Open Thread

Here’s an open thread to talk about anything.

And – a request from me for information. It appears that from the facts Charles is providing, LGF gets at most about 12% of its traffic as hits on its home page. I.e. if he reports 100,000 views in a day, then it appears that 88,000+ of them have to be ‘deep links’, i.e. hits to pages other than the LGF home page.

Does this seem reasonable? If that 12% number is true, shouldn’t the referer [sic] logs that he publishes reflect that?

TIA for any input.


130 Comments on “Open Thread”

  1. Banshee's Banned Ghost says:

    Only if you tell me what that graf is all about.

  2. Lord Nazh says:

    It should probably be the other way (ie. 12% of deep link traffic and 88% to the front page) since the front page loads 9-10 views at each session

  3. When you guys busted Charles for the faulty view counter then when he finally admitted it and fixed the “bug” (a.k.a programming fuckup) his daily counts dropped as you would expect.

    A few days later his counts were back up to the same levels. His counters are not functioning as per industry standard. That is to say what he counts as views and visits is not what most sites count.

    Without his raw server logs we cannot begin to understand what he is counting.

    • nils says:

      Yes, I thought that was remarkable. There’s a bug in his CSS that causes the most widely used browser on the web to bump his page counts by a factor of 800%, and yet fixing the bug has no discernible affect on his DIY page view counter. Seems odd.

  4. Emperor says:

    Regarding the question, it’s believable, at least in recent weeks. Most of his hits, I’d say, come not from regular readers, but from people following links in – he’s gotten a ton of hits from Twitter recently from those two bogus articles on the Paul Revere Wikipedia article and Andrew Breitbart, respectively, and I’m sure he’s also gotten a lot of hits from people sending around links like, “Read this joke of an article, how pathetic is this?”

    As for the referrer logs published by him, I wouldn’t believe them.

  5. Gateway/Jim Hoft, Breitbart, Patterico, to mention a few have been directly linking to LGF in the past couple of weeks, sites that I read and comment at frequently. The only reason I’ve been clicking over to LGF is to watch the meltdown in progress.

    And why would anyone believe anything with regards to Chunk and his more than likely manufactured traffic numbers?

    • nils says:

      I’m skeptical of his numbers for several reasons. Zip of Weaselzippers has, more than once, linked to a Blog-Ads page that rates LGF at around 35k page views per day (IIRC) vs. Johnson’s published 100k views per day. The fact that Johnson dumped all counters but his own is suspicious. And, the extra bumps that we’ve documented that were inflating LGF views counts weren’t limited to just IE8, even though that’s all Johnson ‘fixed’.

      So I don’t believe his numbers, but all I can demonstrate is the 12% max for his front page hits. And this is not just recently – it’s been 12% max for months, as long as we’ve been tracking it…

  6. Lord Nazh says:

    nils :
    He’s gone from 10 to 12 to 15 to 20 front page articles, and – amazingly – his stats are also going up.
    Hmmmm.

    If you can’t get readership up; get the numbers up 🙂

  7. Banshee's Banned Ghost says:

    He’s the worst liar I’ve ever seen.

  8. mrpaulrevere says:

    Submitted without comment: AndrewBreitbartAndrewBreitbart

    @

    Having a bad ponytail day, Jazzy? Lots and lots of people noticed how, again, you lied & lied in order to prove I’m the ‘fraud’. @Lizardoid

  9. Odd little time out.

  10. Takes one to know one.

    • nils says:

      Are you a bot?

      • I think it is someone who registered at wordpress to be able to post here.

        This new system is confusing, it is not obvious registration is not required.

        Hi Fob!

      • nils says:

        I agree it’s not obvious. I’m totally not clear about it. I.e. I’ve never registered that I know of. I just put in an email and a name.

      • ISTE says:

        nils :
        I agree it’s not obvious. I’m totally not clear about it. I.e. I’ve never registered that I know of. I just put in an email and a name.

        You have to be more careful now. I still use the same e-mail (so gravatar shows my avatar) and name but when I first posted with the new format it added a URL which it found by looking up my E-mail address!

        That is why I now force a URL in the URL box.

  11. mrpaulrevere says:

    I saw on CJ’s twitter feed the other day that he claimed to be a ‘championship high school debater’ which I will stipulate to for the sake of arguement. I was also a championship debater in high school so I feel free to critique his game, if you will. High School debates are all about evidence, reason and logic. They are not about throwing around perjoritives like ‘wingnut’, etc.. In reality he is a very, very poor debater. If you want to see a real debater, go to youtube and enter Wm. F. Buckley.

  12. garycooper says:

    GO MAVS!!

    Just finish these dynastic fuxsters, now.

    • Go Bulls………Oh wait……

    • snowcrash says:

      WooHoo Dallas Mavs NBA Champs. In 6 games. Nils called it!

      • Dallas and Cleveland rejoice!!

      • Calo says:

        Dirk!!! 🙂

      • garycooper says:

        How satisfying was that? Damn, that was beautiful. Couldn’t be happier for Dirk and J-Kidd, those guys have really suffered for it. When I saw the clip earlier with Wade and James mocking Nowitzki’s illness by coughing and laughing behind their mitts, it really angered me, partly because I’ve been “playing sick” for the past few days, and partly because they’re both losers and choke-artists who have nerve making fun of anyone until they win something. Just a sweet, sweet outcome. And congrats to anyone here who’s a Mavs-fan, if any such exist. I’m a big Detroit homer in every sport, mostly hockey, but I follow them all through thick and thin.

        Btw, Go Bruins… Win in 7!

  13. swamprat says:

    He’s got 300(?) commenters posting 7-15k comments a week. Except for the soapopera attraction, and the same type of morbid curiosity that makes people look at trainwrecks, why would anyone bother?

    Huffpo and Kos are now more reasonable. His “news” and “insight” can be found at any of the leftwing partisan sites or atheists’ forums.

    I no longer see the site as informative.

    There is no true debate over there. There are no unique insights. There is no cutting edge news. There is no international data and news aggragation.

    All they have is conservative baiting and leftwing patronization.

    Oh yeah, also, the occasional unintentioned (and unacknowledged) self-beclownment.

    But i still look.

    • Banshee's Banned Ghost says:

      Well, it’s actually exactly as informative as it always was. Just that the obsessions have changed.

      Whereas before it was “look at the idiocy of this moonbat/Islamofascist/Euroweenie/ISM asshole” it’s now “look at the lunacy of this wingnut/creationist/Ameriweenie/AGW denier”.

      For those who were worried about/concerned over/amused by the former set, it was very “informative” and a starting point for much discussion. Ditto for people who are terrified of losing their abortion-on-demand rights and having to tolerate people who don’t “believe” in evolution.

    • swamprat says:

      They’ll find something if they have to cut and sew content from several emails together like those ransom notes pasted out of letters cut out of a magazine.

      ….word sent in email on thursday…
      I

      …..word sent friday…

      hate

      …word sent on tuesday

      America

      See! See! This is what she really thinks!

      word counts

      she used the word “I” so many times

      mis-spellings

      grammar

      You haven’t seen the begining… and you might not unless she runs. They won’t show their hand for the good stuff.

  14. mrpaulrevere says:

    Banshee’s Banned Ghost :
    I still want to know what a “non-sequitar” is…

    My spelling was off, whatever: Non sequitur (pronounced /nɒnˈsɛkwɪtər/) is Latin for “it does not follow.” It is most often used as a noun to describe illogical statements.

  15. mrpaulrevere :
    Hitchens was a very compelling media personality. As a factual debater, not so much.

    I’ve been out of the country for a month and just got back, did Hitch die?

  16. mrpaulrevere says:

    Banshee’s Banned Ghost :
    Maybe. I thought he did a number on Galloway, myself.

    Yeah sure, I remember that now that you mention it. Even when I thought Hitchens was whacked out I had an odd admiration for him.

  17. swamprat says:

    This is fun, guys, but it doesn’t rewire the kitchen.

  18. ElSuerte says:

    I just want to know why “”david brotsky” location manager” is a top ten search querie for LGF.

    Makes no sense to me.

  19. mrpaulrevere says:

    Have a good week all…good luck with the kitchen swamprat.

  20. ElSuerte :

    mrpaulrevere :
    If you want to see a real debater, go to youtube and enter Wm. F. Buckley.

    Didn’t Buckley call Vidal a queer and sock him in the face on TV?

    Here’s the video
    http://www.poetv.com/video.php?vid=31833

  21. ISpeakJive says:

    You mean like, Shrieking Harpy?

  22. Re: Latest LGF article.

    And interesting subject: The evolution of what is considered to be a “Moronic Convergence” at LGF.

    In 2011, it is “anti-Muslim bigots” and other right wingers.

    But in 2007, it was “leftists and Islamists”

    littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=25063_The_Islamist-Leftist_Convergence

    • garycooper says:

      Thanks for pointing that out and providing the links to nail it down. I’ve commented on that idiocy a few times over the past few months, just in keeping with the wild-180 that Crazy Bugfuck Johnson has been on about, but it’s nice to see it illustrated so succinctly.

      We have always been at war with Eastasia.

  23. YankintheEU says:

    Hitchens as a debater is a bit of a mixed bag.

    On the one hand, he performed an admittedly fabulous role in the run-up to the Iraq war by making the case for the exact positions President Bush should have been making but was regrettably too inept. Granted, if you read the content of his speeches afterwards, his reasoning is decidedly unmemorable. It’s mainly facts lined up in a good rhetorical manner without much of a connecting logical argument. He gained much of his effectiveness as a debater by being able to appear as a hostile witness towards the right. That befuddled a lot of the media and the effect was quite amusing, at least in my opinion.

    On the other hand, when he debates anything to do with religion, it is never long before his intense antagonism to very idea of faith in God takes over. He routinely spouts the most insulting stereotypes towards Catholics, Evangelicals, etc., and uses particular cases of supposedly evil religious figures (e.g. Mother Teresa) to demonstrate, Charles Johnson style, the harmful effects of belief in God and traditional moral values. At least he is intellectually honest, unlike Johnson, in that he is still willing to admit that militant Islam is a serious threat, whereas the vast majority of Christians are at worst a threat to exercise their democratic rights on behalf of a socially conservative agenda.

    In any case, Hitch has a great sense for the drama and the sing-song back and forth of massive-scale public debating. He can use this medium well to come off as an cool intellectual, particularly at the moment when his opponent begins to rant. That’s a what a smart debater does. He doesn’t appear to revel entirely in the shallowness of one-liner content, the quips and the pettiness involved, and yet is not unarmed in this kind of knife-fight. There are lessons to be learned from him, to be sure.

  24. Doppelganger says:

    If his blog is so popular, how come a dozen people make 50% of all the comments?

  25. ISTE says:

    I hope Dork_Falcon has lubed up with honey mustard because it looks like Charles Johnson is about to give him a lesson in humility.

    71 Charles
    Sun, Jun 12, 2011 8:42:17pm replyquote 3downupreport

    re: #50 Dork_Falcon

    By booting them you make clear that your organization will not tolerate their racism. No criminal action can be taken, as the 1st Amendment does protect that hateful cartoon from criminal liability, but imposing a major social cost on racism is one way to reduce it, or at least reduce its visibility.

    There’s a reason why these people are NOT being booted out of the GOP. It’s called the “Southern Strategy,” and it’s a deliberate appeal to the racist, ignorant base of voters on which the GOP relies. It’s been this way for decades.

    The party of reactionaries needs the reactionary voters. It’s that simple.

    [Waves to Dork_Falcon even though he can’t wave back]

    • Bunk X says:

      I’ll fiip him off on your behalf. *n!m*

    • ISTE says:

      I called that one right. Dork runs away to avoid being Charles Johnson’s Internet Chew Toy.

      80 Dark_Falcon
      Sun, Jun 12, 2011 8:46:25pm

      I’m not going to have any fun on this thread so I’m just going to clear out for the night.

      I’ll be back tomorrow. This is not a reflection on anyone here, since everyone but Frank has been entirely civil, and Frank has been entirely within bounds as well.

      At least Dork has the sense to run away. Just like a scared mouse….

      • ElSuerte says:

        proud mountain lion
        no room for debate, leaves at night
        why does Charles hit you?

      • Bunk X says:

        Lol @ “Internet Chew Toy.” Wasn’t that Breitbart’s twitter smackdown?

      • ISTE says:

        Yep Bunk, I stole it from Breitbart. Mr Andrew has some rough edges and sometimes the moral turpitude of a rabid tree snake, but he is funny.

        Like Barrett Brown only more mature.

      • Bunk X says:

        Heh. That’s just what we need here. More jargon. 😉

    • Nomad says:

      So why did you vote for the “party of reactionaries” in 2008 Chuck?

  26. ElSuerte says:

    This is wierd, Doing a little googling re David Brotsky and LGF.

    So far I can only find references to both on web site analytic sites. Also, it turns out those same sites have Dave Brotsky associated with isreallycool.com and debbieschlussel.com

    I’ve formulated three hypothosis (Hypothosi? Please help me, BBG!) to try and explain this:
    Either
    1) It’s some weird data artifact;
    2) He’s the Keyser Sozy of the wingnut stalkers;
    or
    3) David Brotsky is really Cato the Elder.

    • Lord Nazh says:

      Every time someone tries to figure out the why on that; it makes it more relevant 🙂

      • ElSuerte says:

        LMAO, it’s like quantum mechanics. You can’t study something without changing it.

      • ISTE says:

        ElSuerte :
        LMAO, it’s like quantum mechanics. You can’t study something without changing it.

        Yeah just like someone asking us “Why does he get so many page views” and we say, “hang on a minute while we go visit LGF and have a look”

    • ISTE says:

      I am doing a full search.

      I KNOW I have done this before, maybe in a dream.
      I think the real spelling has a ‘ in there. like David Br’otsky or David Bro’tsky

      • ElSuerte says:

        He’s Klingon? That might explain everything!

        Or nothing

      • ISTE says:

        I can put my hand on my heart and state that “david brotsky” does not exist in any shape or form at Little Green Footballs.

        Not even in a super sekrit private thread, if you know what I mean *wink*

  27. Banshee's Banned Ghost says:

    LGF stats:

    Daily ads revenue $16.87
    Yearly ads revenue $6,157.01
    Worth $19,702.44

    Lulz: Priceless

  28. puppy says:

    test