Monday, January 31, 2005

Why this blog will never contain a site meter

Before I begin, I'd like to apologize to any onlookers who are about to read this post. I'd like to refrain as much as possible from criticizing people in the manner that I am about to employ, although exceptions always exist (thugs, aggressively devout statists, etc.). I simply can not hold back the urge to do so any longer, given the increasing vulgarity and stupidity of this person's presence. Again, I apologize, since it's not my normal nature to be so spiteful.

The reason why this blog will never contain a site meter can be found here (scroll down to the entry titled "Put a Sitemeter on your blog").

Why is it that when I read something of hers, I'm reminded of Ashlee Simpson, certain Frank Zappa lyrics and the general repugnancy associated with the "high school mentality"?

If being respected by her Beltway "libertarian" in-crowd requires cheering on imperialistic aggression, supporting violations of federalism, questioning the intelligence of minorities, advocating a breast implant tax, parroting the government sanctioned version of history, claiming that people who question said history or Bush's foreign policy must simply "hate America", and looking down upon bloggers who don't place a site meter on their blogs, then I can proudly claim to be an icky outsider.

Since I'm an advocate of liberty, being an outsider is only natural.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Freeman, I didn't have to follow your link to guess that as a middle-aged female I'm not the sort of reader "Libertarian Girl" may have targeted, and I spent just enough time reading her blog to feel old and perhaps permanently dis-enfranchised from the L-word. (Give me an "A"...)

Your post did get me thinking about site meters, a subject I'd never thought about quite the way I have tonight. Other people's opinions count for something, surely... feedback mechanisms take that into account. A site meter seems likely to invite or distract your attention away from what _you_ want to say, and toward what other people want to hear or what draws web traffic. Frequent hits don't seem like the best indication of an accurate aim - sometimes, I suspect it's just the opposite.

Kudos to you.


12:19 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

LMAO!!! While I'll admit some interest in knowing something about my site's traffic, I'm more interested in quality than quantity ... and even so, this curious snake hasn't bothered to lift a finger to get my questions answered. I figure if someone visits my blog and wants to let me know about it, he or she'll do so. But then, I've not been too concerned about what the "popular kids" do or think since I was about 14 ...

And now, if you'll excuse me, I need to go hear a certain Zappa song. :-)


7:58 AM  
Blogger Wally Conger said...

Cute as a button, dumb as a brick. She sounds like a neocon Republican who simply thinks it's hipper to call herself a libertarian.

11:53 AM  
Blogger dadahead said...

Actually, Libertarian Girl is the Jessica Simpson of the blogosphere.

4:15 PM  
Blogger John T. Kennedy said...

Hey, don't let a dope turn you off of anything, judge site meters on their own merits.

5:46 PM  
Blogger freeman said...

heh... site meters definitely have their own merit and be useful to some, but I've never been interested in having such a thing on my blog anyway.

And I used Ashlee instead of Jessica because she, I'm assuming, is pretending to be something that she's not (an anarchist). A comparison to either of those sisters is appropriate in my book.

6:07 PM  
Blogger Austropithecanthropus said...

Freeman, you Critter, you definitely have a thing for Libertarian Girl. You are drooling all over her. However, how will you get to DC? Keep us posted, won't you?

6:41 AM  
Blogger freeman said...

Heh... as I stated over at Independent Country...

I prefer brunettes.

I'd much rather date a socialist hippie chick than an obtuse neocon in libertarian clothing.

This critter will not be misrepresented!

5:56 PM  
Blogger Kevin Carson said...

Like, OMG, LOL, WTF??!!! How r u gonna no who the kewl kidz r if u dont have a sitemeter? WhatEVER!!!

12:39 AM  
Blogger kingfelix said...

I don't think you can reject site meters on the basis that someone like that is in favor of them.

She wears shoes, too, no doubt, so are you going to stop wearing shoes next?

12:54 AM  
Blogger freeman said...

Good point pinhut. As I stated in an earlier comment, site meters definitely have their own merit and are useful to some, but I've never been interested in having such a thing on my blog anyway. Even without her post on the subject, I don't think I would have ever decided to add such a gadget to my blog.

While I'd be lying to myself and others to say that I have no interest in having an audience, I just don't have any interest whatsoever in actually keeping count of site traffic. I had a number of reasons for wanting to start a blog, and I would guess that some of mine differ from LG's decision to start a blog.

I will say though that her comment about not respecting blogs that don't have site meters didn't have any persuasive effect on me, to say the least.

3:10 AM  
Blogger James Leroy Wilson said...

It's not that I don't want to know who's partaking freely of my astounding genius, it is rather that the counters I've, uh, encountered, are not reliable: they over-inflate the hits, or they don't record any hits at all.

That's why I prefer looking at responses. I write weekly at and sometimes at Mr. Rockwell has never told me how many people read my articles. But I can tell by the size of the e-mail response. No, I haven't a clue as to the reach of the article, but I do have a clue as to the level of the reaction to it, both positive and negative. It is always far, far, greater at LRC than at the PO. This is somewhat unfortionate, as the Partial Observer is, I think, a great and interesting site - but on the other hand it is literally an "amateur" operation that averages less than a new article per day, as opposed to Rockwell's 12 new daily articles. Yet it is at the PO that I have launched a personal crusade against idolotry and the worship of the State and its Glorious Leader, however gradually I'm making the case. On the other hand, my LRC articles, by and large, are but red meat to the already convinced. But that's also, relatively, a far larger crowd. Yes, I'll take any and every opportunity to write for Rockwell, whenever he accepts my articles. Or any offer from a conglamerate that controls a far greater audience. But we must remember that it is the substance of what we say that is the main thing. Truth is not a matter of fashion, of the right mascara. It is about expressing opinion just as I see it, not expressing it in ways I think may please other people.

And this is why the Internet, and blogs particularly, and your blog specifically, is so great.

Also, I agree about brunettes, and kind of have a thing for Sunni, who, if this is the Sunni from the late, great, is cute as hell. But I understand that she's taken. The magical thing about Libertarian Girl isn't really what she looks like, but what she does. And what she does is, she annoys the hell out of me.

The point being, based on the rarity of comments, I know I don't get much traffic on my own blog - and while I don't think that's "okay," I'll live with it. To Educate is to Liberate, and that's my motto, as opposed to "Persuasion is political gain." You do what you can.

5:39 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wally wrote: "I agree about brunettes, and kind of have a thing for Sunni, who, if this is the Sunni from the late, great, is cute as hell. But I understand that she's taken."

Okay, picture me blushing 'bout the same shade as FLC's lovely background here ... And, FTR, I'd like to say that I can only be "taken" in the same sense as the biblical meaning of "known".

I've heard of you, Wally, but not visited your blog. I'll hie me there anon.

The former FMN Sunni -- accept no substitutes!

8:45 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home