One of my biggest problems with Google Reader is those annoying unread counts. It makes it feel like email you have to get through ... so I quit Google Reader about a year ago, and started using Twitter as my new "Feed Reader". A stream you can check out when you want, and ignore when you don't want, is really nice. Plus, it's easier to whip through 140-character blurbs than paragraphs of text.
I keep pruning, but I haven't been able to get away, partly because I read things that never show up anywhere else, plus it's still the most efficient mechanism of consuming information, at least for me, since you can crunch through full text posts in one location. That said, other sources, notably Friendfeed and aggregators have resulted in the removal of all feeds where the good stories end up bubbling to the top there.
This logic makes no sense to me. To me the whole point of a feed reader is to not miss items. So you're saying you went to Twitter so you could "ignore it when you don't want" but that means you never needed a feed reader in the first place.
I mean, if you don't care about missing important items and Twitter works for you that's great. But to me it doesn't solve the problem feed readers are trying to solve.
I don't think that's the original problem at all. the original problem was simply aggregating a bunch of feeds into one page. I use my feed reader a lot and have no problems with using the "mark all as read" button every so often.
