2007 Kiwiblog Stats

January 7th, 2008 at 10:34 am by David Farrar

I’ve had to wait a few days to get the 2007 stats before my ISP complains traffic is so heavy they had to change the stats package from daily to weekly updates!

Anyway in 2007, Kiwiblog had the following:

Page Views: 9,222,545
Unique Visits: 2,697,578
Downloaded Data: 853 GB
Posts Made: 2,962
Comments Left: 70,247

While this is small fry compared to some of the US blogs (or global tech blogs), it actually is pretty high for our population. In the UK the most visited bloggers are Guido Fawkes and Iain Dale. Guido blogs here that he had 4,273,096 page views in 2007 and Iain Dale had 4,554,000 page views.  They did get more unique visits but still not bad considering the UK population is around 15 times larger than NZ.

No tag for this post.

35 Responses to “2007 Kiwiblog Stats”

  1. sagenz (30 comments) says:

    impressive dpf. well done. I guess it is not people wanting to read the quality comment threads though.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Tina (687 comments) says:

    All very good.

    But Dave’s gone a little quiet on Glorbell Worming.

    That usually indicates a new macrobiotic girlfriend who has to be appeased…….for a while.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. sonic (2,818 comments) says:

    “Dave’s gone a little quiet on Glorbell Worming”

    Probably because recent evidence makes global warming denial about as credible as UFO abduction.

    Difficult to argue away all that missing ice eh?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Tina (687 comments) says:

    These poor misguided souls…

    “Attempts to prevent global climate change from occurring are ultimately futile, and constitute a tragic misallocation of resources that would be better spent on humanity’s real and pressing problems.”

    http://www.nationalpost.com/most_popular/story.html?id=164002

    There seems to be a geneticist, a lot of atmospheric/climatologist types but no gardeners.

    Have they no shame?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. sonic (2,818 comments) says:

    ““Attempts to prevent global climate change from occurring”

    So you now admit it is occuring then?

    Anyway I don’t want more demerits for going off topic.

    Nice work on being to blog again David!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Tina (687 comments) says:

    Sure …about .75 C per century as we speak.

    To help with your understanding of natural cycles….

    From the dreaded Fox News.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,312490,00.html

    The “A” in “AGW” will soon be gone….just as “Glorbell Worming” morphed into “Climate Change”.

    Love the consensus.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. James Sleep (477 comments) says:

    Tina – your gullible

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. James Sleep (477 comments) says:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05_2rH-qepk – enjoy

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Tina (687 comments) says:

    And Jimmy…..you are adolescent and stupid…..no?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Andrew W (1,629 comments) says:

    James, I liked the “we don’t need to listen to nature, nature needs to listen to us” line, sums up the logic used by those on both extremes.

    And yes Tina is gullible when it comes to AGW, she pushes almost anything from anyone that supports her ideologically based position.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Andrew W (1,629 comments) says:

    Well done DPF, probably too well done, I’m not getting nearly as much work done around here as I should be.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Tina (687 comments) says:

    C’mon Andy….

    Tell me there’s still a “consensus”.

    One so rarely sees the “con” word these days from the left.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. PaulL (5,872 comments) says:

    As compared to the UK sites, we are talking more page views but fewer unique visits?

    I’m assuming a unique visit is something like a visit from a single machine on a single day (or some other time period – maybe an hour).

    So people visiting your blog either read more of it (a good sign, means that they found it interesting and looked at some other pages too), or hit the refresh key a lot so they can read the same page over and over again (meaning that you are visited by a lot of people who have nothing better to do with their time than to read the comments – myself included presumably).

    I’m putting my money on the latter – too many comment tragics out there.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. freethinker (680 comments) says:

    Wonder what % of comments are down to the likes of Chronic Sonic and Sleep the creep etc?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Andrew W (1,629 comments) says:

    OK Tina, amongst people who base their opinion of AGW on the science rather than ideology there is a consensus that increasing CO2 levels in the atmosphere is bringing about a warmer Earth.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. James Sleep (477 comments) says:

    FFS Tina, what can’t you understand.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. James Sleep (477 comments) says:

    Anyway – George Bush shares your ideology. I thought you would want to see him on youtube and idolise him even more. ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. dad4justice (7,725 comments) says:

    Hells eels what an audience . I was just wondering if Sir David F would consider wiping the slate clean regarding the demerit scoreboard .You know new year , new start and all that.Put the past behind us and move on in the right direction and I promise I will wear a halo on my head when I type in the future.

    Our politicians don’t get banned if they punch someone’s lights out . Just a thought, as it always pays to be a tough minded optimist ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. James Sleep (477 comments) says:

    D4J – Two days ago you said that you had given up posting on kiwiblog.

    Attention seeking were you?

    I said to my mate, you watch, D4J lies and will be back.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. hinamanu (2,352 comments) says:

    “Wonder what % of comments are down to the likes of Chronic Sonic and Sleep the creep etc?”

    Just don’t blame anyone who calls you ‘free stinker’

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. dad4justice (7,725 comments) says:

    Yawn, yawn, yawn , boring, yawn, yawn .

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Tina (687 comments) says:

    Don’t despair Andy….look how far you’ve come in a few short months.

    “Scientific consensus” now hardly passes your lips…..

    The lists of well credentialled AGW scientific skeptics are difficult to ignore I guess.

    Tho I, for one, think the unecessary international tourist industry should be brought to heel by carbon taxes or edict……less of them on my rivers the better.

    Remember, when you are backing your opinion and go long glorbell worming with money out in the market place be sure to tell me….then I’ll know you’re not just political hot air

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. James Sleep (477 comments) says:

    Your words not mine d4j

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Andrew W (1,629 comments) says:

    Tina, my position on AGW has been constant for 2 years, if anything I’m tending towards the view that it is potentially a greater problem than I have accepted in the past.

    Though I’m happy to point out that few denialists are at the cutting edge of climate research, and that most are either retired or from other disciplines, I don’t usually use the “consensus” argument, as you denialists like to point out, in science having the numbers in themselves doesn’t make one right. It’s getting the science right that counts, something the denialists still haven’t managed.

    I haven’t played the markets for 20 years Tina and accepting AGW – or not – is no reason to start, the vast majority of people on both sides of the debate don’t see their position as a reason for making major investment decisions.

    I’m farming in NZ, as Gareth at Hot Topic notes:
    “NZ is likely to be a good place to be, at least in the next 20–30 years, because it is expected to warm up more slowly than most of the rest of the world. Our agriculture may get a boost from the extra warmth.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. helmet (807 comments) says:

    Yippee! More agriculture! Oooooh can’t wait for that.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Tina (687 comments) says:

    The news is good Andy……the Indian poor rather than craving better bicycles actually have other dreams.

    http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,2235975,00.html

    Make an AGW choke on his locally refined tofu wouldn’t it?

    I reckon you in-country Kiwi residents should take up the white man’s burden and progressively take cars off the road to counter the carbon produced by these oppressed 3rd World dreamers.

    A fitting Kiwi forelock tug for the Hulun era?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. hinamanu (2,352 comments) says:

    “A fitting Kiwi forelock tug for the Hulun era?”

    fantastic line Tina.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Andrew W (1,629 comments) says:

    As usual Tina you’re assuming I’m interested in the politics of AGW, I’m not, if the people of India are going to continue to improve their standard of living then better and safer transport will be part of that.

    A more relevent concern is where is the increase in fuel going to come from? _No-one_ is predicting the increases in global oil production that would be neccessary if even just two billion Indians and Chinese were to achieve the per capita levels of oil consumption we have in the West.

    So some form of electrification of the transport network just about everywhere combined with huge increases in electric power generation (nuclear? solar? geothermal?) looks essential over the next few decades for LDC’s modernisation to continue.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Tina (687 comments) says:

    Andy’s an innocent ?

    AGW is merely the latest socialist attack on market capitalism Andy.
    The comrades can hardly believe their luck

    But you knew that.

    And I want to see NZ offsetting those Indian $1300 car emissions….how about a permanent odd / even number plate driving bans in NZ.

    I mean there’s no chance Hulun isn’t really serious about all the AGW bullshit….is there?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Andrew W (1,629 comments) says:

    That’s right Tina, it’s all a GLWC, all those scientists, starting with Svante Arrhenius who proposed the theory of the greenhouse effect 112 years ago and who calculated how increasing GH gas concentrations could increase the strength of the GH effect are in on this great conspiracy.

    You’re getting a little flakey Tina.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Tina (687 comments) says:

    Apparently your 112 yo science is a worry Andy.

    Lots of CO2 input here….must be a big oil site…..

    http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/subject/c/co2climatehistory.jsp

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Andrew W (1,629 comments) says:

    The Idso’s are doing their best to ignore thermal inertia Tina, you’ve probably seen this graph before (at least I’m sure I’ve linked to it before, perhaps you didn’t view it)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Vostok-ice-core-petit.png

    Are there any particular points that the Idso’s make that you don’t understand why they’re wrong or irrelevent?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Andrew W (1,629 comments) says:

    Nite Tina, past my bed time.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Tina (687 comments) says:

    Scientists may disagree.

    But the best thing is ….

    There’s a consensus.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. kehua (225 comments) says:

    Great stats David, Congratulations, me thinks that the current year is going to be Blog heaven. Bring it on!!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.