Patterico's Pontifications

6/6/2006

Over 2,000,000 Served

Filed under: Blogging Matters,General — Patterico @ 5:14 pm



According to SiteMeter, this blog had its two millionth unique visitor today.

At the beginning of the year, I had projected that this would happen in July. But here we are barely into June and we’re already there.

My millionth visitor came less than a year ago, on July 11, 2005. Which means I’m averaging over a million unique visits a year. That’s paltry by some standards, of course. But I think it’s pretty cool.

I also bypassed 3,000,000 page views recently, but didn’t commemorate the occasion.

Thanks for reading. And please tell a friend.

19 Responses to “Over 2,000,000 Served”

  1. Say Patterico, aren’t you jumping the gun a little bit? I didn’t see that you’d reduced your visitor/view count to make an adjustment for multiple visits/views by the Hiltzik sock puppet team. I figure that’s got to reduce your results by oh say at least a couple of hundred thousand. In any event, congratulations to you. I look forward to hearing what you have to say each day.

    Mike Myers (3a4363)

  2. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Just because you maintain a grade-A, class site that people want to visit, it’s really a big deal that people actually do visit it. 😉

    nk (8214ee)

  3. Congratulations. I think a million visits a year is very cool.

    DRJ (860f91)

  4. Congratulations, Patterico, you’ve got a great site here. I’m glad two million people have seen it. Keep it up.

    Anwyn (01a5cc)

  5. Cool beans, P. Keep it up.

    See-Dubya (cd1302)

  6. Congratulations, Patterico, you’ve got a great site here. I’m glad two million people have seen it. Keep it up.

    Thanks, but unfortunately, two million unique visits doesn’t mean two million unique people.

    Patterico (50c3cd)

  7. Guess I got it wrong again. It does mean two million unique IP addresses, right? As in, I didn’t contribute half a million by trying to keep up with threads here Sunday and Monday?

    Anwyn (01a5cc)

  8. Nope. Nothing that impressive, dammit. If you log on and look at 13 pages, over the course of a half-hour, that’s one unique visit and 13 page views. But if you log on, look at one page, and come back an hour later, I think that’s 2 unique visits.

    I think a unique visit counts the same IP if there is a gap of 30+ minutes during which the IP address is not on the particular page.

    Still unique visits (and not page views) is still the gold standard by which traffic is measured. Hence the emphasis placed on it.

    Patterico (50c3cd)

  9. Okay, well, my face is red for thinking two mil people have been here. I did think that was kind of high…

    Anwyn (01a5cc)

  10. That would be cool. Heh heh.

    Too bad it’s not the case.

    But I’m happy to have you here. Tell your friends and we’ll work up to two million for real.

    Patterico (50c3cd)

  11. You’re sweet, but I don’t know which is more laughable: the notion that the sum total of my current friends across the country would contribute anything noticeable to two mil, or the idea that I could find any new friends who would be able to read, understand, and intelligently respond to conservative-leaning thought. I live in Portland, Oregon, man! D’you think I’d be here, reading and typing, reading and typing, if I could get good discussion from face-to-face people? … Okay, maybe I would, but that doesn’t mean I can get the good spoken discussion. Lead editorial in the Oregonian over the weekend: slamming state tax refund checks. More editorials from same page: against repeal of death tax and accusing military higher-ups of massive Haditha cover-up. And lead article in the Metro section? Council bitching because they could find no legal reason to keep Wal-Mart out.

    Anwyn (01a5cc)

  12. … er, sorry for language. B#$%&ing.

    Anwyn (01a5cc)

  13. Patterico, you still probably had more people read your blog over the past 12 months than the LA Times had actually READ its editorial/opinion pages.

    No joke.

    There’s a good percentage of Times’ subscribers (as with any paper) whom subscribe merely for the coupons, or say, the sports page, and they ignore the rest of the paper.

    Whereas, with a blog, a person generally makes a hit on a blog to specifically read the opinion of the blogger.

    Desert Rat (d8da01)

  14. congratulations. 2 million is impressive any way, whether it’s 20,000 people who each looked at it 100x or whatever. if i started a blog, it would be difficult to match this feat even if i employed cute cat pictures and porn links.
    @anwyn:
    don’t like the oregonian? aw, gee…
    “slamming state tax refund checks…”
    that’s slightly disingenuous. the oregonian was commenting on our “kicker”, which is unique among the 50 states in that unexpectedly large revenue inflows due to an improving economy are automatically returned to taxpayers by law. i support the kicker for individuals, but not for corporations.
    “against repeal of death tax…”
    i’m against the repeal of what is properly known as the estate tax too. it only affects the very largest estates, and there is already a generous exemption of several million dollars which i am open to raising or indexing to inflation. your heirs will already have enough money so that they won’t have to work, and i am skeptical of the social utility of securing idle comfort for the seventh generation of your progeny. just what we need is more paris hiltons, spare me the sob stories of family farms being liquidated, even bill gates supports the estate tax. don’t forget that balancing the budget is a conservative value too.
    “accusing military higher-ups of massive haditha coverup…”
    unfortunately, many of the facts reported so far, the delays in investigation and the changing accounts, seem to support the inference of coverup. pollsters tell us about 29% of the country is still in knee-jerk denial.
    take comfort amigo, you still have fox news.

    assistant devil's advocate (9746e0)

  15. i support the kicker for individuals

    We agree on something.

    but not for corporations.

    Why the distinction? If the money is superfluous to the state budget, it is superfluous whether it came from individuals or corporations.

    i’m against the repeal of what is properly known as the estate tax too.

    I’m not. It’s another example of taxing people with more money than most on principle, a principle I wholeheartedly disagree with as contrary, fundamentally, to disposal of private property.

    the delays in investigation and the changing accounts, seem to support the inference of coverup.

    The committee’s still out on that one. I’ll wait till I hear more. But where I part company with the Oregonian is the part where they project an alleged cover-up into evidence that the “American endeavor in Iraq always has been a deception built on a foundation of fraud.” I.E., it’s the same old “Bush is a liar” speech–now with new cover-up evidence!

    Using an unproven allegation to substantiate a discredited one and to say that the president has created such a climate in the military that all our troops feel free to kill and lie makes for a fairly worthless editorial.

    Anwyn (01a5cc)

  16. Patterico, here’s my endorsement:

    I often find myself turning to your blog for interesting stories that have nothing whatsoever to do with my day-to-day life or even my political reality — I live in Canada, after all.

    I came for the Hiltzik smackdown and “stayed” for the high quality and balanced analysis, good writing, thoroughness, decency (including going easy on one’s opponents when there’s no reason to drive it home and yet a willingless to do so if necessary), the excellent commentators, and realistic — as opposed to pedantic — legalism.

    We’ve agreed and disagreed and it has been a pleasure both ways.

    For personal reasons to do with an incredibly make or break life goal of mine, I must now focus on other things rather than on reading and commenting on excellent political blogs, diving into current affairs, and generally nuzzling the dog in my own unique and special way.

    I’m glad that some of this time could be spent here because for a largely L.A. Times newspaper-centric blog, this kicks ass with international appeal.

    Chris from Victoria, BC (9824e6)

  17. @anwyn:
    why the distinction between the individual and corporate kickers? the individuals are oregonians who will put that money back into our economy. many of the corporations, such as wal-mart, are headquartered out-of-state and have relatively few oregon shareholders who would benefit. some of our public services are underfunded, particularly education and criminal justice. i forget the exact numbers, but there are substantially fewer oregon state troopers out there on the road today than there were ten years ago. corporations benefit from a civil atmosphere in which to sell their products/services, and we get to tax them for the privilege. it might be unconstitutional to distinguish between in-state and out-of-state corporations, i’m not sure, there is no topic in constitutional law duller than the interstate commerce clause.
    “it’s another example of taxing people with more money than most on principle, a principle i wholeheartedly disagree with…”
    yeah, but this is an expensive war your favorite president got us into, it’s costing a quarter trillion a year, who’s gonna pay for it? if your answer is to sluff off deficits onto your grandchildren, well, that isn’t a conservative position. we tax people with more money than most on principle because it’s more equitable and it raises more revenue than taxing the poor to further reward the rich.

    assistant devil's advocate (9746e0)

  18. Even out-of-state corporations need to be treated fairly or they will find other states to set up shop in. And I notice you make no distinction between Oregon companies and out-of-state ones. Businesses, whether headquartered here or elsewhere, contribute to the economy in more ways than just benefiting shareholders.

    Since you ask, my favorite president is Abraham Lincoln, who also prosecuted a sometimes unpopular war and was accused of lying about it. History will judge whether the Iraqis are better or worse off due to our intervention. Either way, it’s an Alice in Wonderland twist on the word to say that taxing only the rich is more “equitable,” and the war doesn’t need more funds so badly that money already overtaxed should be taxed again when the person who earned it wants to use it to make things easier for his heirs.

    And now I feel I need to apologize to Patterico for unintentionally hijacking this congratulatory thread for this discussion.

    Anwyn (01a5cc)

  19. Congratulations!

    I got two posts about the German media for you:

    White Trash Blamed for Haditha
    http://atlanticreview.org/archives/334-guide.html

    Why Abu Ghraib, but not Darfur?
    http://atlanticreview.org/archives/285-guide.html

    Cheers,
    Joerg

    The Atlantic Review
    A press digest on transatlantic affairs edited by three German Fulbright Alumni

    Joerg (6e489a)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0796 secs.