Spazeboy disagrees with us on broad issues, but on the particular issue we were debating he was the only one who offered a clear solution. Post a screenshot of our statistics. We did that, and it shows clearly that we were not lying about anything.
What you posted proved clearly that you had deceived your readers. Whether through deliberate attempts or ignorance, a deception is a lie. Also, I told you in the comments to put up a public sitemeter to prove me wrong.
If you are not getting page views even close to the 350,000 number it is impossible for you to be getting the hits. Put your sitemeter on the net and let it tell the truth. As For now, the graphics I linked out speak the obvious truth. You don’t have the traffic to support claims of those numbers. In fact the stats suggest your site is in decline. But your post says you are growing? Mighty confusing, eh? Also much of the traffic to your site is the same/similar traffic that goes to all of the “Family Institute” sister sites in other states. Suggesting that much of your traffic is likely from out of State.
I linked out to unbiased Blog tracking sites. Just because you say something does not make it true. Prove me wrong and I will amend or retract the post.
That was a most reasonable answer to your problem. I was correct in everything that I wrote, and yet you don’t consider that reasonable enough for your site?
In that diary you wite after realizing that what I pointed out about your hit counts was correct:
An apology may be in order here. Perhaps he thinks that hits are not the best indicator of readership. The more I learn, the more I agree with that.
Yet, instead of actually making an apology you go into a HUGE BUT BUT BUT:
But, please, don’t accuse someone of lying without taking some basic steps to get your facts straight.
P.S. Drinking Liberally still can’t admit to the fact that he was wrong, plain and simple.
I am therefore including a link to a screenshot of our statistics (following Spazeboy’s advice, who has been the most civil in this discussion) that shows clearly we were not lying. Period. We never lied, attempted to deceive, or distorted the numbers. Drinking Liberally got it completely wrong.
I had my facts straight. Even you had to admit that. I was correct, plain and simple.
I am tempted to say that your embarrassment at having been called out BIG TIME, not just by me but here and here by ConnecticutBLOG and MLN as well by those pesky LIBERAL FACTS, may be what is holding you back from actually making an apology to your readers, and from acknowledging that not only am I an opponent, but in fact a reasonable one. Reasonable enough that I even forewarned you that I would be calling you out on your claimed readership.
This vanity you are exhibiting only further exemplifies the points of what I wrote about your being a pious fraud, etc., something that I told you in the comments I was quite reasonably willing to retract or amend if you could prove me wrong. Something I am still willing to do IF you actually ever make an apology to your readers for the deceptions, and IF you consider ammending the posts that label me as drunk and unreasonable for pointing out these facts about your deceptions.
As ctblogger noted in his update:
Oh man, these guys just don't get it. These guys are opening up a can of worms and I don't think they know how big of a hole they're making for themselves.
Are they aware that they're messing around with the big boys? FIC, I appeal to you to stop before you embarrass yourselves even more.
Now, I know I am not one of the "big boys" of Connecticut political Blogging, but I also know that FIC is digging the hole deeper. Clearly they have not proven me wrong in any of my charges. BUT I am willing to give FIC a SECOND CHANCE to prove me wrong on the points about their character.
It won’t change the fact that I disagree with you on almost every topic you write about - since I am for Marriage Equality, politically Pro-Choice, against public money for private schools, believe strongly in The Wall of Seperation, etc. etc. - but that is a different story…
6 comments:
The claim of 350k+ hits was pretty outlandish, and when I wrote my comment none of the others were posted (they moderate all comments before posting, which is what I do on my own site as well). Had I seen yours about asking them to add a sitemeter I may not have posted at all.
The good thing about sitemeter is that it would allow us all to compare apples to apples. We could see the FIC hits, views, visits, etc. and compare it to the sitemeter stats of CTBlog, mine, yours, MLN, etc.
As long as the FIC is reporting stats from some internal and unverifiable tracker, all we have is common sense. I hope that after a month or two with a sitemeter that they'll finally give you the apology you deserve.
one word .. FakeZilla.
haha.
which is dopey because most web hosting providers have some limit on the allowed bandwidth usage for a site. You want REAL hits from people who are READING and AWAKE, not some monkey hitting the enter key. And generally people who are READING and AWAKE are not Bible Thumping Jesus Avengers.
I don't want them to apologoze to me spazeboy... I want them to apologize to their readership. lol
But what you did was get the info needed to verify immidiately that they were wrong. That was a good thing! lol
I don't moderate my comments much... I do delete some of the spam comments that are just addys for crap like "penny stocks". But everything else anyone says stays regardless of if they are right or wrong or inflamatory, etc.
I figure if they have take the time to type in the confirmation letters they deserve to have the comment!
Fuzzy turtle... Fakezilla? lol
Who would have thought that it would exist? I'll stick to my small #s and integrity thank you very much!
Been thinking too... It would be kindof fun to do something sometime before the relevent committees start investigating. lol :D
it would be kindof fun to do something sometime before the relevent committees start investigating. lol :D It's a good time of the year to freewayblog.. the trees are bare so a blue tarp will show up nicely!
as long as we don't run into Officer Pumpkinhead from the election site (he had the ROUNDEST HEAD I had ever seen, barring Charlie Brown perhaps)..damn Republican.
I am going to work on at least one tarp, and maybe some signs over the next few days. :)
And at least pumpkin head didn't try to arresat us for standing there with signs. For that I consider him one of the reasonable police officers on this earth. I have seen some that will bust people for smiling the wrong way.
And at least pumpkin head didn't try to arresat us for standing there with signs. He couldn't .. we were within our rights. I offered to move if the voting officials gave us another spot 75 feet away from the door to stand in.
He was bluffing. He didn't have grounds to ticket us (or give a summons or whatever it is that happens in these situations), it was all posturing. And I really hate bullies, especially ones in uniform.
keep me posted on the sign! We'll find a good spot for it, I've read that in wooded areas away from roads is better than close to places where people can get to to remove :)
Post a Comment