If you put or lay your cards on the table, you deal with a situation by speaking openly about your feelings, ideas, or plans. Hmm… Jonas Paffhausen never does that, does he?
Some of my friends have told me of a loudmouthed Renovationist nuisance on the web who appears to enjoy attacking me… All right, let’s be objective and see who’s naughty and who’s nice using scientific criteria. The following is from Qunatcast.com. Let’s conceal my smarmy friend’s identity… just because they’re a bezkulturny lout doesn’t mean that I have the right to do the same thing to them (there’s such a thing as integrity…). Let’s call them the “Angel”… no… their name does not begin with “A” (it’s something I just picked out of thin air, actually…).
Monthly readership, Voices from Russia
My news site (Voices from Russia) reaches 10,000 discrete people a month, and has an average daily readership of 618. My pleasant little interlocutor runs a website that reaches 527 discrete people a month and has an average daily readership of 51. “Readership” is not “hits”… it’s the number of “cookies” counted per period (I normally run 60-75,000 hits per month). Nevertheless, 527 is not 10,000, and 51 is not 618. There appears to be a slight discrepancy in my favour. To add a little detail to the pot, Angel has 427 US and 100 foreign people per month, and an average daily readership of 45 in the US and 6 abroad. In comparison, my site has 5,200 US and 4,800 foreign readers per month. My average daily readership is 374 in the US and 244 aboard. Am I being catty if I point up that my average daily readership exceeds Angel’s monthly figure? Furthermore, Angel’s daily readership figure is 9.7 percent of the monthly figure, whereas on my site, the corresponding figure is 6.2 percent. The lower this figure is, the lower the proportion of addicts/regulars on a site. Keep this in mind; it’ll be of importance later. The higher this figure is, the greater the chance that its readership is a self-satisfied, self-contained, and smug little coterie. Apparently, Angel’s site has only been around since November ’09, it started with 360 monthly people, with a high point of 550, down to the current figure of 527. It’s a typical reverse-S curve, for those familiar with statistical graphs. Let’s be fair… how did my site fare after six months of operation? Look at the graph below.
Monthly readership, Voices from Russia, from its inception in 11/07
On my site, at the end of six months, in May 2008, I had an average of 4,000 people per month. As for traffic frequency, 1 percent of Angel’s audience are addicts, accounting for 36 percent of hits; 37 percent are regulars, accounting for 47 percent of hits; and 62 percent are passers-by accounting for 17 percent of hits. In comparison, for my site, look at the graph below:
You’ll note that I have more “passers-by” and fewer “addicts” and “regulars”. An addict logs on to a site at least once daily and a regular does so at least once a week. A passer-by, quite logically, is someone who logs on less frequently, often, only once. The higher your proportion of addicts and regulars, the more likely you are talking to a small coterie of like-minded fanatics. 38 percent of Angel’s audience are addicts/regulars, accounting for 83 percent of hits; that is, 200 individuals account for 83 percent of their hits. On the other hand, 21 percent of my audience are addicts/regulars, meaning that 2,100 individuals account for 51 percent of my hits. Another way of looking at this is that 327 passers-by came to Angel’s site and 7,900 came to mine. All things being equal, if one can “convert” 1 percent of passers-by into regulars, it’s obvious that my site has a greater chance of growth than Angel’s does.
This isn’t the first time that I’ve noticed that a critic was reaching only a minuscule set of like-minded individuals. However, as Angel is free in their criticisms… well, why is their site so unpopular, if I can put it so baldly? By the way, there was a reason I didn’t post the Quantcast graphs for Angel’s site here. Firstly, it would’ve robbed Angel of anonymity and confidentiality… that is, I would’ve been a thief of their privacy… decent people don’t do that. Secondly, and just as important, it’s my policy not to give airtime to fanatics, fools, and true believers; therefore, I chose to do this in such a way as to not give access to their site. Thirdly, and most importantly, it removes any ad hominem taint to my comments. The nasty and personal nature of the attacks launched by the Angels of this world on the ‘Net sicken me to no end… I’ll not do so… no, not even the most vicious attack by a troll allows you to do that. Simple decency and good manners forbids it… you don’t even have to drag in Christianity. However, we must tell those such as Angel that the decent majority opposes their nasty little tactics, though.
Let’s look at comparisons of my site with some other personal sites. Of some of the “better-known” sites run by konvertsy, orrologion.blogspot.com, frederica.com, and ochlophobist.blogspot.com, all had no traffic figures available. That means that they have fewer “hits” than my site does. There were figures available for Fr Andrew Phillip’s Orthodox England. He has 5,000 US people, but there aren’t any figures available for foreign hits or for daily readership. That is to say, his audience in the USA (at least) is the same size as mine. I’d argue that our sites are complimentary… mine is feisty, ornery, and journalistic… Batiushka Andrew’s is theological and learned. It’s a good boilermaker… a pint of honest ale followed by a shot of good whiskey. It’s good for what ails ya… and, yes, Fr Andrew and I correspond with one another. I have a sneaking suspicion that our readership more or less overlaps. Here’s a graph of his site’s performance over the past year:
Monthly readership, Orthodox England
Let’s do some comparison with some of the official sites. For a starter, let’s look at oca.org. They have 22,500 US readers monthly, there are no foreign figures available. Their daily readership is 4,900. This brings a daily/monthly readership ratio of 21.8 percent… that means that there is a VERY high proportion of addicts/regulars. In short, oca.org is preaching to the choir. My US monthly readership is 22.1 percent of oca.org… I won’t add my foreign readers because no figures are available for oca.org’s foreign readership; it’s a bogus comparison, unfortunately, the Angels of this world love to engage in such, do they not?
Here are graphs of their performance over the past year:
Monthly readership, oca.org
Monthly visits, oca.org
Generally, this site is trending downwards in people and upwards in visits. Hmm… that means that the true believers are getting jittery.
All right, how is the AOCANA doing? The Antiochians do make a great deal of noise, do they not? Their site has 17,400 US readers per month, there are no foreign figures available. My monthly US readership is 29.9 percent of the Antiochian site, not bad, eh? The daily readership figure given is 873, which doesn’t seem right at all. However, when one looks at the graph for monthly hits (not monthly people), one sees such volatility that only a fool would dare to try to pluck a synthesis out of them. INTERESTING. Look at the AOCANA graphs below.
Monthly readership, antiochian.org
Monthly visits, antiochian.org
It’s almost as though the AOCANA had no substantial solidity to it whatsoever. Don’t forget that Again magazine had 3,000 subscribers in the late 80s… and the same figure some twenty years later. In short, the vaunted “growth” of this body may only be puffery given life by Saliba. Don’t be fooled by the antics of Reardon, Gillquist, Honeycutt, et al. It may be nothing but an Internet House of Cards… and we’ve all seen those, haven’t we?
Now, let’s look at the ROCOR’s site. They have 16,700 monthly US people, and a daily readership of 1,200, which gives us a monthly/daily readership ratio of 7.2 percent. This is much lower than the OCA figure, and only slightly higher than mine is, which argues for growth in this site. Indeed, it appears as though OCA people are jumping ship and checking out both the AOCANA and ROCOR. In fact, it appears as though the former has been investigated and rejected, whilst the latter is under active consideration at present. This figure is almost as many as that for the AOCANA site (96.0 percent to be exact), and it’s 74.2 percent of the OCA figure, given that the ROCOR is only some 20 percent (estimated) the size of the OCA. My US monthly readership is 31.1 percent of the ROCOR website figure, no mean feat for a personal website.
Monthly readership, ROCOR website
Monthly hits, ROCOR website
Look for big things from the Jordanville folks… Hilarion Kapral is a sly and cunning Ukie… he knows how to keep his mouth shut. Don’t be fooled by his shy and placid smile… there’s some real peasant cunning and grit behind it all… just like Laurus Skurla (remember him? HK is his protégé, after all). Do notice that when he is uncomfortable with a person or situation, he plants a wide and beaming insincere “sincere smile” on his face (I don’t think that I’m the only one to have noticed this). He smiled in that way when he met Paffhausen, Saliba, and Gabriel. When he is comfortable and happy, he has a quiet and unassuming peasant smile (indeed, it’s rather touching… I don’t think that it’s an affectation). You see that in his photos with his beloved Australian flock and the snaps taken of his recent trip to the Ukraine.
Lastly, amongst the official sites, let’s look at the Greeks. Is it any surprise that they have the largest number of monthly people? They have 37,700 monthly people, with 2,200 daily readers. That gives a ratio of 5.8 percent, lower (and better) than mine. This site is showing an upward trend. My site has a US readership 13.8 percent of the GOA figure, which isn’t bad at all.
Monthly readership, goarch.org
Monthly visits, goarch.org
Let’s turn our attention to two Renovationist sites that think very highly of themselves. The first is Mark Stokoe’s so-called Orthodox Christians for Accountability. Have you noticed how he muted all of his rhetoric after he was given a seat on the Protestant-inspired “Metropolitan Council?” His interview with Paffhausen was a joke… “fluff” would be overgenerous as an estimation. Mr Stokoe is a rabid Renovationist and radical autocephalist, and his posts reflect that. He believes in Schmemann’s heresy that people can “excommunicate themselves”, when everyone knows that such requires a hearing before a bishop (the Renovationists do everything possible to strip the bishops of any real power, you see). That being said, his figures look good at first glance, 11,700 monthly US readers, and 3,400 daily US readers. Let’s look at the graphs.
Monthly readership, ocanews.org
Monthly visits, ocanews.org
People are way up since March 2010, but the number of visits is only 25 percent that of its peak in September 2009 and still falling. That means that people signed on to see if Stokoe said anything about Paffhausen’s failure to discipline Velencia (the Koumentakos case). This site looks like it’s headed for implosion.
Finally, let’s take a long look at a site that thinks very highly of itself… the so-called Orthodox Forum. You’d think it was a major venue with all the caterwauling of Harry Coin… well, let’s look at objective figures. It reaches 975 monthly readers (606 in the US, 369 foreign). Less than a thousand! Whew… it looks like Harry Coin is the original “Don’t pay attention to the man behind the curtain” guy! I was rolling on the ground laughing at this… this group thinks SO highly of itself, yet it has an audience only 9.75 percent of mine (or, to put it another way, my site has 10.2 times more readers). Betcha that Rod Dreher is a member… it wouldn’t surprise me. Its daily readership is 93 (69 US 24 foreign), giving a ratio of 9.5 percent… almost the same as Angel’s. I’ll bet you that all of Angel’s readers are in this group, and vice versa. Birds of a feather do flock together.
WHAT A POTYOMKIN VILLAGE!
Here’s a graph for this Grand Fenwickian site:
Monthly readership, Orthodox Forum:
The traffic stats seem to indicate a static and inbred group. There are some good people here (of whom I must mention Bob Czech, a most wonderful fellow), but a clique of twenty loud Renovationists, led by Harry Coin, rule the site. Like all Renovationists, they use intimidation and personal smears to put their point across (one of the worst has the username of “Hank Leaf”). Caveat lector.
Without a doubt, all of this is interesting. It tells you “who” is actually reading “what”. I’ll tell you why folks come to my site:
- I try to give an accurate reading of the news with no censorship or guff
- I use interesting images
- I don’t waste your time… if I do that, I’m showing you disrespect, for I’m stealing your God-given life
You do have to feel sorry for the Angels of this world. When they’re thwarted, like toddlers, they fling poo. Decent people don’t do that. God willing, Angel will grow up someday. In the meantime, consider the source…
If you wish a ton of laughs, JP gave an “interview” to Ancient Faith Radio with… with Eric Tosi, the dweeb who told us, “The records simply don’t exist”. For those of you who wish to pointlessly flagellate themselves and waste some time, here’s the URL:
I’ll tell you what… let’s set up a REAL interview! We should have the Der Spiegel guys who beat up the Boy Blunder interview Paffhausen, and I’d brief them beforehand on Podmoshensky, Bobby K, Eric Iliff (may his memory be eternal!), Feodosy’s explicit exploits in the Village, and the HOOMies. Then, I’d step aside and let Mel and Cappy give ‘em “the rest of the story”. Trust me, that posing and preening California New Age Hippie would bitch and moan… “They’re not being fair! They’re persecuting me…” THAT would be an interview to read, wouldn’t it?
The truth will set you free… but only if you let it. Lay your cards on the table… Paffhausen, pay up or go home…
Thursday 20 May 2010