Blog Logs

Posted on Monday, August 2, 2004 @ 9:46 am
Filed Under Dabbler

Note 11/17/07: This is obsolete, but potentially interesting to someone. I've removed most links; some no longer exist, and the others didn't seem worth fixing.


Some of the things I find in the server logs for a dabbler's journal.

Web server log reading is not exactly a science.  My webspace provider furnishes me two views of my logs--one uses Webalizer and gives a simple summary of traffic, basically arranged by month; the other uses NetTracker and permits some fancy filtering.  Although they show generally similar information, in detail they can be quite different.  For instance:

Like I say, not exactly a science; since they're reporting from the same data source, I expected them to track a little more closely than that.  On the other hand, I've used several weblog readers over the years and know that there's a lot of room for interpretation.  Although the logs record discreet events, it's the patterns in those events that's interesting.  Summarizing those patterns requires judgments about how things should be classified.  It ain't just counting.  So when we see these disagreements we're seeing different programmer's interpretations of the data, and I'm sure both sets of assumptions can be defended.  Trusting that those choices have some basis in reality, consistency over time is probably more important than getting the details "just right."  After all, I'm trying to understand why folks are reading me.  Both tools give me clues.

Followup:  For August 2, both reported 949 hits.  That's better.


Who Reads Dabbler?

I've come to believe that the most interesting number NetTracker delivers about this site is "Total repeat visitors."  The numbers there suggest that I've got about 25 "daily readers" (user agents, for the most part), and perhaps a hundred readers overall who check the site regularly.  This has been pretty stable since mid-May, when my readership suddenly doubled over a three-week period.

One last note:  Last month's long vacation seemed not to affect the readership pattern.  I'm a little surprised.

What Pages are those Readers Reading?

Trivia: One of the most-served "pages" on the site is the ever-changing Daily Picture thumbnail.

The most popular pages on the site are the RSS feeds.  Here's how they rank (all numbers which follow are from June 15--the day I rebuilt the RSS feeds--thru August 1 and exclude me when I could reasonably do so):

Truth:  I didn't expect these numbers to be so similar.  Note that for convenience I'm ignoring the "discontinued" feeds, which show a similar pattern.

Home:  The Front Page is the other "routine" way to check the site for changes.  That page has also had about 1,000 hits in this period.

After the feeds, there's an enormous dropoff--which means that most of my page hits are from feed readers, and tell more about the tools than about my (human) readers.  The highest-count page which isn't a feed or Home is the "Chrono" page (another index, of course [not currently extent]), with 88 hits in this time period.

The site has eight indexed categories.  Here are the hit counts for those indexes:

Pages, jowo.  Tell me about pages.  These are the most popular pages, and some comments:

Second tier.

Well, you get the idea.  There's really no one page which attracts a lot of readers, and those which do attract people are not the (bureaucratic whimsy) folks I'm doing the most serious writing for.

For what it's worth, a new page generally attracts five to fifteen hits within a few days; I take these to be mostly folks reading the excerpt feed and clicking through.  (See what I mean about interpretation?)  Page views after that are largely driven by Google.

Google

Of the 6,600 or so page referrals to dabblersjournal.com since June 15, only 925 show a referring website in the log--that is, I've had around 5,700 hits from bookmarks, user agents, and other non-reporting link sources.  Of the 925 hits which reported their referral page, 563 were referred by Google; the next highest total for a "search engine" is Yahoo at 64.  AOL Search generated 46 hits; all other sources of traffic are insignificant, except in aggregate.

What did they search for?

The first keyword set which could be called a "Bureaucratic Whimsy" search is Frank Patrick (3).  No other search for a "Whimsy" page has more than one hit.

Oh, yes.  I got a link from Robert Scoble during this period (to my comment about Spolsky on Microsoft); it generated 15 hits.  Not exactly a Slashdot impact.


Final note:  How do folks expect to find anything useful when their search term is "passable"?  Or "frequent"?


Another 11/17/07 note: This entry drew a response from Effern/Ethan Johnson on his then-blog The Vision Thing (no longer extent in the same form), which provoked a followup from me. Effern's entry is gone, and my response will likely not be reposted.


Last changed 11/17/07 @ 2:31 pm

Comments

Leave a Reply


The moderator will not approve anonymous comments (he's tolerant of nicknames, though). Thanks for your cooperation.



XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>