Over 700 Pornographic Visits PER DAY
Local blogger Joe Guarino follows with a post inspired by Tony in which Joe describes "700 attempted visits per day." Naturally, several commenters for whom this is just what they wanted to hear cheer the "findings" without question. No question of why the sources would want to hide anonymously behind Tony's skirt and no questions of whether or not the report actually substantiates what the anonymous source conveyed to Tony.
I like Tony. He's a good guy in a lot of ways, but that doesn't matter much here. Facts are facts and, were I him, I would be furious at my sources for making me the public face of a gross misrepresentation.
I have obtained the report and there were not 700 visits to pornographic web sites per day. As I explained at Ed Cone's blog (in response to a post by Tony), there is proper terminology to describe what log files record about internet browsing. "Hits" and "page views" are different things. A single page view will generate multiple hits The distinction between these terms is not unimportant jargon. It is key to understanding what the data means. Interchanging hits with visits is simply to misreport the data.
So should we make allowances for Tony's sources not knowing the difference? No. This was clearly explained in the report itself. Somewhere between its reading by Tony's sources and its characterization on Tony's blog, someone decided to ignore or hide this, from the report:
Individual web pages usually count as multiple or even dozens of web hits. (for example a site that we reviewed counted as about 50 hits)and this...
[A]ny toolbars, images, advertisements, directional buttons, etc. that exist on a single page count as separate hits. For example, a web page that contains 100 thumbnail images will actually count as over 100 web hits because each of the thumbnails count as unique hits.Twice now we have been asked to evaluate the nature of the "porn problem" with intentionally exaggerated data.
Here is the report:
Greensboro Public Library Internet Usage Statistics
Tony, aren't you so relieved that Roch finds you a good guy, BUT...?
ReplyDeleteSame category as kathy Hartsell. You're both just a little misguided. What a dipshit.
Wow, Tony really was off. It was really 717 a day. And I didn't realize the library was only open 12 hours, that's one every minute.
ReplyDeleteRoch, thanks for providing this. I guess we understand the frequency of the problem now.
You miss the point, brave anonymous commmenter, that this is not personal. I'd wager Tony agrees. Something you seem to not understand. But thanks for commenting, I think it is important that we see were people are coming from.
ReplyDeleteDr. Hayes, 717 what a day?
ReplyDeleteSorry Roch, that was a little ambiguous, that number was the daily average for the period, as were the per hour and per minute figures.
ReplyDeleteHey anonymous, all he did was present data everyone's been wanting to see. Do you see that as something to condemn?
"Daily average" of what, John?
ReplyDeleteRoch, are you really, really, really like this? Are you sure you've not just evolved into a greater and greater caricature of your own unusual self? But since whatever answer I could give you will certainly be wrong, I will let you tell me since you supplied the data and presumably think it shows something worth posting. I assume what you're getting at is the definition of the word "hit" since you have quite a hangup on definitions, or at least of words other people use, if not your own. So pray tell, what's a hit?
ReplyDeleteDr. Hayes, I'm sorry, I just assumed you would have read the original post before commenting on it. Read the post.
ReplyDelete(I think its weird that a doctor finds accuracy and precision worthy of mockery.)
So Roch, if I am following this correctly, a user can generate a "hit" if an ad or other link for an inappropriate site comes up on an otherwise appropriate page. The user doesn't have to go to the site or click on the ad for a hit to register.
ReplyDeleteAlso lost in this discussion is the fact that the computer system is tagging what is and isn't pornography. As discussed numerous times, there are errors both ways in making these classifications.
That is also true, Dave. If you hit a legitimate site and a pop-up ad appears from a site tagged as porn, that too would generate a hit. That ad itself could be comprised of multiple files, thus generating multiple hits.
ReplyDeleteFor the sake of accuracy, you wrote, Dave, "ad or link." And ad, whether pop-up or embedded, if from a "porn" site would show up as a hit or multiple hits from that site.
ReplyDeleteA link to a porn site, however, would not generate a hit unless it was clicked on. The mere display of a link would not be recorded as a hit.