..now, for something completely different...

[BURKE89]

How 'bout Alexa ratings?

As I was just comparing my "Paleo" sites vs "Neo" rabble politico sites... I thought about P-L vs other comparable sites. Well, it's rather interesting, indeed.

Let's have a go here:

P-L ranked at 70,491 (remember, a low # is good). In essence, P-L is in the top 71K sites around the world.

RWG, however, tallied a mere 134,048.

For perspective:

Yahoo - 1.

E-bay - 7.

Anastasiaweb - 18,777

Firstdream - 161,542

Worker world online (workers-dot-org) - 267,910  (I couldn't forget a Yoe favorite)

...nor could I deny a upstart fav from S.L.C...

Alas, coloringbook-dot-com has pulled the upset. Sitting pretty at 254,222.

Enjoy...

[Dan]

... in response to ..now, for something completely differen..., posted by BURKE89 on Jan 21, 2003

I would not be surprised to see a LOT of the casual - and even long-time - posters from this board migrate to some more sensible venue. Or cease participation altogether.

FWIW

- Dan

[MarkInTx]

... in response to Many More Tirades Like The Last Debacle,..., posted by Dan on Jan 22, 2003

Maybe it drove up the hit count because of all of the voyeurs out there who tuned in every day to see what would happen next?

[Dan]

... in response to Or, posted by MarkInTx on Jan 22, 2003

A board full of "voyeurs" whose principal interest is to watch your verbal sparring - then it's time for me (at least) to go elsewhere - or cease posting.

As it is, I am ashamed at my lack of self-control and having allowed myself to participate in a lot of the mud-slinging over the past 6 or 9 months or so. It is immature and antithesis to the intent and value of this board.

Unfortunately, as I observed some months back - there are a few arrogant, ignorant loudmouths that have settled in here and they make it upleasant and unproductive for all.

Rather than sit passively on the sidelines, I chose to engage. That was a mistake. At least, in the form I chose to engage, it was a mistake.

So we'll see how things evolve here. Board participation is cyclic. Participants come and go rather fluidly. Some stick - most do not. If this board becomes one for your "voyeurs" - you can have it.

There's a LOT of truth in what your friend FOG has to say - in spite of your response and the manner in which he chooses to say it.

- Dan

[thesearch]

... in response to Possibly So Mark - and When It Becomes ...., posted by Dan on Jan 22, 2003

Glad to see you back in your best form. It is best to leave the mudslinging to those lower in the evolutionary scale.

However, we all do it as we all have our moments - it not always easy to look at ourselves, see it, drop it,  and get back on a more even keel versus continuing to wallow in the mud

[Charles]

... in response to Possibly So Mark - and When It Becomes ...., posted by Dan on Jan 22, 2003

Dan, I would have to say that my interest in participating has waned considerably in recent months.  It's very hard to enjoy and be of help to anyone when Mark, Jack, Oscar et al, and, last but not least, you too Dan, seek to detract from the worthwhile purpose of this board by, among other things, elongated debates to prove your manhood, trying to be an expert on everything by commenting on every post, whether helpful or not, trying to get the last word on every subject, going into a ballistic ad hominem attack when someone disagrees with them, and use of invective that certainly discourages the "lurkers" or the "silent majority" of readers from participating.  To your credit, you (and Oscar, IMHO) have made some efforts to clean up your act of late, I only wish that others had more time to spend with their wives rather than trying to dominate the board and run people off.  I may turn this on every other day.  Lately I haven't even bothered because I'm sick of turning to this board and seeing (I rarely take the time to read em) another knock down drag out thread.  Just my take, FWIW.

[Globetrotter]

... in response to Re: Possibly So Mark - and When It Becom..., posted by Charles on Jan 22, 2003

I'll second that.  Seems as late to be a waste of time to read anything here...............

[LP]

... in response to Re: Re: Possibly So Mark - and When It B..., posted by Globetrotter on Jan 22, 2003

[This message has been edited by LP]

...*always* been a waste of time to read anything here, I thought you realized that.....

[Dan]

... in response to Re: Possibly So Mark - and When It Becom..., posted by Charles on Jan 22, 2003

And I am sincerely embarrassed by my contributions to the problems.

There are a few guys here that just hit me the wrong way - and I haven't exercised much (if any) self-control in response.

I am committed to doing better.

Sorry.

In any case - please keep reading and posting. The guys on this board need people like yourself that are experienced and reasonable. Don't let me be the reason that your interest level wanes.

- Dan

[MarkInTx]

... in response to Possibly So Mark - and When It Becomes ...., posted by Dan on Jan 22, 2003

Dan...

You make a post that *attempts* to be the voice of reason, and then you add that last zinger...

There is "a LOT of truth" to what FOG says?

Really???

As I write this, here are Fog's "Posts of Truth" on the board:

===========
Posted by Fog on 01/22/2003
In Reply to: Obviously posted by MarkInTx on 01/22/2003:

Just give her some time, Mark, you'll be dumped soon!

===========
Posted by Fog on 01/22/2003
In Reply to: Well, Hello Fog! posted by MarkInTx on 01/22/2003:

Nah, your choice will have nothing to do with it. Once the Green Card comes in, she'll not need you anymore. My guess is that she'll return to her old profession to earn money.

============

I'm a little dense Dan, so maybe you can help me out.

Which one of those posts are loaded with the TRUTH as you see it?

[Dan]

... in response to A lot of truth?, posted by MarkInTx on Jan 22, 2003

By the fact that Patrick deleted a lot of threads yesterday, many of FOG's along with them and you only have access to his/her posts today.

Among those deleted posts were some that were, indeed, quite critical of certain posters - you among those.

I found several of his posts (not ALL of them) spot-on.

My closing wasn't intended as a "zinger" - at least, not in the way you apparently interpreted it. I apologize for that.

- Dan

[MarkInTx]

... in response to You're Limited - Just As I Am . . ., posted by Dan on Jan 22, 2003

Than Mr. Fog does, indeed, seem to have an agenda?

And that this agenda is, perhaps, not in the best interest of the board?

[Dan]

... in response to You will agree then, posted by MarkInTx on Jan 22, 2003

I appreciate FOG's - just like LP's - unabashed and unashamed presentation of the truth as they see it.

I happen to agree with much (not ALL) of what these guys have said - and that perspective is of some value to people involved in this pursuit - in my opinion.

Look Mark - I won't get sucked into being an apologist for FOG. Your line of questioning took us in that direction with a debate on LP in the past and i won't take that path with this exchange.

I've said everything I intended to say. I didn't intend to be confrontational or offensive.

Take it for what it's worth.

- Dan

[MarkInTx]

... in response to No, Not Necessarily . . ., posted by Dan on Jan 22, 2003

Thanks, I think you made your stand here quite clear, thanks.

I especially liked your spot-on comparison of LP and FOG.

You are quite right. Good observation!

[Dan]

... in response to Great Post Dan!, posted by MarkInTx on Jan 22, 2003

I'm glad you liked the comparison.

Tell me though - the sarcastic tenor of your response suggests that you are implying a connection between Fog and LP that is lost on me. Care to be more explicit?

- Dan