Source: agentbedhead.com
According to an “interview” with the Wall Street Journal, even ol’ NZ Bear knows that the significance of the TTLB Ecosystem is vastly overrated:
“My systems are lousy for making definitive pronouncements about the entire scope of the blogosphere … But for the blogs I *do* track, they offer pretty good data, especially in comparing between blogs.”
Of course, NZ Bear knows that the effectiveness of databases lies in the fact that they require constant attention and maintenance, which is a burdensome task. I assume that NZ Bear has a day job, so it’s relatively impossible for him, as a lone blogger, to verify the accuracy of such an entity to track 23,000 different blogs.
The main aspect of the Ecosystem that disturbs my relative sensibilities is that all blogs are treated equally as far as frequency of updating is concerned. Methinks there should be some penalty for blogs that update less regularly than once a week. This perhaps would knock down the rankings of a few pioneers who have gone on an extended hiatus, yet still remain in the top 500 blogs. As an example ad nauseum, that silly old blog that I used to write remained in the top 1000 for six consecutive months after it became inactive. On a related issue, a standard would have to be issued as to what sort of post qualifies as an update. Would we be speaking of a five-paragraph essay or a single-word link - does a simple “heh” or “indeed” count as one entry?
Although it is interesting to see that NZ Bear did recently give the ecosystem a nice little shake, which resulted in a significant devolution for many blogs. Oooh, so I do happen to make semi-accurate predictions every so often. It must be all that truth-telling serum I’ve been downing like the moonshine that Preston guzzles every White Trash Wednesday. A random quirky thought - If one binges and purges truth-telling serum, what is the resulting effect on the ability to evade falsehoods? These are the things that keep me awake.
