues are compared with first-party documentation and current specialists for original evidence and interpretation.[1][2]
What you get: The source is kept only if it adds tested implications or a distinct audience perspective.[1][2]
What to watch for
Sources worth keeping
How Scottie helps
Scottie can show which chosen sources repeatedly add something useful and which are usually redundant.[3]