Ok - it was actually just Dirt, but she had good reason to ask since her link was in "last" place. To clarify: the previous "link order" was based on the posting frequency of the guys. The girls were then listed with their significant other. This was done to increase the effectiveness of my links - the idea being that the higher up the list you clicked the more likely you were to get a "fresh" post.
For example:
* DUST posted the most, so he and GOLD were at the top of the list
* FUND posted the least, so my alter ego and Dirt were dropped to the bottom.
To increase the equity of link ranking, I have removed the couples connection; ranking the list in tru post order. For those of you that were wondering, I've posted June's data below:
June 2005 Blogging Data
| BLOGGER | POSTS | CMNTS | C/P |
DUST
16
123
7.69
DIRT
13
78
6.00
AFOR
12
55
4.58
GOLD
11
60
5.45
BLAC
10
29
2.90
DASH
9
64
7.11
DARW
7
37
5.29
ROAM
5
25
5.00
ACHT
2
12
6.00
VERN
2
15
15.00
FUND
1
15
12.00
18 comments:
dang - a C+
What's with the title though?
Are you trying to compete with G.W. and the Presidential speeches that interrupt regular programming?
How is my average running now? LOL! =D
Thanks for NOT discriminating against us "single" folk!! (and that is a real comment)
Your data is incorrect. Please make the proper corrections and repost your blog.
Thanks for catching my error.... and providing the comment average to 2 decimal places.
that's precision teamwork.
But did you factor in the +/- of today's comments added to your blog (before your recalc)? My average should have increased, whether or not it moved me up in the rankings...lol! J/K!
It is # of comments on your blog site, not that you have commented. Also---Today is July 1st so it would not be calc. in June's numbers!:)
Yes T is correct. I waited until the first so I could use an entire months worth of data. Also not cared for in the analysis are:
* multiple comments from the same reader
* multiple personalities aka clearing
* your own comments to other bloggers were not factored in, neither were your own comments on your own posts factored out
* spam posts from outside the group
Wow. Had no idea that I was that far down the list. Perhaps something will happen in my life soon that I will feel compelled to post prolifically. Perhaps.
Glad you didn't do a quality chart!
I didn't even make the list. Like Roamer, I better get more prolific.
Doc,
I am so sorry for not including you in the chart, I'll be adding you to my links shortly...of course I'll have to rank your postings to know where to add the link. Then I will once again correct my incorrect post!
And I took the easy way out and sorted alphabetically. I am almost always happy to see myself at the top of a list. Let's see if it continues or if T or Forrest pick it up a notch (BAM!).
Doc,
I've added you to the links list based on your June posts.
7 Post
28 Comments
4.0 C/P
Can you also do a study to find the average time and medium time of the posts. I would tend to think that my new posts are around 1:00 and that dust are around 8:30ish. Do a study, let me know the results.
Be happy to forrest. Let's set up a project charter immediately and define the scope for success .. we should also discuss the small matter of my fee.
how much did you get paid for your first study?
Post a Comment