Woodstock Valley Girl has repeated many times something to the effect that no one visits the Cafe anymore (not an exact quote). I used to kid another frequent visitor when he asked how many visit the Cafe by telling him that it’s just you, me, and Taxpayer 
. An educated estimate is that there are about 600-800 Woodstock-relevant visitors, some of whom come every day and some of whom visit once or twice a month “to catch up” as one Woodstock resident told me recently.
For someone who doesn’t like anyone here Valley Girl seems to be here a lot. In fact, he has submitted the last 12 comments. Why bother if no one visits to read his attacks and insults other than the few of us that write at the Cafe?
Valley Girl has said that most of our visitation is spam. Of course he has no idea about our activity because he does not have access to our server stats. Stats measured directly by the server are accurate unlike the indirect services like StatCounter, Compete, and Google Analytics. We do get spam, but that stat is tallied as “non-viewing hits.”
The reason I think we have about 600-800 Woodstock relevant visitors is that I can sort those who turn multiple pages from those who turn only one or two pages. If I limit the list to those who have turned 5 pages in any particular month, I find more than 700 unique IPs. It doesn’t matter to me where they’re from if they are interested enough to turn the pages. Those with dynamic IPs will not register multiple page turns because their IP changes with each page turn (AOL for example). So the majority of unique visitors and visits represent “others” from outside our community. Many of these visitors come to the Cafe by searching Google or Bing … and many of these come to the Cafe by searching Images. For example, someone may be searching for one of the actresses or actors in Hollywood Comes to Woodstock and they end up viewing a picture at the Cafe. We have a lot of this minute by minute. Another example is searching “Jennica Heifer” in quotes in Google Images. In case you forgot, Jennica was the Ace Reporter for the Villager at the time 
. If you search Jennica in Images, you get a picture of Stephen Spielberg or a poster for the movie “Murial’s Wedding”which were published in “Hollywood” at the Cafe.
It’s the page turns (clicks) that are the mosts telling because turning pages suggests that some reading is going on. Lately we’ve had over 70,000 page turns per month (see Table below) and “in-and-out visitors” contribute little to this number. Our bandwidth is also very high suggesting that visitors stay for a while.
Valley Girl might suggest that since we have few commentors, there’s nothing going on at the Cafe. I took a look at some ‘mega’ websites to see their level of comments. Take the Courant for example which has 666,937 unique visitors and 2,312,408 visits per year (these stats can be obtained at compete.com but they are surely an under estimate). If you check the comments of the Courant Columnists, you will find that Ubinas got 37 comments on her most recent post, our friend Rick Green got 17, and Colin McEnroe got 3. I went to the next level at USAToday. This newspaper had an article on the Dems final push to pass healthcare which had 1942 comments at the time I looked (there are many repeat commentors per article). So I guess some of their 13,804,558 unique visitors during their 44,240,220 visits (I go there multiple times a day) got up the gumption to leave a comment. The point to be made here is that only a very low percentage of visitors ever comment – this is the norm for web surfers and it’s the norm in Woodstock. See the stats for the last 14 months below.
There is also a visitor map below. Even though we receive spam from Russia, these so-called visitors do not show up in our visitor map. This is because these spammers are not counted as ‘visitors’.
There were also two visitors from the Malay Peninsula and New Zealand. We expect more visitation in the next month from New Zealand 
Sure John, you just keep drinking your Kool-Aid.
It’s really funny to watch you insist on convincing yourself that your little world here is something it’s not.
Tell ya what, let’s do a little test sometime, I won’t visit for four weeks straight and I’ll bet your REAL traffic (not counting spammers and people who don’t understand English) here will drop 20%.
You know as well as I do that this place was a whole lot more active four years ago than it is now. Unfortunately for you, you ruined it with your heavy-handed moderation, deleting posts and letting your temper and thin skin get the best of you.
If anything, you’ve gotten worse in your old age because just this week, you resorted to posting direct lies about me and you continue to refuse to admit it (see the “Some Thoughtful Advice” article) going so far as to break your own rules.
Since you obviously insist on living in a fantasy world, let me help you out. Repeat the following at least once every hour and everything will be right with the world:
“My name is John Leavitt and I own a hugely successful blog, it’s bigger that life. I’m an honest person and I’m widely respected in my town. If I ran for any public office in Woodstock, I’d be the highest vote getter. Everybody loves me, I’m one of the smartest people in the whole world. I’m good enough, I’m smart enough and gosh darn it, people like me.”
Here’s the first sentence in paragraph six:
“Valley Girl might suggest that since we have few commentors, ”
John, what the hell is a “commentor?” You’re making up words again! (Frank probably would have said “your” instead of “you’re”)
You’ll need to add a line to the prayer I wrote for you in my first comment here:
“I’m the world’s best speller and I never make mistakes.”
Make it the second to the last sentence. Don’t get mad, I’m just trying to help ya out there buddy! (Frank help me out here will ya? It that “their,” “they’re” or “there?”)
Valley Girl,
I posted this just to get your goat. And it worked
. The Cafe “is what it is”. What makes you think that any of those ‘credits’ you gave me have anything to do with me?
As for “commentor”, I prefer that spelling like “licensor”, “creditor”, … etc. I personally don’t care what Webster thinks.
Blowhards have come and gone from the Cafe and the Cafe is always a better place when they leave. I think the only reason you are here is to gear up for the candidates you are backing in the next election. We’ll see how they do in time.
WVG-
Not to sound like a petty, ostentatious, bigoting, mimic, but in holding true to being fair and balanced, “is” should have been used instead of “it” in your last sentence.
I would think that any candidate who depends on WVG for his/her support would be distraught by the behavior and language used by WVG on this website.
If anything, I think WVG is making a great case for not supporting a Republican candidate. He is a total turnoff and might as well carry a slogan banner that proclaims “We put the ASS in embarASSment” because that is the only take home message that is coming through when one reads WVG’s comments.
Perhaps, afterall, John is the smart one for letting WVG continue on this blog. Dumb like a fox.
Oh I see John, so you’re a master baiter now, right? Now you’re breaking another one of your own rules, “trolling” as you people like to call it. How about trying to post something worthwhile instead of posting something just to start trouble. You whine about others doing something you don’t like then engage in the EXACT same behavior yourself. Sound pretty hypocritical to me John.
As far as you thinking I’m here “to gear up for the candidates you are backing in the next election.” that doesn’t make any sense. Don’t inflate your ego any further than you already have.
Since we all already know that traffic here in your little world is significantly less than it was two and four years ago, why would anyone come here to promote candidates? The audience is what, about six to ten people who already have their minds made up? There are a variety of tasks and things that need to be done to help get good people elected and wasting time posting on blogs is not one of them.
Hold on I forgot, you actually think there are 600 to 800 “Woodstock relevant” voters that are here reading your blog. If you really think that then you’re living in a fantasy world.
As far as you making up words, did I actually see you try and justify your inability to use proper grammar and spelling? Wow, talk about a “blowhard.” That’s truly sad John because that really makes you look stupid and foolish, characteristics an aspiring blog owner needs to avoid.
Thank you proud liberal for pointing out my typo, I made a mistake and I was wrong. I think you’d agree that typos like that are far less egregious than people like John who make up words or those like Frank who don’t know the difference between “you’re” and “your” or the “their, they’re, there” conundrum.
Proud, I’m supporting Ned Lamont. I voted for him in 2006 and I think he’d make the best governor for the state of Connecticut. Does this mean you now won’t vote for him because I’m supporting him and you don’t like the fact that I used a bad word or two here? I’m also supporting Bill Loftus as well. Will you still vote for Bill? I sure hope you do, he’s a good guy.
Mind games, Valley Girl.
When proud liberal spouts off with her ultra left wing mantra, it most definitely turns people off from voting for Democrats. I only hope I can encourage her to keep her big mouth shut long enough so that she doesn’t bring harm to my candidates Ned Lamont and Bill Loftus.
What I find amazing about her is that she criticizes me by saying:
“would be distraught by the behavior and language used by WVG on this website.”
yet in the VERY SAME POST engages in the EXACT behavior she finds so objectionable:
“might as well carry a slogan banner that proclaims ‘We put the ASS in embarASSment’”
proud liberal, you’re a pathetic hypocrite! Too funny!
John, one main reason traffic is less here than it used to be is because you have a track record of lying and jumping to conclusions. When you’re called out on it, you ignore it or call it a “wackity rant” or whatever other immature way you attempt to deal with your deceitful and underhanded behavior.
As Frank likes to say “case in point,” you said this about me in the “Some Thoughtful Advice” article:
“At that time he was using his real name and an email that he still uses today. At that time he told us where he lives.”
John, you lied and you refuse to accept responsibility for that because I NEVER used my real name and I NEVER said where I live. I’ve repeatedly asked you to prove this and you continue to ignore that. Ignoring it will not make it go away.
This article is just a distraction attempting to draw the audience’s attention away from that major matter of concern which is your lying and lack of character. You can continue to try and write off me calling you out for lying as a “rant” but no one’s buying that.
Valley Girl,
It’s really a feather in the Cafe’s cap that you are so interested in us. Can’t wait to hear your reasons for supporting Lamont and Loftus
. Are you giving the same support to Hurlburt? It’s really shocking in this turbulent political era that a Republican would support these Democrats.
A rule of thumb commonly used in the online media industry is the 90-9-1 rule. Loosely speaking it states that 90% of the people only lurk (read), 9% occasionally participate and 1% creates most of the community’s content.
It is important to realize that this is just a rule of thumb. In many online communities the percentage of people who contribute in any way shape or form is much less. YouTube was recently mentioned here; speaking from memory I believe that the number of people who fully participate (upload videos) is much less than 1%. In general the 90-9-1 rule gives an order of magnitude estimate on the likely size of the readership.
As an aside:
http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/grammarian.htm
Thanks,
Kevin
This post represents my personal opinions and in no way should be considered an official act of the BoE or that I am speaking on behalf of the BoE in any way.
There ya go again John, trying to change the subject and ignore the issue at hand which is your lying.
Tell you what, I’ll make a deal with you, if you acknowledge the fact that you lied, I’ll tell you why I’m supporting Lamont and Loftus. You have to go first.
Kevin, that may be all well and good however there is no denying the fact that interest in this site has fallen off considerably from it’s level two to four years ago. I highly doubt you’d disagree with me on that point. And as I’ve been maintaining all along, it has everything to do with how poorly the “Admins” run this place.
John can sit there kidding himself that this place is alive and well but that’s just simply not true. “Hits” and “page turns” from people in countries who don’t understand English or stumbled across this site because they were searching for a celebrity who happened to have the same name as a reporter from the Villager don’t count at legitimately interested people in John’s little world, no matter how much he tries to spin it to the contrary.
John, you can put all the lipstick you want on your pig, it’s still a pig.
As an aside, here’s one for John:
http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/artfuldodger.htm
Here’s con:
http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/xenophobe.htm
As if no one has noticed (except for the perpetrator himself), WVG manifests the following pattern of debate:
1- make an outrageous statement
2- deny ever saying it
3- make up lies to support his new counter- argument
4- mimic his opponent
5- point out the grammatical errors of his opponents
5- feign indignation
6- demand an apology
Anyone who is or was a parent of an adolescent can easily identify the shortcomings of such debate techniques, and while I would personally recommend a “time out” for WVG, I do respect the administrator’s willingness to provide us with some comic relief.
While WVG’s weak pattern for argument is amusing, on a serious note it sorely reflects a poor character, emotional immaturity, and a need for anger management–something not so uncommon in Woodstock and certainly not so uncommon in Woodstock politics. Is it something in the water, is a question that has been asked by many an outsider. So while this may not be new to us, it does demand of us, at some meaningless but amusing level to ask the million dollar question:
Why does WVG come to a website which he claims no one is reading and harrass good people?
a) Is it for intelligent debate and conversation?
b) Is it to show us how smart he is and that he can rhetorically win an argument?
c) Is he politically motivated to undermine any opposing arguments against a particular political candidate?
d) Does he like to blog when he drinks beer?
d) Does he have mental illness?
Maybe we’ll never know, but let’s pretend for a second that we care. Anyone willing to take a guess will become immediately eligible to win a signed copy of Otto F. Kernberg’s book “Borderline Conditions and Pathological Narcissim”.
(Oh, my apologies ahead of time for any spelling errors or punctuation faux pas)
WVG,
John’s not lying about your identity. He’s simply mistaken. You used to post comments here under a couple of names that I can recall – “Woodstock Charlie” and “Woodchuck” are foremost in my memory.
I think John’s mistaken about something else he said about you. You’re not here to gear up for candidates you are backing in the next election. You are here to get other commentators worked up and on the defensive so as to disrupt the exchange of ideas and debate. We’re all letting you get away with it too, so congratulations.
I would think we’d be discussing this historic health care vote in D.C. today. Whether you’re for or against this bill, it’s going to be historic either way. I believe it’s a first step in dramatically altering our health care system in this country. I’m not in favor of this bill one bit but in a short matter of time, it could become the law of the land.
Debate has just begun on the House floor for this bill (it’s 2:15pm as I type this). Presumably a vote will follow. Would anyone like to talk about this instead?
Oh proud liberal, PLEASE get over yourself will you? So what you’re saying is that anyone who disagrees with you and your left wing agenda are not “good people?” Do you even realize how ridiculous you make yourself look with stupid statements like that?
And you, just like the other hypocritical lowlifes around here are engaging in behavior you purport to abhor when you post things like:
“d) Does he like to blog when he drinks beer?
d) Does he have mental illness?”
It sure looks like you have your own demons (mental illness and alcoholism) and your only defense is to project your own faults and shortcomings on to those who don’t share your political agenda. That “Independent” guy said a lot of good things in his article here:
http://www.woodstockctcafe.com/2010/03/21/from-one-who-has-pretty-much-given-up-on-this-forum-due-to-its-lack-of-intelligent-editorial-direction/
You really should read it and take to heart many of the things he discussed.
Newcomber, mistaken and lying are synonymous in this case. John made a strong, concise statement, I told him it wasn’t true and he refuses to admit he was dead wrong. He figures ignoring it will make it go away. That’s a tactic he’s employed ever since the beginning of the WoodstockDTCCafe.
I’m sorry but I have no interest in discussion the OWE BAMA socialist health care plan other than if the Democrats are stupid enough to pass it, they will get what they deserve this November. As far as watching the “debate” on television please, that’s all just a dog and pony show, it’s not like any of it matters one bit. I’d much rather watch the Food Network “The Best Thing I Ever Ate” is on right now and I can guarantee you, that’s a far better use of television time than watching the Democrats self-destruct on national television. That is unless of course you’re the kind that loves to gawk at train wrecks and car crashes.
Valley Girl,
Since I personally supported George McCoy (R), Mike Dougherty (R), Alan Walker (R), Chan Pacquette (R), Judy Alberts (R), Scott Sincerbaeux (R), and nearly all the other Republicans that ran, shouldn’t you call us the “WoodstockRTCCafe”? I did vote and pushed for election of one Democrat, Dick Cass (D) to the Board of Finance, and placed my hand-made signs for Dick around town. I am very happy with Alan Walker as First Selectman – he’s done a fine job and I told him so. The Cafe published supporting articles for all of these candidates. These articles are still there in the September and October archives. I also published articles reminding voters of the negative activities of the Chairman of the DTC and Ms. Wholean (D) who then lost miserably (those articles are still there also). Although they could have, none of those Dems chose to publish at the Cafe. I wonder why?
I might add that I would have gladly voted for Frank Corden if he had been on the ballot.
Yes WVG. Independent did say some good things. …(see Proud Liberal’s new article. Admin).
John, you and Becki are registered Democrats and you were a candidate in a Democratic primary for First Selectman so please, spare us the BS. What ever happened to Joe Breen, the former Woodstock DTC Town Chairman? We all know he was known around here as “the many faces of Joe Breen” with his multiple screen names. Weren’t you and he big buddies back in 2005? I remember that you, Joe and many others were not only not supporting Republican candidates back then, you were downright nasty about it.
How about Mike Alberts, do you support him? If you’re telling me you support all those other Republicans, it only follows that you’d support him too, right? If not, then why not?
I won’t ask about Tony Guglielmo since I think I know your answer on that one and I wouldn’t want to back you into a corner by forcing you to say you support Tony Guglielmo and then have to make you to look foolish and support Bryan Hurlburt if the rumors are true and he winds up running against Tony Guglielmo this year.
By the way Allan Walker spells his first name with two ls, not just one, Chandler’s last name is Paquette, the Town Clerk is Judy Walberg not “Alberts” (c’mon John, it was on the BALLOT that way, don’t tell me you didn’t notice!) and Scott’s last name is Sincerbeaux.
Now don’t get mad, I’m sincerely trying to help you out getting the names of the elected officials in the town of Woodstock spelled correctly. Unfortunately pointing out spelling errors here is usually met with immature anger and sarcasm instead of appreciation.
Yes Valley Girl, I am a registered Democrat… and thankyou for bringing me an opportunity to talk about my political persuasion. Yah, I’m not a good speller or is it spellor. Joe’s here and you may have a lot more in common with him than you think. The first time I met Joe was in May of 2006 a couple of months after his “Problem Statement” which I agree with, and which accurately describes the situation in Woodstock. However, the new HeadMaster seems more sensitive to this situation so we’ll see. Mike Alberts was the first to inform me officially that Joe’s initiative failed even though he didn’t say anything before it failed. We published his letter at the Cafe and it’s still here. This is typical Mike. Locally both town committees are disappointing although not entirely. You’re a good example of this disappointment. No, I don’t support all Republicans, especially do nothing Mike Alberts – your candidate. I think you will have no trouble interpretting the last sentence. Tony? I have not idea although I know he is influencial, especially with you.
Newcomer,
Please tell us why you are not in favor of the Health Care Bill. We will publish this.
NC, I am dissapointed also in the bill in that it doesn’t go far enough. Sooner or later we will have a public option like virtually every other industrialized country in this world. We also need tort reform. My biggest concern is that the Democrats have not usually cared about reducing costs and now with virtually everyone being covered, it will be difficult to make changes in the future.
John,
You don’t have to publish it. It would take me weeks to pick out everything that I don’t like, or am skeptical of….(see Newcomer’s new article. Admin).
John,
I neglected to cite the source of the excerpts of the legislation that I provided in my comments. I took them directly from the bill itself. Here it is:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c111:6:./temp/~c111Rwgokt:e1157:
This is a link to the original Senate bill that the House passed. I didn’t even adress the Recon bill.
John, I asked you why you don’t support Mike Alberts. All you did was engage in name calling, “do nothing Mike Alberts” are your words to be exact. By the way, aren’t you breaking your own rules again?
Would you please elaborate on that? What exactly did John Mordasky do for Woodstock or Jefferson Davis for that matter? Didn’t Mike get quite a bit of money for Woodstock for the town garage/salt shed?
How is Tony influential with me? You don’t even know who I am even though you seem to think you do! Tony is supporting Oz Griebel for Governor. Oz Griebel is a horrible candidate, worse than Sarah Palin if that’s possible. No matter what Tony says to me, I’m supporting Ned Lamont. I think Dick Blumenthal is one of the most insincere, two-faced, pandering, meanest politicians I’ve known here in Connecticut. The AG’s office is on cloud nine right now knowing that he’ll be leaving soon. I think Susan Bysiewicz is by far the best candidate for Attorney General out there and this whole “ten years active service” thing is a whole lot of baloney. Blumenthal didn’t have “ten years active service” as a practicing attorney but no one said a word about it 20 years ago.
Actually John, never mind my choice of candidates, I’d still like you to explain why you resorted to name calling regarding Mike Alberts and why you’re not supporting him.
How ironic…. After putting Mr. Corden on the spotlight for incorrect spelling, WVG says:
“Kevin, that may be all well and good however there is no denying the fact that interest in this site has fallen off considerably from it’s level two to four years ago.”
…when “it’s” should be its.
Thank you student you are correct, I made a mistake.
By the way, did you ever call the Fire Marshall and ask him what the cause of that house fire was on Pole Bridge Road? I spoke to him and he said is was accidental, unable to determine the cause and NOT caused by the homeowner engaging in any kind of illegal burning but don’t take my word for it, call him yourself and he’ll tell you the same thing.
Nope, we’re never going to hear from John as to why he engaged in name calling. Odds are none of the howlers will chime in either seeing as how there are clearly two sets of rules around here, one for John as his boot lickers and another set for everyone else.
I do believe you, WVG, because I heard the same thing, but I kept my word and didn’t share that information here.
“Marshall” is only supposed to have one L, by the way.
Student, I don’t think the Fire Marshal’s findings are confidential (thanks for letting me know about the double l thing, I’ve now learned not to make that mistake again!). When he told me, he didn’t qualify it that it was confidential information.
Well, that’s good, because there would be a problem if it was and he told you, wouldn’t there?
Glad I helped you out.