Friday, April 06, 2007

twenty thousand

So visitor #20,000 dropped by earlier this morning. Ok, that's not precisely true; visitor #20,000 dropped by SNR, this blog's nerdy and obsessive sibling, earlier this morning. But I use the same hit counter for both, just to simplify things... well, and because it makes the numbers scroll by a little faster that way, to be honest.

In my most recent metablog (i.e. blogging about blogging) post, I'd just gone back over old posts and attached "labels" to them. Which is a nice feature, but it's had a couple of odd side effects. First, Google went and indexed the resulting label pages, producing the same "junk hit" effect I've seen since they started indexing monthly archive pages. You search for two keywords, and end up on one of my label or archive pages, but one keyword occurs in a post from last month, and the other in an unrelated post a year earlier, and both are way down the page so you'll really have to search to find either. People typically don't bother with that, and I can't blame them. Google owns Blogger, so you'd think they'd have a clue about which pages are worth indexing and which aren't. Oh, well. I probably shouldn't take it personally.

The other odd thing is that when I added all those labels, Blogger sent me a ton of visitors who happened to be using the Next Blog button or otherwise wandering around Blogger's corner of blogospace at the time. I don't know if that was supposed to be my reward for using the new feature, or what. Back in the day, I used to be rather interested in where visitors arrived from, and the pseudorandom nature of how they got here, and I used to post "referrer" lists fairly regulary. Eventually I got bored with that and moved on to even less interesting things. But this time around there was just so much data and it seemed a shame not to do anything with it. It's not quite a statistical sample of the blog universe, but hey. It's the data I have in hand, and here it is. I've weeded out a couple of splogs, but I haven't gone down the list and screened each blog or anything, because that would take a lot of time, and the resulting list wouldn't be very random, would it? So if you see something here that you don't like, well, that's the interwebs for ya. Just deal with it.

So without further ado, here's the list. Three (or so) cheers for pseudorandomness.....


Tish said...

Thanks for the link! ;)

Marg Choco said...

Thanks for linking to my site~! ;D

doctor chip said...

I just happened across this while doing a little meta-research of my own.
if you would like a bit more insight to the bastards at blogger, click HERE. it's a full-page write-up on how some of the stuff at blogger interacts. I think you'll find it interesting.


-- doctor chip