Done!Web said:
Another question...
- Thread starter SwampHag
- Start date
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2012
- Messages
- 11,703
- Reaction score
- 2,616
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
subllibrm said:
Just for the record, fff.org is currently the top three Google hits for "stavesoffzombies."
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2012
- Messages
- 6,740
- Reaction score
- 264
- Points
- 83
Ransom said:
Really? Stavesoffzombies has that kind of interest still going? I never would have thought stavesoffzombies would draw that kind of traffic! I must admit that I am a little jealous that stavesoffzombies ranks ahead of subllibrm. Oh well, stavesoffzombies is the better key word and I will just have to give stavesoffzombies props for that fact.
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2013
- Messages
- 1,829
- Reaction score
- 40
- Points
- 48
Right now, even as we speak, there are 88 users online at the old FFF. And we have 17 right now.
I mean, it says that.
I mean, it says that.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2012
- Messages
- 11,703
- Reaction score
- 2,616
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Vince Massi said:
All that means is that in some recent amount of time, 88 people have accessed fff.com. Note they are all "guests," not "members" - meaning they are not logged-in users.
As I write this, we have 16 users who are logged in and identifiable by name, and 112 guests - so however you want to spin it, Vince, we're more active than the fleabag forum right now.
(Also, fff.com has a statistic at the bottom of each page that told you it took x number of seconds to render it. The one I have on screen says, "Page generated in 1,421,179,574.05390 seconds with 15 queries." Yes, that's 1.4 billion seconds. I have little confidence in their computational abilities . . .)
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2013
- Messages
- 1,829
- Reaction score
- 40
- Points
- 48
Yessirree, there are plenty of amazing statistics on the FFF.
Years ago, an Atheist named "Jaguar" was posting on the errors of Calvinism. Using philosophy only, he had things hopping. He was getting over 200 hits per day.
And then he was getting zero hits per day. Honest! He didn't taper off--he dropped from over 200 hits per day to 0 hits per day in one day. And he stayed at zero hits per day until he left.
Years ago, an Atheist named "Jaguar" was posting on the errors of Calvinism. Using philosophy only, he had things hopping. He was getting over 200 hits per day.
And then he was getting zero hits per day. Honest! He didn't taper off--he dropped from over 200 hits per day to 0 hits per day in one day. And he stayed at zero hits per day until he left.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2012
- Messages
- 11,703
- Reaction score
- 2,616
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Vince Massi said:
Is this your way of admitting your error by changing the subject, Vince?
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2013
- Messages
- 1,829
- Reaction score
- 40
- Points
- 48
No, but I'm going to apologize for being sarcastic, after everything I've been saying about scorners.
The FFFs have been faking their numbers for years. The story about Jaguar confirmed what I had already suspected. The more "hits" you get, the higher you appear in search engines, and it was clear that people were simply clicking on the threads several times a day to get the count up. It was sometimes joked about, and occasionally even admitted.
Over the past few months, we have had about a dozen people who post regularly--this is not a large site, regardless of what the counters show.
When I started explaining the Biblical doctrine of judging, it became one of the most popular threads on this forum--averaging about twenty hits per post. This is not a large site.
But if we can get away from posters attacking people who post, it can become a much bigger and better site.
The FFFs have been faking their numbers for years. The story about Jaguar confirmed what I had already suspected. The more "hits" you get, the higher you appear in search engines, and it was clear that people were simply clicking on the threads several times a day to get the count up. It was sometimes joked about, and occasionally even admitted.
Over the past few months, we have had about a dozen people who post regularly--this is not a large site, regardless of what the counters show.
When I started explaining the Biblical doctrine of judging, it became one of the most popular threads on this forum--averaging about twenty hits per post. This is not a large site.
But if we can get away from posters attacking people who post, it can become a much bigger and better site.
Vince lied?
Will at least he did not judge. That would be unacceptable.
Will at least he did not judge. That would be unacceptable.
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2013
- Messages
- 1,829
- Reaction score
- 40
- Points
- 48
I neither lied nor judged Qwerty. Those are your own sins you are describing.
In over fourteen years of lurking, I noticed that a few posters would judge, speak evil, scorn, etc., and they would drive off other posters. A few would fight back, and several other posters would join in to support sin. The posters who objected to sin would generally make the same three mistakes:
1) Defend themselves. Since judgers really do see their own sins in someone else, that can't work.
2) Point out that the judgers were not being used by God. Since those who judge others are also judging God´s law (without obeying it) they didn't accept God's standards of success, so that didn't work.
3) Object to the lack of love. The judgers and scorners claimed that anyone who objected to their lack of love was not showing love, so that didn't work.
Those people drove off a lot of posters and readers, and that is one reason why the FFF went from a major to a minor site.
In over fourteen years of lurking, I noticed that a few posters would judge, speak evil, scorn, etc., and they would drive off other posters. A few would fight back, and several other posters would join in to support sin. The posters who objected to sin would generally make the same three mistakes:
1) Defend themselves. Since judgers really do see their own sins in someone else, that can't work.
2) Point out that the judgers were not being used by God. Since those who judge others are also judging God´s law (without obeying it) they didn't accept God's standards of success, so that didn't work.
3) Object to the lack of love. The judgers and scorners claimed that anyone who objected to their lack of love was not showing love, so that didn't work.
Those people drove off a lot of posters and readers, and that is one reason why the FFF went from a major to a minor site.
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2013
- Messages
- 1,829
- Reaction score
- 40
- Points
- 48
BALAAM said:Well, the way it sounds, we just need to get vince to explain some more bible doctrines and this forum would explode!
Improve maybe. There has been some of that already.
Whenever a person posts good, helpful information, things improve. A recent thread on the deterioration of HAC has explained a lot of problems that didn't make sense, and the thread has helped some people. When people post insults, accusations, etc., that hurts the forum.