Oh, +1 for something along the lines of @Patrick Cox's idea! :)

I think it would be useful if the "Follow this paper" gave access to some sort of discussion forum where all those who are Following the paper are able to have a discussion. It could look similar to the Questions and their answers that are posted to specific research interests. Comments on the paper would automatically post to everyone who is following the paper, author included.

But as I said earlier, I find it hard to believe folks at Academia.edu are reading this. I'd love to be wrong, though!

Hey, that thing really doesn't make sense, when you think of it.
http://www.bestelectricshaversreviews.info

Yeah, I also think it's kind of nonsensical. Good point.

http://www.bestelectricsnowblowersreviews.com

I really recommand others to Follow a paper. Ive Read this button is still being missed by me.
http://www.Ticketbots.net

I "Follow" papers I want to eventually read and "unfollow" them once I've read them. I'd rather there be an option for "Would like to read" though, as I don't really consider myself "following" these works that I've never read.

By the way, I don't get the sense anyone at academia.edu is reading these. Nothing here seems to change. Some ideas were marked as "planned" quite a long time ago and they still have not been implemented.

Thanks for sharing this great information. I really enjoyed reading about this,and I'm going to let other people know about this as well.
<a href ="http://ipad3dev.com/">ipad 3</a>

Thanks for sharing this great information. I really enjoyed reading about this,and I'm going to let other people know about this as well.
<a href ="http://ipad3dev.com/">ipad 3</a>

Yes I myself do think they same.. I`ve read this button shouldnt be removed.
http://iphoneappdevelopmentservices.com

Yeah it would annoying to see papers already checked.

"Have read" alongside "Would like to read" would be good -- perhaps the latter would even encourage more availability of freely accessible papers! :) I think the trick with a rating system would be that ensuring consistent use across a very wide population of readers with very different interests and approaches. Would someone rate a paper low because they disagreed, weren't interested, thought it was badly written, just didn't like the author, etc. & etc.? Moreover, what would the function be? What should we expect an author to learn from the fact that a given paper was rated either high or low? (Given the many different reasons readers might assign a given rating, it would be hard to tell!) But I do wonder if there could be a "Comments" feature -- at the very least for working papers. It would be useful to make it easy for readers to leave "I like the way you said X ...", "I disagree with you point about Y because ...", "Have you considered Z ...?", etc.

Well, I'll add a dissenting opinion here. At first, I had the same reaction and I still feel like "follow" may not be the most helpful term (though it is consistent with "following" a person's work, or a research interest, etc.). I feel that it is helpful to allow more options than to say "I've read this." There are many papers and books that are on my radar and that I would like to read, or it is on an extensive topical bibliography that has some interest to me, or perhaps have no time to read but I recognize the significance of it, or I have read a few reviews of it but not the actual book, etc. Perhaps we might advocate a means by which multiple options are offered, at least something like these two options: "I've read this" and "I want to read this." More options might be helpful too -- perhaps eventually a commenting system. A rating system for papers and books might be nice, though that could be a little scary.

I like Carl Anderson's suggestion for adding a category for working papers that may change and can be followed; agree with the rest about how silly it is to follow something published, and wonder why something as straightforward as "read this" shold have disappeared.

Most of all, though, I wish someone from Academia.edu would at least acknowledge this and explain the thinking behind the change we all seem to dislike.

I totally agree.

I agree. I've emailed academia directly and no response! I've used the "I've read this button" to foster paper discussions among colleagues, but "following" a paper seems to have reduced that potential.

I totally agree, JW. I see no logic to this change, and as you say, clicking on the "I've read this button" conveyed useful information. This is a very annoying change, being vacuous and ill-thought out, in my opinion.

I still don't know what the idea behind changing this function into "following" was in the first place, but it's still there and still not making that much sense. I noticed that a lot of users are unsatisfied with this. In addition, it's lowering the quality and transparence of academic interaction, in my opinion. To follow a paper merely means that someone is in some regard interested in it and it's topic. So isn't that actually the same like having a certian research interest, what we already do have a section for? After all, there is a difference between being interested in something or actually aware of the contents of a particular paper or book. So it doesn't tell me anything new about a person I'm following, if he/she clicked the "follow"-button, whereas it indeed created a basis of academic discussion and awareness of the other members actions, when we had the "I've-read-this"-button. In my opinion, this part of the information shared at academia.edu became a rather nebulous and meaningless branch. There could definitely be some improvement done here.

I too find the ""follow a paper illogical. I miss the "I've read this" button.

Well, I suppose a "working paper" (as opposed to a published paper) might well change. Books might also come out in new editions -- though, admittedly, not every day .... ;)

Perhaps in addition to "Talks", "Papers", and "Books", there could be a seperate "Working Papers" category -- specifically for papers that ARE expected to change (until they should become "[Published] Papers", anyway ...)?

I completely agree with JW. I find "follow" a paper illogical whereas the "I've read this" button was sensible and transparent. I don't see how this change can be regarded as any kind of improvement.