I’m Just Going to Leave This Here

What’s this? It’s the traffic graph for all the parts of Scalzi.com that are not part of the current iteration of Whatever, i.e., archives and other bits and pieces that continue to be linked into from around the Web and Internet. The part of the site you’re reading now (the current iteration of Whatever), has statistics information provided by WordPress and Google Analytics. Everything else has its stat information recorded by the 1&1 Site Analytics. There’s surprisingly little overlap in recording between the two stats packages. Last year the WordPress stats package recorded 7.57 million visits; the 1&1 stats package recorded 6.13 million. The former set of stats are mirrored inexactly by Google Analytics; the latter, not at all.

I note this because occasionally I see someone who is not me purport to speak with authority about how many visits the site gets. However, as the total universe of visits the site gets is not publicly accessible, if someone who is not me is making that claim, they literally do not know what they are talking about. Not because they are obtuse or dishonest (or at least not just), but simply because they don’t have all the information about the traffic coming into the site — the entire site.

(If am making the claim, mind you, I generally note all sorts of caveats about the numbers. If several years of looking at stats has shown me anything, it’s that the numbers are fairly fungible, shall we say.)

The moral of the story: Beware people who are not me! At least, as far as the stats to this site are concerned.

46 Comments on “I’m Just Going to Leave This Here”

  1. Before anyone asks, no, it’s not all bots and spiders coming to the other parts of the site; as far as I can see those comprise about 10% of the visits. A lot of the traffic, I suspect, comes from people google searching on a term and getting a result from an older iteration of the site (the old Moveable Type installs, etc).

    As a historical thing the old parts of the site traffic is fairly consistent, although I would note that significant bump about halfway through the year. 2013’s 1&1 traffic was higher than 2012’s, which is different than it was on the WordPress stats.

  2. I can’t see the graph very clearly but if it includes Random Whatever then I am part of that traffic :). I use RW anytime posting is light on here, or I’m bored …

  3. “What’s with that long plateau full of inverted spikes in the summer?”

    People flaking off at work, I’d guess, and spending their weekends outdoors.

    I’ve done deep, deep behavioral analysis on consumer behavior for your phone company, and found that generally, Monday’s were big traffic days for social media, particularly for content that was generated on Fridays and Saturdays. People go party on the weekend, and then spend Monday at the office talking about it.

    I’ve never done a seasonal breakdown, but I would bet I have that data set around here somewhere…..

  4. Heh. You appear to get more traffic in a day than I got in the first six months my blog was active. I’m not sure if that’s depressing or if I should start a “get more traffic in a month than Scalzi gets in a day” goal. :-)

  5. You’re right, at least this time you Admitted there’s someone you need to prove something to.

  6. thedude:

    It’s correct I’ve proven there are ignorant people talking entirely out of their ass about me and this site, yes. Otherwise, no.

    Now run along, thedude. You are already boring.

    I should note that I’m not speaking about only one person getting the stats wrong; it’s more than one person. It’s entirely possible that everyone is getting erroneous information from one source, however, and one that’s not exactly been a font of accurate information regarding me, historically speaking.

  7. So, there are folks who want to spread misinformation about your visitor stats, and then it hits me just how alien people are to me sometimes.

  8. The problem with anything that record traffic such as Google analytics, is that there are people who are using browser addons that actually disable that option and various others.

  9. As if stupid things like facts and evidence would prevent ignorant people from spewing ignorant BS. There is an entire class of people who worship ignorance and hold knowledge as evil because it does not confirm their biases. These people have been doing quiet well for themselves for the last couple of decades and will not be easily deterred; certainly not by anything mildly related to math and statistics.

  10. Why bother to engage with Trolldemort any more? He has more than shown that he is unworthy of your attention, even indirectly.

  11. As noted earlier, more than one person appears to making assertions of fact regarding my stats. People are assuming I am referring to one particular person here, which is not the case.

  12. Get real John, we are on to your hit count enhancement techniques.

    You’ve got the cats and dog (probably even Athena & Chrissy) trained to endlessly execute random-walk algorithims on the site. By clever use of food rewards, little bells, and Skinner Boxes you’ve created a mini-army of bio-netbots; no doubt completely funded by DARPA or the NSA.

  13. There’s a man who is not John coming down the street! Flee! Flee for your lives! Beware!

    Or at least verify your statistics.

  14. I don’t Twitter, but happened to look over at the ‘skeevy author’ picture on the R side. The first thing I thought was “Heeee-eee-e-e-re’s Johnny!”

  15. Ah, I see the Dudebros are trying to sleaze their way on again. Bad as Republicans, which they closely resemble….

    You know – guys like these make the French Revolution seem like a more viable model every day.

  16. Not bad, but I’ll bet you would double your traffic with just a bit more leg and a bit more cleavage showing. Just saying.

  17. Mr. Scalzi’s legs have already been displayed as part of the fundraiser he did, posing vs. Jim Hines. I will not comment on said legs, lest Krissy take up the Mallet and start swinging.

  18. I have to admit that this was a pretty hardcore in your face. Not only did you post an image with an imperceptible resolution, but it also shows stats from a site that your critics didn’t even call into question.

  19. One person introduced me to Whatever, and now three or four of my other friends read it as well, and on occasion we’ll talk about it or send quotes to each other or, you know, whatever. So I guess my concern with the readers numbers tops out at about 5.

  20. It’s all the same site, trog, particularly since most of the rest of the site is archived versions of the blog. As for not being able to read the numbers on the graphic: glasses?

  21. My apologies, and due credit for posting stats that may not be your historical best.

  22. Josh:

    Some might not be lying. Some may be legitimately misinformed. And those who are lying, well, some of them lie because they desperately crave my attention. Not giving it to them amuses me.

  23. But isn’t this post indirectly giving them attention? So now they can back and say “ha, I got him to post about me!”

  24. Josh:

    Well, if their ego is such that they assume every time that I speak of detractors they assume it must be them, how is their sad and petty version of megalomania my problem?

  25. Well, you’ve occupied a middle ground between ignoring them completely and calling them out on their inaccuracies. If your goal is to defeat them, I’m not sure that’s the way to go. However, internet slaughter, mayhem, and destruction might not be your goal.

  26. Josh:

    I think it’s fine to have something here to point to, as a matter of factual clarification, when people, intentionally or otherwise, make incorrect assertions. I’m not attempting to “defeat” anyone on the Internet; that’s not an achievable proposition, particularly if one is dealing with people who don’t care if what they are asserting has any relation to fact. Laying out actual facts, however, points out to observers that others are either misinformed or malicious, and that’s not a bad thing.

  27. Understood. I doubt this will stop whomever it is who is saying whatever they are saying about whatever. But, as you’ve said, that’s not really your goal.

  28. “Does anyone know whether a smartphone would get tracked in the same way as a laptop?”

    G.A. does not rely only on client-side tracking, it will use server-side tracking just as happily. So a laptop, a smart phone, a dumb phone, a carrier pigeon, they will all get recorded to the best degree of data available.

    1&1 stats look to be based on Apache logs, which would also be device agnostic.

%d bloggers like this: