ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2014 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Saturday, March 02, 2013

70,000 readers per day!

One thing you have to keep in mind when dealing with the Left is that leftists very seldom tell the truth about anything.  They depend upon misleading others.  That is why, if you notice a leftist is putting particular stress on something, that is a glowing-red, beeping signal that if you look a little closer, you'll discover that whatever they are claiming is, if not entirely false, at least somewhat exaggerated.

Item 1: Rachel Maddow"A poster on Twitter, upon seeing what he thought were very similar posts referencing MSNBC host Rachel Maddow's show, did some searching and found out that Maddow has been using phony twitter accounts to boost her "mentions" on the popular website.  As can be seen by screenshots collected by a tweeter named @LeftyBollocks, Maddow has massive amount of accounts posting the exact same claim that "Confession: I yell at my TV while watching Rachel #Maddow talk about filibuster reform in the same way most people do during football."

Item 2: John Scalzi.   "Handily demolishing the burger that he had chosen over a Midtown restaurant’s fancier Mediterranean fare, Mr. Scalzi was anything but grim; he smiled readily and giggled heartily. He is comfortable with the business of promotion: An affable speaker, he is familiar with the patois of fandom and is adept at generating buzz through the nerd mafia of like-minded collaborators. He already reaches up to 50,000 readers a day through his popular blog, “Whatever.” (“Taunting the tauntable since 1998” is the slogan on its home page.)"

Item 3: 2012 Nebula Awards.  The SFWA Nebula ballots went out today.  As usual, Tor had 2 of the 6 nominations for Best Novel, but as Tor's defenders are quick to point out, that could be accounted for by the fact that it publishes the most novels in the increasingly mislabeled field of "science fiction".  However, even more questionable is the fact that three of the seven Best Novelette nominees were published on Tor.com, which is one fewer nomination than Asimov, Analog, F&SF, and Black Gate received for all short fiction combined.  Another apparent anomaly was that two writers, Aliette de Bodard and Kenneth Liu, received five nominations between them for the three shorter fiction awards, up from three last year.  Now, it would appear that either the two writers are the second comings of Asimov and Heinlein who will dominate the field of science fiction for decades to come or there is something else at work here.

The numerate among us will recognize that 50,000 readers per day is 18.25 million readers per year.  Now recall that McRapey was more than a little pleased to have hit 8.2 million in 2012, up from 5.4 million in 2011.  That 8.2 million refers to Wordpress views that amount to 7.8 million in Google pageview terms.  Now to demonstrate how absurd that shows the "50,000 readers a day" claim to be, note that two months into 2013 I am presently right on pace to hit 25,309,493 readers in 2013 by the NYT metric.  That's 69,341 daily, which rounds nicely up to 70,000 readers per day!

How seriously would you take me if I claimed I had up to 70,000 readers per day?  That's precisely how seriously you should take any the posturing of any left-winger about his popularity, his influence, or even his "bestselling" status, said the three-time Billboard top 40 recording artist.

These examples demonstrate why you should never, ever give anyone on the Left even the smallest benefit of the doubt.  They always, at the very least, stretch the truth.  They sockpuppet.  They pretend to read things they have not.  They claim to have bought things they have never seen.  They claim to have published three books when they have only published one.  This reliable pattern of left-wing dishonesty is why I don't hesitate to call out fake reviewers and point out apparent shenanigans even before I have gathered the incontrovertible and conclusive proof; experience and pattern recognition have taught me that where there is the smoke of anomalies and numbers not adding up, there is usually the fire of someone who is "comfortable with the business of promotion" and "adept at generating buzz".

It is always unwise to place any trust whatsoever in those who live by attempting to redefine reality through their lies.

Labels: , ,

61 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous Poster March 02, 2013 9:43 AM  

The numerate among us will recognize that 50,000 readers per day is 18.25 million readers per year.

No, the numerate will recognize that 50k readers per day could be anywhere from 50k readers per year to 18.25 million.

Anonymous harry12 March 02, 2013 9:51 AM  

No, the numerate will recognize that 50k readers per day could be anywhere from 50k readers per year to 18.25 million.

Why does that remind me of a one-half real?

Anonymous VD March 02, 2013 9:53 AM  

No, the numerate will recognize that 50k readers per day could be anywhere from 50k readers per year to 18.25 million.

That's impossible. "50k readers per day" is 50,000 x 365 = 18,250,000. You are wrong. Now, what you may have meant to say was that "up to 50,000 readers a day" could be anything from 50,000 to 18.25 million per year.

If you're going to be pedantic, do at least take the trouble to get it right. And I suspect you know perfectly well that it is deeply misleading to claim "up to 50,000 readers per day" for a blog with only 8.2 million Wordpress views. Which, of course, was precisely my point about the Left and its self-promoting assertions.

Anonymous VD March 02, 2013 10:00 AM  

I note, with some amusement, that using the metric AP is defending, I can claim "up to 43,797 readers per day" on the basis of February alone.

Anonymous stg58/Animal Mother March 02, 2013 10:01 AM  

So Scalzi does lurk here. Looks like you found him, Vox.

Anonymous Anonymous Poster March 02, 2013 10:01 AM  

Vox; do you honestly think every day, 50k new people read his blog but then the 50k that discovered it the day before never read it again? That's stupid and you probably should know that.

Anonymous Anonymous Poster March 02, 2013 10:02 AM  

Animal; I'm not a Scalzi fan. But I value honesty.

Anonymous stg58/Animal Mother March 02, 2013 10:03 AM  

AP,

When did Vox claim to have 50, 000 new readers per day?

Anonymous Anonymous Poster March 02, 2013 10:03 AM  

Vox; Now, what you may have meant to say was that "up to 50,000 readers a day" could be anything from 50,000 to 18.25 million per year.

Um, that's exactly what I did say. "50k readers per day could be anywhere from 50k readers per year to 18.25 million"

Anonymous VD March 02, 2013 10:12 AM  

Vox; do you honestly think every day, 50k new people read his blog but then the 50k that discovered it the day before never read it again?

No, I don't. That would indeed be stupid.

Um, that's exactly what I did say. "50k readers per day could be anywhere from 50k readers per year to 18.25 million"

My, and here I thought you were only playing dumb. No, you're still wrong. "50k readers per day" is not the same as "up to 50k readers per day".

Anonymous lol March 02, 2013 10:22 AM  

So is this an admission that you still don't have the proof you were purportedly hot on the heels of when you posted that "fake" reviewer's home address?

As for your "pattern recognition" skills, isn't that precisely what you admitted was trumped by polling (in other words, sampling actual evidence) and led you to guess hilariously badly on the election results?

It seems like for you, "pattern recognition" works, even when it fails laughably and repeatedly, because, well, you suppose it does.

Blogger WATYF March 02, 2013 10:28 AM  

Yeah, I'm confused as well about this terminology.

If "50,00 readers per day" doesn't necessarily mean "50,000 NEW readers per day", then couldn't the SAME "50,000 readers" show up every single day for 365 days, thus giving a yearly total of only 50,000?

WATYF

Anonymous The other skeptic March 02, 2013 10:37 AM  

More misleading crap


Landen Gambill took an unusual step after she was sexually assaulted.

She reported it.

Unusual why? Because the vast majority of rapes go unreported.


Hmmm, so sexual assault only means rape?

However, what is more interesting is how universities no longer seem to care much about the suckersstudents who they prey on.

Anonymous VD March 02, 2013 10:37 AM  

So is this an admission that you still don't have the proof you were purportedly hot on the heels of when you posted that "fake" reviewer's home address?

No, of course not. I obtained the proof, but only after publicly I made the charge.

As for your "pattern recognition" skills, isn't that precisely what you admitted was trumped by polling (in other words, sampling actual evidence) and led you to guess hilariously badly on the election results?

Yes, just as it's what led me to correctly anticipate gold prices rising from below $300, the 2008 financial crisis, and the failure of the reported economic recovery.

Anonymous Rantor March 02, 2013 10:38 AM  

Rachel Maddow: Cow
John Scalzi: Waengsty Rrraepist Gamma Bunny (Say with german accent, preten there are umlauts, learn how, roll the r)
Tor: Publisher of the best regarded science fiction and fantasy according to the SFWA
SFWA: Lets not go there... but if you become president, you'll need to clean house (If you need help, I and some of the ilk might work this into our busy schedules.)
Numeracy: (OT) I found Nate's post pretty convincing... but still don't see how you can seperate debt from money since most of the money we use is derived from debt. Cash inflation with simultaneous debt deflation, hmm)
Anonymous Poster: Stupid Ankle Biting Rabbit
lol: Clueless wonder-bunny

Blogger Rantor March 02, 2013 10:42 AM  

Other Skeptic: at this point, in the more enlightened jurisdictions, all you have to do is cop a feel or play grab ass and you have committed sexual assault. At UC Berkely you can probably be charged without physical contact...

Anonymous anon123 March 02, 2013 10:48 AM  

As usual Vox is correct. Except Al Gore DID invent the internet.

Anonymous Anonymous March 02, 2013 10:49 AM  

Have you read the nominated stories for the Nebulas from those two writers? I actually think they're really good.

Anonymous The other skeptic March 02, 2013 10:53 AM  

Other Skeptic: at this point, in the more enlightened jurisdictions, all you have to do is cop a feel or play grab ass and you have committed sexual assault. At UC Berkely you can probably be charged without physical contact...

I understand that well. I was commenting on the bait and switch tactics. She (the author) lead with "sexual assault" which could have been inappropriate touching or even lewd suggestions in today's environment, and then switched to rape.

That is simply dishonest, in my view.

In addition, from the article it seems that universities no longer want to play that game.

Is the power of the vagina waning?

Anonymous The other skeptic March 02, 2013 10:54 AM  

Have you read the nominated stories for the Nebulas from those two writers? I actually think they're really good.

Based on the claims of an anonymous commenter I must drop everything and read them immediately.

Anonymous VD March 02, 2013 10:55 AM  

Have you read the nominated stories for the Nebulas from those two writers? I actually think they're really good.

I will before I vote. I liked Ken Liu's past stuff, so I wouldn't be at all surprised if it is good. And I like de Bodard's Aztec novels. However, I'm a little dubious that those two writers alone truly account for nearly one-third of the noteworthy short fiction published in 2012.

Anonymous VD March 02, 2013 10:55 AM  

Also, Anonymous, please choose a name, any name.

Anonymous stg58/Animal Mother March 02, 2013 11:01 AM  

He should choose John Scalzi, since that is who he really is.

Anonymous JartStar March 02, 2013 11:03 AM  

As for your "pattern recognition" skills, isn't that precisely what you admitted was trumped by polling (in other words, sampling actual evidence) and led you to guess hilariously badly on the election results?

Yes, just as it's what led me to correctly anticipate gold prices rising from below $300, the 2008 financial crisis, and the failure of the reported economic recovery.


These are all different categories and being good or bad at pattern recognition in one doesn't necessarily translate into another. It's possible that being good at one could actually cloud one's judgment in another and give one a false sense ability.

Anonymous The other skeptic March 02, 2013 11:05 AM  

Have you read the nominated stories for the Nebulas from those two writers? I actually think they're really good.

When I compare the scratchings of Sylvia Plath with the writing of William Shakespeare I am convinced that affirmative action was in operation for one of them.

I read the first several paragraphs of "The Bookmaking habits of certain species" it was mind-numbingly boring. I didn't even bother to check whether it was nominated in the Nebula category.

Anonymous Difster March 02, 2013 11:39 AM  

Maxine waters claimed the other day that 170,000,000 million Americans workers could be put out of work because of the sequester. Umm... Ms. Crazy Waters, there are only 134 million American workers.

Anonymous Outlaw X March 02, 2013 12:14 PM  

Liberals are liars but are liars all liberals. I ask this question because almost all politicians lie, even the ones claiming to be conservative.

There is a better way to say what I am thinking, but can't figure out just now how to accurately say it.

Blogger mmaier2112 March 02, 2013 12:23 PM  

Waters is probably illiterate as well as innumerate.

Anonymous orb March 02, 2013 12:34 PM  

Liberals lie as naturally as a dog barks and it happens that more trustworthy information is imparted from the barking dog then the lying liberal.

Anonymous The other skeptic March 02, 2013 12:44 PM  

Just when you thought the Holocaust had been forgotten

Perhaps the article should be nominated for a Hugo award or something.

Blogger foxmarks March 02, 2013 12:56 PM  

I, alone, am at least 207 “readers”. The main body of the Ilk has to be worth more than 1,000 “readers” each. We are great in number, but few in quantity.

Anonymous Fail Burton March 02, 2013 12:57 PM  

I don't know I even believe Scalzi's politics are for real. If all you have to do to pay bills is agree with liberal politics to ensure you're not blacklisted and indeed, pump up sympathy for you and publicity for your work, why not?

It's a win-win, cuz you're certainly not going to tick off all the conservative artists out there in SF and TV-land. So, make some dumb t-shirt, use some LBGT buzzwords in between the pix of sleeping cats and fascinating posts about visiting the library.

Promote novels that conspicuously fit the diversity obsession of the Left, even though they're so hopelessly amateurish even Goodreads, the gentle-feely "I'm okay, you're okay," of the web seems vicious. Go home, smoke a cigar, put your feet up and say, "Idiots." It's particularly helpful when there's no way in hell your writing will rise of its own accord. It's not like this guy has a Night's Dawn trilogy in him. He had to go scrounge in Piper's marginalized Fuzzy left-overs just to generate a new idea.

As for Maddow, anyone who's watched her show knows she's a liar. She did an 18 minute "expose" on Fast & Furious that didn't even mention F&F til the 7:30 mark. That's cuz she had zilch.

Anonymous Pinakeli March 02, 2013 12:57 PM  

Difster March 02, 2013 11:39 AM

Maxine waters claimed the other day that 170,000,000 million Americans workers could be put out of work because of the sequester. Umm... Ms. Crazy Waters, there are only 134 million American workers.

She is planning to import more workers from Mexico to put on the Dole?

Anonymous IncoherentM March 02, 2013 1:22 PM  

The reason Liberals continue to lie without shame is because it WORKS.

Anonymous James May March 02, 2013 1:26 PM  

Waters was including all of Central America and her collection of wigs. Or she could've been referring to the number of her brain cells since she's as smart as a stoat, though less attractive from a human point of view.

Anonymous Van March 02, 2013 1:30 PM  

If one person read your blog every day for a year, is that one reader or 365 readers?

Anonymous VD March 02, 2013 1:50 PM  

If one person read your blog every day for a year, is that one reader or 365 readers?

The way these things are usually counted, 365. Hence the "per day" and the references to "8 million".

Anonymous jay c March 02, 2013 2:17 PM  

Vox, you must be following the same Torah reading cycle that we are. /jk

Those are the same tactics used by Adonijah in 1 Kings 1.

Anonymous Van March 02, 2013 2:26 PM  

Thought so; explains the confusion above. Quite a few of these hits are me - I'm a constant lurker. A few months ago I realized I needed an education on economics and Christianity (had the same observations you refer to as churchianity). What do you know, when I asked I found your blog.

Anonymous kh123 March 02, 2013 2:30 PM  

"The reason Liberals continue to lie without shame is because it WORKS."

This needs to be the slogan on those American Recovery and Reinvestment Act freeway signs.

Anonymous kh123 March 02, 2013 2:31 PM  

"So, make some dumb t-shirt, use some LBGT buzzwords in between the pix of sleeping cats and fascinating posts about visiting the library."

I laughed.

Anonymous Anonagain March 02, 2013 2:35 PM  

It is always unwise to place any trust whatsoever in those who live by attempting to redefine reality through their lies.

It's not just a matter of not trusting them, it's a matter of fighting them off like a plague of locusts. Leftists not only live their lives in a state of denial and delusion, they fully expect everyone else to do likewise.

They never stop with the lies, distortions, obfuscations, manipulations, propaganda, hypocrisy, hysteria, rewriting history, junk science, attacks, slanders, libels, manufactured crises, manufactured hate crimes, and activism.

There is never peace with Leftists. They can't leave things alone because eventually reality will set in, as it always does. So they keep stirring the pot, creating frictions, discord and continuous instability.

There is no passive strategy that will insulate one from the effects of the poison of Leftism.

Blogger The Great and Powerful Oz March 02, 2013 2:54 PM  

If you post 4 times a day and 1 person reads all of them, is that 4 readers?

Given the number of "here's yet another picture of my cat(s)" blog posts that Scalzi does, his number could be greatly inflated.

And how the hell do I get Blogger to remove Scazi's blog from the list of blogs I follow? Blogger was a lot more useful before Google bought them.

Blogger Doom March 02, 2013 3:40 PM  

I honestly have to think that, Spartan warriors being what they were, if they had the time and energy, would have lots of fun too. When rigor mortis set in, it wouldn't surprise me if they put corpses in as building blocks, meant to collapse when that failed, and placed bets on which side of the structure would fail first. As I said, if they had the time. But it must have been great fun.

As this point, to me? It looks like you are doing just that. No... no complaints. I'm betting on Maddow failing first, by the way.

Anonymous Daniel March 02, 2013 4:18 PM  

Reposting from a previous thread, because it is relevant:

McRapey posts his travel itinerary, with about five destinations for the year, including:

May 16 – 19: Nebula Awards Weekend, San Jose

I assumed that this was in relation to his role as President of the SFWA. However, he then writes:

And some of you may ask: Hey, didn’t you say you weren’t going to be doing much travel this year? The answer: I did, but I noted that I would be doing some travel at the behest of Tor, my publisher. So you may assume that the large majority of that travel above is Tor-related in some way.

I can't see how this admission is anything but a conflict of interest. If he's going to the Nebulas (an award bestowed by the SFWA) at the behest of Tor, the dominant winner of the Nebulas while the President of the SFWA, that's a mess. Shouldn't the SFWA be sending him to the Nebulas? Or are SFWA and Tor one and the same?

If Tor is not sending him to the Nebulas to logroll for his stablemates, he ought to have known and made it very clear that the one trip that was not in "the large majority" which are funded/backed/ordered by Tor.

Anonymous The other skeptic March 02, 2013 5:22 PM  

I spent some time reading some of All the Flavors

It almost reads like:

It was stark in the dorm that night and the students drank incessantly, except on those occasions when violence broke out, as it was wont to do when the discussion turned to football.

Only in the syphilitic-addled brain of a PC fudge packer could that be worthy of an award.

Anonymous VD March 02, 2013 5:54 PM  

I can't see how this admission is anything but a conflict of interest. If he's going to the Nebulas (an award bestowed by the SFWA) at the behest of Tor, the dominant winner of the Nebulas while the President of the SFWA, that's a mess.

No, Scalzi wouldn't miss that sort of thing even if he didn't have an obligation to go, as president. It's not as if the SFWA president has any say in who wins the awards, he just hands them out.

Anonymous In other words... March 02, 2013 7:33 PM  

Shut up daniel

Anonymous Daniel March 02, 2013 8:35 PM  

No, Scalzi wouldn't miss that sort of thing even if he didn't have an obligation to go, as president. It's not as if the SFWA president has any say in who wins the awards, he just hands them out.

I understand that very well. His defense of his itinerary is that he is making these travels on behalf of Tor, not in his capacity as President. I assumed, until he got to his defense of the travel, that he was merely going in his capacity as President. The fact that he indicates he's going on behalf of Tor is what seems like the conflict - one that he raises seemingly unnecessarily. It would have been just as simple for him to write: "Aside from the Nebulas, which I'll be handing out in my capacity as SFWA president, the other travel is at the behest of Tor."

From the outside looking in, it looks ugly. SFWA President should be making the obvious efforts to clarify a separation. The Tor thing is a shadow.


Anonymous Daniel March 02, 2013 8:36 PM  

Actually, what would have been even simpler was for him to choose not to justify his travel schedule to the public at all. I don't know what he needs to apologize for.

Anonymous Tico March 02, 2013 8:43 PM  

Dan; why do you think he's defending or apologizing for this schedule. Be specific.

Anonymous Daniel March 02, 2013 8:51 PM  

And some of you may ask: Hey, didn’t you say you weren’t going to be doing much travel this year? The answer: I did, but I noted that I would be doing some travel at the behest of Tor, my publisher. So you may assume that the large majority of that travel above is Tor-related in some way.

a) the travel he listed was not terribly extensive.
b) presuming anyone cared to catch him in a mistatement or recalculation of his travel is defensive, and strange.
c) If he actually has 3 people who would have bothered to mention in the comments that he was planning to travel more than they presumed, I'd be surprised.
d) He shifts the blame to Tor.

He anticipates a question that no one would have thought to ask. I read it and assumed it was justification he was making to his wife translated for his groupers.

Anonymous Anonymous March 02, 2013 8:59 PM  

Well, I guess we can agree that math isn't one of the arrows in Vox's quiver.

Anonymous Dot connector March 02, 2013 11:32 PM  

"Liberals are liars but are liars all liberals."

No, everybody tells lies now and then usually pretty small ones that in the scheme of things don't do much damage but leftists are pathological. Their lies are big,small and profuse.

Blogger LP 999/Eliza March 03, 2013 12:42 AM  

Agreed as stated.

The readers know or should know the truth on blog traffic. But it is important to stress the facts of actual claims versus real readership.

Anonymous VryeDenker March 03, 2013 2:53 AM  

I recall Yuri Bezmenov (if anyone doesn't know about him, they should google) describing this exact tactic in an interview.

It was about how one lefty would belong to 30 similar organizations or lobby groups, thereby artificially boosting their perceived numbers.

Anonymous James May March 03, 2013 3:09 AM  

“I will not let my sales figures dictate what I say on the blog, because the blog is what I want to say.”

I thought that was hilarious because Scalzi in fact attacks groups easy and fashionable to stigmatize, knowing it not only doesn't put him in jeopardy but enhances his diversa-status with his Orwellian fans. It's a pander-fest. He should have an SF convention called PanderCon because it is one big con and one big pander.

His sales figures are the direct result of his pandering and self-promotion with a distinctly political slant to ingratiate himself with a demo, not the result of courage. If Scalzi was a conservative his creative "talent" would suddenly disappear, since his skills as a writer are viewed through Leftist conformity, not artistry.

So he knows what gov't cheese (Velveeta) tastes like. I'm sure the whip scars of that have pushed him through life like the Jean Valjean of pedantic nerds who will argue for hours over whether a 19th century Prussian soldier's back pack was blue or butternut even while the soldier carries demon-glamour powder inside it we all know accidentally killed the Duke of Wellington.

I know what gov't peanut butter and Spam tastes like. So what? That doesn't exactly make me the Count of Monte Cristo or the last Aztec dying in Tenochtitlan. But it would if I wept to teenaged mental cases awash in material privilege they make up for by saying 10 diversa-Hail Mary's and 10 diversa-Our Father's and saying "yaaaaaaaaay!" every time a new SF novel comes out by a black, gay, woman about the non-white diaspora of some other such racist, anti-racist, parochial, parochial-hating expression of MiniTrue.

Blogger Baloo March 03, 2013 9:14 AM  

It's not so much that leftists lie as that they find the truth irrelevant. They largely live in their imaginations,
like children.

Anonymous CaptDMO March 03, 2013 9:25 AM  

I'm guessing a "click" somehow translates to actual "reader", and subsequently implies "comprehension" and ability to discriminate.
While I accept "click" is good enough for marketing wonks to justify their existance via the "sampling of exposure" meme, I usually consider recognition of "exposure" to more of "the masses" indicative of "The Emporors New Clothes", perhaps "Henny Penny".

Where's the part where "sampling" measures age/IQ of a "seperate unique reader"?

As if it mattered to the neo-qualification of "intellectual", or "sampling" of anonymous "likes" or "mentions" of popular "Yay for the only team that would have me..." commentary, disguised in "news" or "Recent academic/gub'mint studies have PROVED..." clothing.

Anonymous Ferd March 03, 2013 4:15 PM  

Rach Maddow is a nice looking young man and i wish him all the best on his blog. I am encouraged that our young folk are able to post their feelings and thoughts.

Blogger TJIC March 04, 2013 1:11 PM  

> he smiled readily and giggled

Jesus wept.

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts