DISQUS

DISQUS Hello! Elliott Back's Blog is using DISQUS, a powerful comment system, to manage its comments. Learn more.

Community Page

Jump to original thread »
Author

Is Blogspot really bad?

Started by elliottback · 8 months ago

No excerpt available. Jump to website »

11 comments

  • A couple of thoughts.....

    1. The next / random blog button isn't truly random - or at least wasn't a while back... As I understand it, Blogger generate a small set of recently published blogs & then the next blog button navigates through that set randomly, which explains why some of the blogs show up more than once in quick succession.

    2. I think that the splogs are probably more visible on the weekends, because there aren't as many "real" blogs getting published? I'd be interested to see a repeat experiment on peak-publishing Tuesday... Either way, 28% is high!!

    3. It appeared at one stage that this button had been fixed & that splogs were being excluded from these results.

    http://blogfresh.blogspot.com/2005/09/next-blog...

    Not so, apparently. What to do, what to do...?
  • As much as I like Blogger/Blogspot (because it plainly works), checking 50 blogs doesn't hit me like a scientific sample making a serious point at whether splogs are less than 30% (which is kind of high, anyway). Depending on the time you're hitting the "next blog" button, you'll find yourself falling into splog after splog and I don't see how that flag thing is helping.

    Blogspot is filled with splogs and blogs that have been dead for 4+ years. They should consider a serious clean-up.
  • 90% of the blogspot.com pings that BlogsNow sees are junk.
    That's all I can tell you. It got worse over time, and this weekend it tipped.

    It would have been easy for Blogger to stop this when it was starting a year ago. They did not.
  • There's an assumption here, which is a big one, and that is that clicking the "random blog" button actually returns a "reasonably random" blog for some definition of what properties you need the randomness to hold. If this function is random, then we do indeed have a great scientific sample. n=50 is more than enough to begin doing statistical tests--the guidlines I always heard in stats class was more than 30. If the next feature is not sufficiently random, then this study is measuring something else...
  • Can someone give me a definition of a splog? Is the site just useless (like mine) or is there a specific characteristic that'll identify one?
  • My guess.

    splog = spam blog.

    That should define splog. :)
  • It's a bad assumption. Blogger <a href="http://buzz.blogger.com/2005/09/next-blog-now-with-less-spam.html
    ">announced last month that they were taking steps to filter spam blogs out of Next Blog.
  • This really struck a pain point for Mark Cuban. His latest post rails on how Google has dropped the ball. Read about it at http://www.blogmaverick.com/entry/1234000717063...
  • Since no one at GOOGLE will admit or even tell us to what is going on, I have had to talk to other bloggers to find out why I have not been able to post for two days.

    Supposedly, blogs with few posts - and I have 300 in one year - but with a lot of links have been shut down without any prior warning by Google. Even Microsoft at its worst has never screwed over its customers this badly.

    Now as I write a blog about the media - most of my posts link to the articles I am write about, hence I have a lot of links. But Goggle has now decided to censor my views and no longer allows me to post.

    All I get is this:

    006 Please contact Blogger Support.blog/46/41/4/lacowboy/index.html

    Except - there is no way to contact anyone at blogger support...

Add New Comment

Returning? Login