Posts by lprent
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Most Discursive Website, in reply to Richard Aston,
Wow we have a fancy Latin word for old shit – handy I could use that sometime.
That was my thought when I saw it whilst moderating comments at TS recently. I even remember the earth sciences lecture room exploding with mirth on a lazy Hamilton summers day in 1979 when I first heard it (damned if I can remember the course through). Refiled for later use.
And since the subject sidetracked into earth sciences and troll slang arose from the compacted sediments of 2008..... Well it seemed appropriate.
Well I found a use for it :)
-
Hard News: Most Discursive Website, in reply to Russell Brown,
Nice. Congratulations.
I rather like the idea of The Standard being second on the list of chattering sites after Public Address. It isn't one of our primary objectives but still nice to know.
I tend to put the numbers of commentators to unique readers at The Standard to be less than half that level. I have a half written post on comments on my queue at present but haven't finished extracting numbers from the SQL. By the sound of Russel's comment above they may be taking a broader measure across the websites.
Looking at the number of "matched unique browsers", I'm kind of puzzled about what they are.
-
Hard News: Most Discursive Website, in reply to Thomas Johnson,
That wasn’t the number of unique visitors (it was less than half of those according to google analytics).
It was “matched unique browsers”. Which is something that I have no idea what they’re measuring. It does coincide roughly with the numbers of really regular visitors.
But keep fondling your ancient coprolites if that is all you can do http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coprolite
-
I was slightly shocked to find out how many leading homepages weigh in at ~1MB.
Wow! I tracked back and tried YSlow on my site The Standard. I was relieved to find that it weighs in at about 170kb for the front page, and about 240kb for a comments page that had 170 odd long comments over the weekend. That includes everything that it loads, gravatars, css, js, etc as well as the content.
In practice it'd be less than that because of the client side caching and compression. It is usually less than 25kb on the front and 80kb on a long comments page.
But the site is designed to be resource friendly at both sides of the system. On the server because I really don't want to pay that much. On the client because people want to read, navigate and write. It is a very simple site.
I should get hold of an itouch or something and css a mobile version. It'd mainly turn off the sidebars. But how many of our readers are likely to use one?
YSlow was elegant - nice use of a debugger.