Comments on: ‘Nacle Numbers 2007, Part 1

By: 2008 Niblets: Rock the Vote Here! at Mormon Matters

2008 Niblets: Rock the Vote Here! at Mormon Matters — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 10:49:54 +0000

[...] Ziff’s Nacle numbers posts [...]

By: Last Chance for Niblet Nominations at Mormon Matters

Last Chance for Niblet Nominations at Mormon Matters — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 23:35:37 +0000

[...] Jana’s picture of her belly-button J. Max Wilson’s “A Critical Look at LDS Blog Portals, Parts 1-4” Lynnette’s “Using Human Reason to Think About God” Ray’s Farewell to the Bloggernacle Seriously So Blessed Nominating self for every Niblet Award: Steve Evans What Mormons Like Ziff’s Nacle numbers posts [...]

By: Zelophehad’s Daughters | Nacle Numbers, 2003-2008, Part 1

Zelophehad’s Daughters | Nacle Numbers, 2003-2008, Part 1 — Wed, 06 May 2009 20:14:28 +0000

[...] year I threw together a big pile of numbers, counting during the previous year the number and length of posts and comments [...]

By: Zelophehad’s Daughters | ‘Nacle Numbers: Notes

Zelophehad’s Daughters | ‘Nacle Numbers: Notes — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 09:19:34 +0000

[...] more questions about the 11 blogs in my sample. (If you haven’t read previous installments, Part 1 describes the sample, Part 2 discusses blogs, Part 3, bloggers, and Part 4, [...]

By: Nine Moons » Blog Archive : Statistical Proof Of My Laziness…or My Evolution As A Mormon Blogger » Statistical Proof Of My Laziness…or My Evolution As A Mormon Blogger

Thu, 12 Jun 2008 05:59:41 +0000

[...] I don’t remember). Ziff over at Zelophehad’s Daughters wrote a great series of posts (Part I, Part II, Part III, and Part IV) crunching numbers of some of the bigger Bloggernacle blogs. [...]

By: Zelophehad’s Daughters | ‘Nacle Numbers: The Commenters

Zelophehad’s Daughters | ‘Nacle Numbers: The Commenters — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 05:27:29 +0000

[...] previous installments of ‘Nacle Numbers, I’ve shown some data on my entire sample of 11 blogs, on differences among blogs, and on differences among bloggers. In this installment, [...]

By: BrianJ

BrianJ — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 00:18:54 +0000

Ziff, that makes sense, and it is unlikely that any blogs get more traffic than those big three. I actually like the fact that your data set includes some well-known albeit less-trafficked blogs because it gives a nice range. (What I mean by “less-trafficked” is that there are group blogs that get more traffic than some on your list.)

By: Kim Siever

Kim Siever — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 23:24:43 +0000

I could go for beach balls. even roulette wheels. I draw the line at drinking anything that has the name Coke in it.

I am now having to forcefully control my reflex action. Thanks, RT.

By: Ziff

Ziff — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 23:12:11 +0000

I guess I figured that BCC, T&S, and FMH are the most trafficked, but I don’t have any data to back that up.

Perhaps I was unclear in the original. I didn’t mean to say that my sample includes only the most trafficked blogs. That is, I wasn’t claiming that these 11 blogs are the most visited. I was just saying that the 11 include the (three) most trafficked. Does that make more sense?

By: BrianJ

BrianJ — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 21:56:55 +0000

I’m sure my sample is biased by what I like to read, but given that it includes the most trafficked blogs in the bloggernacle….

I’m wondering how you know that you picked up the most trafficked blogs in the bloggernacle.