Weblogging
Webloggers
It is so refreshing!

Weblogging
Webloggers
It is so refreshing!

This is interesting, Fedster.  Thanks for taking the time to share.  Since I can always use a shot of humility, I shall give StatCounter a try.  Like you, I also go back several times I day to a site where I expect replies to comments or there is an interesting debate taking place.  StatCounter’s ability to filter out repeaters is a great feature in a free utility.  [The repeat notion reminds me of Saratoga Racetrack, which counts each of the times -- for some, it's 40 or 50 or more -- that some folks pay for general admission entry on souvenir hat, bobble-head, or t-shirt days, when giving its headcount stats for the season.]
As always happens to the boy who points out the emperor’s scanty wardrobe, I’ve been scorned by the poohbahs of the blawgiverse for suggesting that the numbers are so small.  Your 2% number is probably high in the universe of all weblogs (even active ones), but might be about right for lawyer weblogs.  The low numbers of actual human beings reading weblawgs also solves the riddle of there being so few Commentors, among a famously opinionated group.  The percent of commentors to actual visitors might actually be rather high.  Of course, when you figure how long it takes to write some of the lengthy comments, you start wondering what the median time spent at the weblog might be.  Lots of really fast readers.  More humility seems warranted.

This is interesting, Fedster.  Thanks for taking the time to share.  Since I can always use a shot of humility, I shall give StatCounter a try.  Like you, I also go back several times I day to a site where I expect replies to comments or there is an interesting debate taking place.  StatCounter’s ability to filter out repeaters is a great feature in a free utility.  [The repeat notion reminds me of Saratoga Racetrack, which counts each of the times -- for some, it's 40 or 50 or more -- that some folks pay for general admission entry on souvenir hat, bobble-head, or t-shirt days, when giving its headcount stats for the season.]
As always happens to the boy who points out the emperor’s scanty wardrobe, I’ve been scorned by the poohbahs of the blawgiverse for suggesting that the numbers are so small.  Your 2% number is probably high in the universe of all weblogs (even active ones), but might be about right for lawyer weblogs.  The low numbers of actual human beings reading weblawgs also solves the riddle of there being so few Commentors, among a famously opinionated group.  The percent of commentors to actual visitors might actually be rather high.  Of course, when you figure how long it takes to write some of the lengthy comments, you start wondering what the median time spent at the weblog might be.  Lots of really fast readers.  More humility seems warranted.

The most accurate counter I’ve seen is Statcounter  www.statcounter.com). It counts IP addresses that comes to your site, and most importantly, it doesn’t double-count. E.g., If I visit your site 5 times today, most likely you will have five “unique visits.” Hell, I’m not that unique! Sometimes, if I am in a comment war with someone, I will visit a blog 4 or 5 times a day. I suspect others check in frequently to their favorite sites, thus inflating readership numbers.

Statcounter eliminates that problem.

It also gives the relevant data of returning visitor. Due to my high page rank, about 50% of my hits are from Google. That doesn’t mean much to me, as I want people to read me, not just arrive to my site because there was an intersection between their search term and my blog.

Thus, I track two things: Unique visitors (as measured by unique IP addresses over a 24-hour period), and return visitors.

Based on the stats I’ve seen at dozens of blogs, I suspect that few (2%)blogs have over 100 people reading them. Likely, few people have 50 daily (return) visitors. Sobering, ‘eh?

Of course, what I am telling you is the dirty underbelly of legal blogging — No one likes to admit that very few people actually read legal blogs.

The most accurate counter I’ve seen is Statcounter  www.statcounter.com). It counts IP addresses that comes to your site, and most importantly, it doesn’t double-count. E.g., If I visit your site 5 times today, most likely you will have five “unique visits.” Hell, I’m not that unique! Sometimes, if I am in a comment war with someone, I will visit a blog 4 or 5 times a day. I suspect others check in frequently to their favorite sites, thus inflating readership numbers.

Statcounter eliminates that problem.

It also gives the relevant data of returning visitor. Due to my high page rank, about 50% of my hits are from Google. That doesn’t mean much to me, as I want people to read me, not just arrive to my site because there was an intersection between their search term and my blog.

Thus, I track two things: Unique visitors (as measured by unique IP addresses over a 24-hour period), and return visitors.

Based on the stats I’ve seen at dozens of blogs, I suspect that few (2%)blogs have over 100 people reading them. Likely, few people have 50 daily (return) visitors. Sobering, ‘eh?

Of course, what I am telling you is the dirty underbelly of legal blogging — No one likes to admit that very few people actually read legal blogs.