benblog

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

UPDATE: 10-‹-06

In my blog last month, I posted some "research" on data generated by my frontpage stat-counter.

I did not, however, post any findings from this "research." Instead I said simply, "it seems prettly clear to me what the results of this research are." I then did not elaborate.

Allow me to elaborate on my findings from this "research" now.

The number of "returning visitors" reflects the number of people who have "returned" to visit at least two or more times. Therefore, when, in Dec, 2005, 11 people are listed as "returning visitors" this means that the seven visitors of Oct, four of whom "returned" in November, all returned in December, along with the four "returning visitors" from the month before. Therefore, if the number of "returning visitors" in one month is higher than the number of "returning visitors" the month before, it means that the same number of visitors as the preceding month "returned," as well as some who had been "visitors" in a month before. Therefore, read for December, 2005: "the four visitors of the previous month were joined by the seven of the month before," or rather, four November visitors of seven in October returned in December," or even, "the total of four and seven is eleven." Therefore, everyone who visited in October and November of 2005 "returned" that December. This means the numbers went "up."

Likewise, if the number of "returning visitors" in one month is lower than the number of "returning visitors" the month before, it means that fewer visitors than the preceding month "returned." In other words, when seven visitors "returned" in May, 2006, and then only two visitors "returned" in June, 2006, it means that only two of the number of all the posters who had been to the site before "returned" to view the site that month. This means the numbers went "down."

We can compare the content of the blogs, thus, to the number of "returning visitors" to determine which blogs garnered, or possibly even attracted, the highest number of prior visitors to "return" to the site. In this case, the greatest increase of "returning visitors" was between, as mentioned, November and December of 2005. However, we can rule this out as, according to the stated calculations, this only established the total number of visitors "returning" to the site from the previous two months, and thus establishes only an initial number of total visitors altogether at the time the counter was installed. Therefore, we look to what was the greatest increase following that of December, 2005. We find that, following that, one more visitor "returned" of the eleven total each month than had the previous month until May, 2006. After this the number of "returning visitors" dropped drastically for the month of June, 2006, but immediately went back to nearly the same number as it had been before, that is, in April, 2006. Therefore, we look at the blog from the month of July, 2006 to determine what the content of it was that garnered, or attracted, as many "return visitors." Then we can compare this content to that of the April, 2006, blog which represented the largest "drop" in the number of "return visitors."

We then see that the topic of the July, 2006 blog was my attempted suicide. The topics the month before had been "the class of messengers..." and "the drugs don't work." In, "the drugs don't work," I introduced many of the issues that would lead to my attempted suicide the following month. Thus, when the number of "returning visitors" to my site dropped from seven to two in the month of June, 2006, I attempted suicide. Following my attemtping suicide, the number of "returning visitors" to my site increased from two in the month of June to six in the month of July. That is what I meant by "it seems pretty clear to me what the results of this research are."

We see that the numbers of "first time visitors" and those of "unique visitors" reflect different results than those of the "returning visitors" however. For "first time visitors" as well as of "unique visitors," the greatest leap was between May and June, 2006, and the greatest drop was between July and August, 2006. In other words, the number of "unique" and that of "first time" visitors actually increased the most drastically (more than doubling) the month before I attempted suicide, and decreased the most drastically the month after, although still remaining higher than it had been the month before I attempted suicide. In other words, the month prior to my attempting suicide, the number of "unique visitors" and "first time visitors" nearly quadrupled. The month that I attempted suicide gained me three times as many "returning visitors" as visited the month of the quadrupling of "unique" and "first time" visitors. The month following my attempted suicide cut the number of "returning visitors" in half, but left the number of "unique" and "first time" visitors still well above their numbers in the month they had nearly quadrupled.

In short, the findings of my "research" indicate that immediately prior to my attempting suicide a large number of "first time" visitors began accessing my site, and that immediately subsequent to my attempting suicide, several of the "returning" visitors left. Aside from this all I have to add is that, to calculate the number of "unique" visitors, you add the number of "first time" visitors to that of "returning" visitors. The difference between the number of "unique" visitors and the number of "page loads" refers to how many times the "unique" visitors opened the front page of my site.

Now that we have addressed the entire lot of the blogs objectively, let's compare these findings to the subjects of the blogs individually. As long as seven months before my attempting suicide, I began to discuss issues such as "psychic surgery" having been performed on me at a young age, and to refer to the "devil's heart" that had been placed in me at that time. Earlier than this, even, I pondered the origins of the "benpadiah personality," or the "benpadiah delusion" as opposed to the earlier, and far more psychotic "Christ complex," or "Messiah delusion" under which I had previously suffered. I also compared and contrasted these delusions associated with being the "son of God" to the "scape-goat" scenario employed by my own father to ostricise me from his life, and about my father's own malignantly narcissistic "God complex." All of this was under discussion on my blog from November of last year. It was not until eight months later I would attempt suicide. This "attempt" was predicated upon these and other earlier meditations, the latter being on various near-death experiences I've had in my life. Its failure allowed me to disclose, though still more or less in secret, the capstone reason for my earlier revelations. I suspect that, while my conscious-self was blocked out such that I cannot now directly remember, when I was a young boy around the age of ten, I was sexually abused by my father. This culminated, with evidence, my earlier blogs that had revealed the prior abuse and disclosed the multiplicity of interiorised personality traits.

So, we can see then that, during the months when I exhibited the "early warning" signs of my later attempted suicide, the stat counter results do not reflect any additional "unique visitors" to my site to read my blog and discover them. Between November and December, 2005, there was an unprecedented and unimmitated increase of thirty "unique visitors," but in November itself, when I discussed the "benpadiah personality" in specific, the same regular ~60+ "unique visitors" read my blog on the frontpage of my site. I cannot rightly attribute December's increase to the content of the blog the month before, therefore. It appears more likely to me that the increase in December can be accounted for by the spontaneous doubling of November's "page loads." At an increase of 153 (two more than twice the preceding month's "page loads"), this incident reflects the greatest and most sudden increase in "page loads" that had occured by that point, and is greater even than the same event that occured between February and March of 2006 (when the number of "page loads" doubled plus one). This "doubling" of the number of "page loads" is not reflected by the numbers of "unique visitors," and therefore this statistic refers to the number of "returning visitors," which nearly tripled from November to December of '05. It would appear that, since the increase was not subsequently sustained, the additional seven "returning visitors" in December were entirely responsible for the increase from 151 to 304 "page loads" from November. In short, we can say that, I made the "early warning" signs of being suicidal six months before attempting suicide.

In spite of all these things, the overall funniest thing about the stat-counter results I'd posted last month is the fact that the stat-counter attracts ninety percent of the "page loads" of my site itself by allowing "bots" to access my site via search engines. Because I have the stat-counter on my site, the front page shows up on search-engines. Because of this, the content of my blog each month shows up on search engines. Advertisers and merchants using content-based platforms to cross-reference sites brought up by search-engines then access the page with their automated content-based search-programs. These automated content cross-referencing "bots" count as "page loads" on the stat-counter. The higher the number of "page loads" by the same content-based platforms, the greater the likelihood that other merchants and advertisers for similar products will access the site. Eventually, once a certain number of merchants and advertisers access the site from the same basic product or service category, another kind of automated "bot" is sent out: the forum-based "spam-bot." This is why, despite no humans having read the suicidal "early-warning" signs in the content of my front-page blog, my forum has been bombarded by guest-posts and posts by new-member "chat-bots" advertising hot-links to psychiatric medications. That is why now no guests can post on my forum, and why email address confirmation is required in order for a new user's account to be activated. I also "prune" the non-active "pr0n-bots" out fairly frequently too. I like to know about how many real friends I have.

All in all, putting stock in the site's stat-counter is alot like buying stock in general. The numbers will always appear impressive so long as you hvae no idea what they mean. All in all, however, the numbers for this site are considerably unimpressive. It seems that, at least during my life, I am destined to have no real impact. It also seems that it will only be because of my death, when it eventually does transpire, that anyone will take notice of my having even existed at all. As it is, my friends do not grant me respect unless I struggle to continually earn it from them, and additionally so, with confidence. No one thinks I am a "good" writer, judging by my style. No one seems to even care enough to try to understand my precious metaphysical diagrams. Should I be killed and my entire life be erased from the records of material evidence, it would not be long before my contributions to this universe would be utterly forgotten, and moreover, they would remain absolutely unappreciated during even that short time. I once, long ago, came to the conclusion that "reality doesn't need me. It doesn't even want me. And moreover, it seems to not like me very much." This conclusion seems as generally applicable now as ever. That is basically what I meant by concluding, "it seems pretty clear to me what the results of this research are."

-ben

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LINKS: