I'd say "more interaction with the guest while letting him/her finish thoughts" but that would sound self-serving.

I'd like to see a picture of the community manager, that handsome devil, incorporated into your logo.

Kidding side, I will make a suggestion that may not be feasible, but might be interesting. I'd like to hear what the community has to say about major stories du jour, even staff and editor articles. A "the tables have turned" type of thing. I envision such a segment would have a few community people each time to keep it fresh because that is the "community" angle of the idea, but I am sure that would be a logistics nightmare.

Either way, keep up the good work.

I'd love for you guys to get back to highlighting articles that slipped through the cracks. When I was on toward the beginning, you specifically told me to pick out a community article that hadn't gotten front paged or put in a spotlight if at all possible, and Brett acted a little annoyed that the article he had picked out had been front paged a short time before we recorded. As of recently, though, almost every single article you guys discuss had been on the front page before you recorded.

Just a thought, as the Bitmob community has grown a lot recently, and that means there are a lot more solidly written articles getting posted without any notice. It meant a lot to me when you guys talked about one of my articles on one of the first few shows, and I'm sure it'd also help encourage other writers that might have gotten overlooked to keep writing because, at the very least, they've managed to spark up a good conversation.

I think what would help the show if idiot guests (me) did not screw up the recording.

I'm really sorry guys! 

As towards the question at hand, I agree with Michael, Andrew and Alex, and would add:

-Remind the community of upcoming/ongoing events, such as the Jukebox, Book Club, or writing challenges

-Make a section called "What you've been reading?" because it sounds really good and that can be where Bitmob posts are highlighted

-have not just one, but two guests at once, like you did with Brian and Mark. But the difference is the two guests must be in the same room. So for instance, Mike and AJ could be guests together, James DeRosa or Aaron Rivers/Harold Brunett and so forth. 

-More hornballs, ostriches, beard talk, and the like.

-MORE JEFF, BRETT AND DEREK!!!!!

I think you should just give that cool guy who always calls in his own ten minutes of every episode to rant on whatever he feels like.

I wish I could remember his name... I think it was something like Hank Henderson.

Seriously though, going to Alex's post- I have to say that on the episode I was on all the articles we discussed had not been front paged at the time we talked about them.  It was only in the interveening days and the days directly after that all the articles we discussed got front paged.

On other words the problem might be that we are all too hella good at picking out pieces that is the problem, not that we are just picking front page pieces!

I liked that suggestion about me.

I'm wary of Lance's restrictive "guest duos".  I would assume that a majority of the people on this site aren't close friends with - much less live close to - other Bitmob members.  However, while it might be a Skype nightmare, I would certainly be all for a second guest on the show; five people on a podcast is a solid maximum.

Mike R's point may sound a bit selfish coming from the guest's point of view, but I think it actually has some merit.  Have the guest be more involved in the show.  It seems like in every podcast with "three guys and a guest" the three guys do 90% of the talking while the guest only occasionally chimes in if addressed.  Now, yes, this can partly be the fault of the guest resulting from his or her shyness or unwillingness to assert his or herself into the discussion, but I feel like the guest always takes an unfortunate backseat to Derek, Jeff, and Brett.

One simple way to get the guest more involved and familiar with you guys and the community would be a more lengthy introduction.  All we usually get is the guest's name at the beginning of the show, and then his or her Twitter handle at the end of show.  That's great, but how about the guest's age, location, where they're going or went to school, career dreams, what types of games do you like to play, "What 'cha been playin'?" (I wouldn't go as far to say that you all need to go around the horn to relay what you've been playing, as that would eat up a lot of time [though I'm interested], but I'd at least like to know what our guests' interests are).

I agree with Mr. Rousseau and Mr. Glynn. I know it can be difficult, but more guest interaction is critical. We get to know all about the three of you since you are on every episode, but we hear very little about the guest. Chances are they'll get one or two opportunites at most to be on the podcast, it's important you make those opportunities count.

I really enjoy the show in its current state. I'd be wary about emphasizing certain kinds of articles over others. If something catches your eye and it's on the front page, I say talk about it.

I suppose an emphasis on guests could be made. Maybe dedicate some time at the start to just addressing who he or she is and why you chose him or her. Perhaps even touch upon some of his/her work on the site - or elsewhere?

I think the show would be much better in 3D. But not the kind of 3D where I need glasses, the magical kind of 3D that Nintendo has done with the 3DS.

More Mike Minotti.

...and Grubb needs to be way more sauced.

I also like the idea of having people come on to discuss their own articles. Why they wrote them, what gave them the idea, and the meat of the topic at hand like you normally do. You could also maybe bring multiple guests on that wrote articles with opposing viewpoints to have a good old fashioned debate/discussion about the topic they wrote about and really get some back and forth going to help dissect a topic.