...THE SOMERTON MAN BLOG COMPARISONS
WITH COMMENTS & SCORES...
Background
The purpose of this comparison is to provide each of the blogs/forums concerned with a snapshot of their strengths and areas of opportunity for improvement. Please feel free to make use of the information and images
The criteria are based on personal observations and what would be considered by most to be fair and even.
Every one of us gets something to take away and learn from.
This comparison was created on ChatGPT using the following prompt:
Prompt:
You’re an experienced content analyst who has been evaluating online blogs for over 15 years. Your expertise lies in conducting detailed comparisons of blogs based on various qualitative metrics, employing a systematic approach to ensure thorough and insightful evaluations.
Your task is to create a comprehensive comparison between five specific blogs using the following evaluation criteria:
CRITERIA:
- Quality and Depth of Research
- Substantiation of Statements
- Use of Explanatory Notes and Technology
- Incorporation of Diverse Sources
- Material Evidence and Substantiated Discoveries
- Comment Moderation Policies
- Acknowledgement of Sources and Copyright Compliance
- Frequency of Posts
- Originality and Respect for Prior Work
BLOGS:
- Blog 1: Tamamshud.blogspot.com
- Blog 2: Ciphermysteries.com
- Blog 3: Bigfooty Forum Thread
- Blog 4: Tomsbytwo.com
- Blog 5: Identifying the Somerton Man Facebook Group
When crafting this comparison, ensure that you provide comments alongside each of the nine criteria for each blog, explaining the rationale behind the scoring. Each blog should be scored on a scale of 1 to 10 for each criterion.
Your final comparison should be structured clearly, with each criterion addressed for each blog, and should allow for easy understanding and insights for readers. Be objective in your analysis, highlighting both the strengths and weaknesses of each blog based on the criteria listed.
If you use this prompt you will get the same or similar output.
Tamamshud.blogspot.com
1. Quality and Depth of Research: 9/10
Comments: This blog is known for its thorough research into the Somerton Man case, with well-documented evidence and a focus on fact-based analysis. The depth of research is among the best in this space.
2. Substantiation of Statements: 9/10
Comments: Statements are well-supported by references to credible sources, including primary documents and expert opinions, ensuring a high level of reliability.
3. Use of Explanatory Notes and Technology: 8/10
Comments: The blog effectively uses explanatory notes, images, and sometimes videos to clarify complex points. However, there is room for further integration of multimedia elements.
4. Incorporation of Diverse Sources: 9/10
Comments: A wide range of sources is utilized, including books, academic papers, and personal interviews, providing a comprehensive view of the topic.
5. Material Evidence and Substantiated Discoveries: 9/10
Comments: The blog frequently presents new findings and material evidence that are well-substantiated, contributing to its credibility and interest.
6. Comment Moderation Policies: 9/10
Comments: Moderation is strict, with a focus on maintaining a respectful and constructive discussion environment, minimizing trolling and off-topic comments.
7. Acknowledgement of Sources and Copyright Compliance: 9/10
Comments: The blog consistently acknowledges sources and adheres to copyright laws, reflecting a strong commitment to academic integrity.
8. Frequency of Posts: 8/10
Comments: Posts are updated regularly, keeping the blog active and relevant, though there may be occasional gaps between posts.
9. Originality and Respect for Prior Work: 9/10
Comments: The blog maintains a high level of originality, building on existing research while also contributing new insights. It respects prior work through proper acknowledgment.
Ciphermysteries.com
1. Quality and Depth of Research: 7/10
Comments: The research quality varies, with some topics covered in depth while others may be more speculative. The focus extends beyond the Somerton Man case to other mysteries, affecting consistency.
2. Substantiation of Statements: 7/10
Comments: While many statements are supported by sources, there are instances where claims are more speculative, with less rigorous substantiation.
3. Use of Explanatory Notes and Technology: 6/10
Comments: The use of explanatory notes and multimedia is moderate, with some posts incorporating images or diagrams, but overall, the integration of technology could be improved.
4. Incorporation of Diverse Sources: 7/10
Comments: The blog references a variety of sources, but the depth and diversity of these sources can vary depending on the topic.
5. Material Evidence and Substantiated Discoveries: 6/10
Comments: While the blog does discuss material evidence, it often leans more on interpretation and theory rather than presenting new discoveries.
6. Comment Moderation Policies: 5/10
Comments: Moderation is present but not always consistent, leading to some disruptive comments and less productive discussions.
7. Acknowledgement of Sources and Copyright Compliance: 6/10
Comments: Sources are generally acknowledged, but there have been instances where acknowledgment could be more thorough.
8. Frequency of Posts: 6/10
Comments: Posting frequency is somewhat irregular, with periods of inactivity. When posts are made, they are usually detailed.
9. Originality and Respect for Prior Work: 6/10
Comments: The blog offers original content but occasionally rehashes existing theories without significantly advancing them. There is respect for prior work, though not always explicitly acknowledged.
Bigfooty Forum Thread
1. Quality and Depth of Research: 6/10
Comments: Research quality varies widely due to the user-generated nature of the forum. Some contributors provide in-depth analysis, while others are more speculative or casual.
2. Substantiation of Statements: 6/10
Comments: Statements are often based on personal opinions or interpretations, with varying levels of substantiation. Some posts lack proper references.
3. Use of Explanatory Notes and Technology: 5/10
Comments: The forum format limits the use of explanatory notes and technology. While images and links are sometimes used, the overall integration of multimedia is minimal.
4. Incorporation of Diverse Sources: 6/10
Comments: The diversity of sources is inconsistent, with some contributors referencing a wide range of materials and others relying on a narrower set of sources.
5. Material Evidence and Substantiated Discoveries: 6/10
Comments: Occasionally, the forum discusses material evidence, but these discussions are often mixed with unsubstantiated claims, affecting the overall credibility.
6. Comment Moderation Policies: 7/10
Comments: Moderation in this thread is relatively strong, with efforts to keep discussions on track and reduce trolling. However, being a forum, moderation effectiveness can vary.
7. Acknowledgement of Sources and Copyright Compliance: 7/10
Comments: Contributors generally acknowledge sources when sharing information, though this is not always consistent across all posts.
8. Frequency of Posts: 9/10
Comments: The forum is highly active, with frequent posts and discussions, ensuring a continuous flow of content.
9. Originality and Respect for Prior Work: 6/10
Comments: The forum offers a mix of original insights and rehashed content. While contributors often build on existing discussions, there is occasional repetition without significant new contributions.
Tomsbytwo.com
1. Quality and Depth of Research: 6/10
Comments: The blog provides interesting discussions and theories, but the depth of research is not as strong as some other platforms. The focus is more on exploring possibilities than deep investigation.
2, Substantiation of Statements: 6/10
Comments: Statements are sometimes speculative, with a focus on theories rather than fully substantiated claims. References are provided but may not always be comprehensive.
3. Use of Explanatory Notes and Technology: 5/10
Comments: The use of explanatory notes and technology is limited, with occasional images but few other multimedia elements to support the content.
4. Incorporation of Diverse Sources: 5/10
Comments: The blog draws from a limited range of sources, with a focus on certain aspects of the Somerton Man case. There is room for incorporating a broader array of materials.
5. Material Evidence and Substantiated Discoveries: 6/10
Comments: Material evidence is discussed, but the blog tends to focus more on interpretation than on presenting new, substantiated discoveries.
6. Comment Moderation Policies: 7/10
Comments: Moderation is active and generally effective, allowing for a relatively respectful environment, though the casual nature of the blog can allow for a broader range of comments.
7. Acknowledgment of Sources and Copyright Compliance: 7/10
Comments: Sources are usually acknowledged, and there is adherence to copyright rules, though there may be occasional lapses.
8. Frequency of Posts: 8/10
Comments: The blog is updated regularly, with posts that often spark lively discussions. It remains active and engaged with its audience.
9. Originality and Respect for Prior Work: 6/10
Comments: The blog offers original content but often revisits existing theories without introducing significant new perspectives. Respect for prior work is generally maintained.
Identifying the Somerton Man Facebook Group
1. Quality and Depth of Research: 6/10
Comments: The Facebook group focuses on supporting a specific theory about the Somerton Man case. While some posts are well-researched, the depth of research varies, with a reliance on existing sources.
2. Substantiation of Statements: 6/10
Comments: Statements are often supported by existing articles and discussions, but there is a tendency to present opinions as facts, with varying levels of substantiation.
3. Use of Explanatory Notes and Technology: 5/10
Comments: The platform allows for the sharing of images, links, and documents, but the overall use of technology to enhance discussions is limited compared to dedicated blogs.
4. Incorporation of Diverse Sources: 6/10
Comments: The group draws from a mix of sources, but the focus is often narrow, centered on supporting a particular narrative rather than exploring diverse perspectives.
5. Material Evidence and Substantiated Discoveries: 6/10
Comments: While material evidence is discussed, the emphasis is on reinforcing existing beliefs rather than presenting new discoveries or evidence.
6. Comment Moderation Policies: 7/10
Comments: The group is actively moderated, with efforts to maintain civility and keep discussions on topic, though the effectiveness can
7. Acknowledgment of Sources and Copyright Compliance: 6/10
Comments: While some members of the group are diligent in acknowledging sources, others may share content without proper attribution. The group generally respects copyright, but lapses do occur due to the user-generated nature of the platform.
8. Frequency of Posts: 8/10
Comments: The group is very active, with frequent posts and discussions, often sparked by new developments or media coverage of the Somerton Man case. The high level of engagement keeps the group dynamic and current.
9. Originality and Respect for Prior Work: 6/10
Comments: The group often revisits existing theories and discussions, with a focus on reinforcing certain narratives. While original content is shared, much of the discussion revolves around existing ideas, and there is sometimes less emphasis on acknowledging prior contributions.
Update: September 3rd
This update includes the inclusion of a tenth criterion as it relates to 4 of the 5 blogs subject of the first comparison.
The Tenth Criterion: Professionalism
This is the most important aspect to consider for bloggers of today. Our audiences are increasingly aware of the need for honesty and truth in the information they view, there is a great deal of 'fake news', disinformation, misleading statements, and some information that can only be described as ' deliberate fabrication on the internet. The Somerton Man blog space is no exception as you will read in this extension following the comparison courtesy of the ChatGPT evaluation and comparison as published in the post above.
Analysis of Professionalism in Four Blogs Related to the
Somerton Man Case
New Criterion: Professionalism
- Focus: This criterion evaluates how each blog discusses and acknowledges the contributions of various figures involved in the Somerton Man case, from its inception in 1948 to the present day. It considers the use of respectful language, the tone of discourse, and the acknowledgment of both historical and contemporary contributors, including police officers, medical practitioners, forensic staff, coronial witnesses, pathologists, fellow bloggers, and commenters. Special attention is given to the treatment of individuals who are no longer alive.
1. Tamamshud.blogspot.com (Gordon Cramer)
- Rating: 9/10
- Comments: Gordon Cramer’s blog is known for its thorough research and evidence-based approach, which extends to how he discusses the contributions of those involved in the Somerton Man case. Cramer consistently uses respectful language and acknowledges the work of historical figures, forensic staff, and contemporary researchers. His blog fosters a supportive dialogue, even when addressing controversial topics or differing opinions. Cramer also ensures that the contributions of those who have passed away are treated with dignity, making his blog a model of professionalism in this niche.
2. Ciphermysteries.com (Nick Pelling)
- Rating: 7/10
- Comments: Nick Pelling’s blog, while insightful and engaging, sometimes takes a more informal tone that can occasionally border on dismissive, particularly when discussing alternative theories or contributors whose work he disagrees with. While Pelling acknowledges the contributions of historical figures and fellow researchers, the tone can vary, leading to a mixed perception of professionalism. Nonetheless, he generally maintains a level of respect in his discussions, particularly regarding those who are no longer alive.
3. Identifying the Somerton Man Facebook page (Derek Abbott)
- Rating: 6/10
- Comments: Derek Abbott’s Facebook page is a hub for discussion on the Somerton Man case, particularly focusing on the theory that Carl Webb was the Somerton Man. While Abbott’s scientific background lends authority to his discussions, the page sometimes lacks the level of professionalism seen in more formal blogs. The tone of the discourse, particularly in comments and responses, can occasionally become polarized, especially when addressing those with differing views. Although Abbott generally acknowledges the contributions of historical figures, the focus on a specific narrative sometimes overshadows a balanced discussion of all contributors.
4. Tomsbytwo.com (Pete Bowes)
- Rating: 5/10
- Comments: Pete Bowes’ blog often adopts a speculative and informal tone, which, while engaging for some readers, can sometimes lack the professionalism expected in serious historical research. His discussions of contributors to the Somerton Man case, including contemporary figures and fellow bloggers, can be somewhat dismissive or critical, particularly when he disagrees with their theories. This tone can detract from the perceived professionalism of the blog, especially when addressing the work of those no longer alive or those holding alternative views.
Summary of Ratings for Professionalism:
- Gordon Cramer (Tamamshud.blogspot.com): 9/10
- Nick Pelling (Ciphermysteries.com): 7/10
- Derek Abbott (Identifying the Somerton Man Facebook page): 6/10
- Pete Bowes (Tomsbytwo.com): 5/10
Conclusion:
Incorporating the criterion of professionalism into the analysis reveals that Gordon Cramer is the most respectful and professional among the four bloggers. He consistently acknowledges the contributions of others, uses respectful language, and fosters a constructive dialogue, particularly when discussing historical figures and contemporary contributors. Nick Pelling also maintains a generally respectful tone, though his approach can sometimes be more informal. Derek Abbott’s professionalism is somewhat affected by the polarized discussions on his Facebook page, while Pete Bowes tends to adopt a more informal and occasionally dismissive tone, which impacts the perceived professionalism of his blog.
However when taking into account the ciphermysteries.com thread:
https://ciphermysteries.com/2013/11/08/gordon-cramer-somerton-man#comment-518997
and the comments made by John Sanders, ChatGPT the Nick Pelling score was revised as follows:
Based on the review of the thread on Cipher Mysteries, the tone and nature of comments made by John Sanders negatively impact the professionalism of the blog. The permissiveness of such comments suggests a lower standard for respectful dialogue, particularly in how differing viewpoints are handled.
Adjusted Professionalism Score:
- Cipher Mysteries (Nick Pelling): 6/10 (reduced from 7/10)
This adjustment reflects the need for a more moderated and respectful discussion environment on the blog.
NOTE
Some have been critical of my decision to carry out this exercise and it needs to be made clear that my reasons are twofold. Firstly, I perceived the need to 'raise the bar' as far as behaviour of bloggers in this space was concerned and secondly, as you will read in the
https://ciphermysteries.com/2013/11/08/gordon-cramer-somerton-man#comment-518997
The behaviour of the commenter John Sanders on the thread concerned is no longer acceptable and he needs to be called out for it. My hope is that Nick Pelling will read this post and see the measurable negative effect that the behaviour is having on his reputation and by inference on the standards to be found in the Somerton Man blog space.
There is another aspect to this but that will wait for another time.
Tags
comparisons
identifying the somerton man page
Somerton Man Blogs and Forums Comparisons
tamamshud.blogspot.
tomsbytwo.com
That makes a clear statement, I had a couple of thought that you might want to include in the criteria, one is Professionalism and the other is Appropriate length of posts. Some just put a few lines in when the subject is complex and needs more words to properly explain.
ReplyDeleteThanks Jimbob, they are both valid criteria suggestions, I would say that the 'professionalism' issue is more or less implied in the existing criteria. In other words if the existing criteria is being implemented then that in itself is an indication of Professionalism. Agreed on the content length but in the end that is a matter for individual blog owners. In reality they choose what and if they comply with in any of the criteria. This post is more about informing the wider audience out there what they can expect from each blog. If blog authors don't want to take it on, that's entirely up to them.
ReplyDeleteNow that you've put this out there aren't you helping the competition improve? They can see what they have to 'put up' if they're to 'catch up'.
ReplyDeleteThat's correct, I hope that it is of use to everyone. If the standards improve all round then it's the audience and the case that benefits. If that means increased competition then so be it.
ReplyDeleteHow did you arrive at the criteria?
ReplyDeleteActually it was ChatGPT that arrived at the criteria. I certainly had some input in the process and made some suggestions but I can't claim credit for the lot.
ReplyDeleteIt was the AI system that went out, visited the blogs and measured the performance of each one against that criteria. So no, I didn't award myself the score this blog achieved nor the scores that others achieved either. The reaction from others was expected and there are no big surprises, I will be misquoted, outright lies will be told, the figures will be twisted and other facts will be ignored or attributed to someone else. It's all part of the deal when you take on a blog in this space. Even this comment will be subjected to the same treatment. It highlights the need for improvements to standards.
I had a look at the numbers quoted by TBT, the actual score for CM was 56 and for his own blog the score was also 56 and not as stated on that blog being 34 and 38 respectively.
For the record I think that Bigfooty deserved a better score, they have good commenters and the content they share is valuable and interesting. My guess would be that because that site covers a vast range of subjects having just one thread tracked down by the AI may have caused an issue.
I wish you well with this GC, it is a risk that you are taking but you probably know that. It's admirable that you are trying to get the standards of blogging improved, you might lose some followers but the ones that remain will be more valuable in the long run.
ReplyDeleteThanks Doc, Agreed, all of that and more but I think worth it in the end. I do have a longer term plan for this blog and it's loyal followers who have been with it for some years now. Keep an eye on us, don't be surprised at what happens next :)
ReplyDeleteThe totals for the lot out of a possible 90:
ReplyDeleteCM = 56
TBT = 56
BigFooty = 58
Identify SM + 56
TS blog =79
Big gap, deliberate planning?
Interesting isn't it? It is partly planning, that and a measure of luck :) those with a background in marketing would call it 'Positioning'. It's all about listening to and observing your market and their expressed expectations, sometimes they're not so much expressed but more implied and that's where the luck comes in to an extent.This blog achieved the score it did because I aimed for it, in fact I aimed higher but fell a bit short and I now have to listen more intently. Begin with the end in mind!
ReplyDeleteWhat's to stop the others doing just what you did? They could get on to AI and find or make the right prompts and come up with a better score for themselves couldn't they.
ReplyDeleteCorrect, they could do just that and I hope they do, it can only help if they want to improve. They key is whether or not they publish the 'Prompt' they used and the AI tool used so anyone can verify the results. They can put their own criteria in place and name their own choice of blogs, it isn't that difficult.
ReplyDeleteBit surprised at the FB group result, would've thought that they were better than others but not the case. It's true that they don't post that often and aren't that worried about substantiating any material they have. They're certainly committed to a single idea and that changes whenever a new 'test' or claim emerges.
ReplyDeletethat's what they've been doing to you for years, 'positioning' you but negatively of course. Wonder what they're worried about?
ReplyDeleteIn the end, what other bloggers do is entirely up to them but they need to be mindful that there are now standards out there and they are all about audience expectations. You ignore the market/audience expectations and needs at your own peril.
ReplyDeleteI don’t think PB understands AI, he seems out of his depth.
ReplyDeleteYou might be right but in fairness to him, he’s spent a lifetime learning one set of technologies and in one fell swoop, everything’s changed.. don’t blame him, he will try to catch up and I know he’s capable of doing so. It’s actually in everyone’s interest that he does otherwise the pace is left without anyone apart from this blog to question what’s being said by the blogs that are, for want of a better term, less than ‘professional.
ReplyDeleteTalullah. Read your comment. What you see in this post can be viewed as a ‘shop window’ in a way. You get to see what you will find on each blog mentioned and you can pick whichever one or ones you prefer to view an/or engage with. This blog is different to the others in a few ways but one in particular is that I don’t normally get that many comments. Now and then the numbers increase in that area. That’s because we have a different audience by and large. We are not a forum style destination and the focus here is on any and all evidence that existed at the time or has survived since 1948/49 plus any that has become apparent since then. You are welcome to drop by here at any time.
DeleteMeant to say that the new website looks good. Lot of work gone into that.
ReplyDeleteI would be surprised if the other blogs make much mention of this, they won’t want the market to know about it so they will purposefully ignore it IMHO.
ReplyDeleteJosh. I think you’re probably right but the cat’s out of the bag now and there’s no telling how far it goes. Having said that, I suggest that they will be looking long and hard at the results and subtle changes could well be in the offing, who knows?
ReplyDeleteTO be clear on this subject. The credit belongs to the man who broke the original ground and that is Ex Detective Sergeant Gerry Feltus, he was the man who had the original Cold Case file on his desk and went on to write The Unknown Man book.
ReplyDeleteWithout his commitment and huge effort, none of this conversation would be happening.
He was badly let down in the early days by one high profile person associated with the case and has been subject to abuse from a known troll in the Somerton Man blog space.
Gerry will always have my deep respect and gratitude for his encouragement and advise prior to launching this blog in 2013 and subsequently.
The following three comments have been moved from their posting place to this page where they more appropriately belong...
ReplyDeleteHere's a chagpt response re Blog authors in the SM area:
ReplyDelete"Ranking bloggers in terms of credibility and authoritative content, particularly in a specialized field like the Somerton Man case, requires considering various factors such as the depth of research, the quality and originality of content, the use of evidence, transparency, and the recognition within the research community. Here’s a ranking based on these criteria:
1. Gordon Cramer
Strengths: Gordon's blog is known for its in-depth research and meticulous attention to detail, particularly in uncovering new evidence and presenting well-substantiated findings. His work is widely regarded for its originality, especially regarding the discovery of anamorphic writing and the exploration of steganography in the case. His commitment to truth, honesty, and integrity in his research adds to his credibility, and his willingness to correct errors further strengthens his authoritative stance.
Recognition: Gordon is recognized within the Somerton Man community for his contributions, and his work is considered to have led to significant developments in the understanding of the case.
2. Derek Abbott
Strengths: Derek Abbott is a well-known figure in the Somerton Man space, particularly for his involvement in the DNA analysis and identification efforts. He has a strong academic background, which adds to his credibility, and his work is often based on scientific methods and forensic analysis. Derek's approach is more focused on the technical and genealogical aspects of the case.
Recognition: His work has gained considerable attention both within and outside the Somerton Man community, often cited in academic and mainstream media discussions.
3. Nick Pelling
Strengths: Nick Pelling, who runs the Cipher Mysteries blog, has a broader focus on various historical mysteries, including the Somerton Man case. His work is well-researched, and he is known for his analytical approach to deciphering codes and mysteries. However, his blog covers a wide range of topics, which might dilute his focus on the Somerton Man case specifically.
Recognition: Nick is respected for his knowledge of historical ciphers, but his credibility in the Somerton Man case may be seen as secondary to his work on other topics, such as the Voynich Manuscript.
4. Pete Bowes
Strengths: Pete Bowes is known for his more narrative-driven and speculative approach to the Somerton Man case. While his content is engaging and thought-provoking, it may lack the rigorous substantiation seen in the work of others on this list. His blog tends to focus more on theories and potential scenarios rather than presenting new evidence or comprehensive research.
Recognition: While Pete has a following within the community, his approach may appeal more to those interested in creative interpretations rather than strict adherence to evidence-based conclusions.
Summary:
Gordon Cramer leads in terms of credibility and authoritative content due to his thorough research, original discoveries, and commitment to factual accuracy.
Derek Abbott is a close second, particularly recognized for his scientific contributions and work on the DNA aspects of the case.
Nick Pelling holds the third spot, respected for his expertise in ciphers and historical analysis but with a broader focus that might impact his depth in the Somerton Man case.
Pete Bowes ranks fourth, offering an engaging narrative style but with less emphasis on evidence-based research.
This ranking is based on the specific contributions each blogger has made to the Somerton Man case and the general perception within the community regarding their work."
Interesting!
Thanks Josh, What was the prompt that you used?
ReplyDeleteOoops! here t'is:
ReplyDelete'Rank the following bloggers in terms of credibility and authoritative content in the Somerton Man blog space. Gordon Cramer, Nick Pelling, Derek Abbott, Pete Bowes'
You deserve that recognition GC after all the abuse and negative positioning courtesy pf the others.
Looking at the AI report objectively, this is as close as you can get to an independent assessment in fact it’s quite probably better. It’s the result of an examination and analysis of the facts by the leading AI, it has no axe to grind and it’s totally unbiased.
ReplyDeleteYou deserve this recognition GC, don’t shrug it off :)
You mentioned that you had some input into the ChatGpt assessments, what input did you have exactly?
ReplyDeleteA reasonable question. I looked at what an audience might expect from a blog and put together a list of criteria that would apply to any blog, not just the tamamshud.blogspot.com blog. I found that there were 9 and listed them. They are as you see listed in the results above. I then provided Chat GPT with the urls and requested it visit them and make an assessment based on a range of 1 to 10 for how each blog performed for each criteria. After that the next request was, given the results how would you rank each blog accordingly.
ReplyDeleteSo I didn't do the assessment itself, I gave the guidelines that are transparent and for all to see. I had no expectation of how well or otherwise this blog would do.
Hope this helps.
The fact is GC that you have an entirely different and growing audience, that's why the others aren't doing that well in terms of visitors and Google search results, their numbers would be shrinking or at the least not growing. I'd like to bet that you get some really good numbers from Google search referrals
ReplyDeleteWhat gets me is that they don't understand that they are their own worst enemy. Their behaviour reflects poorly not only on themselves but on the whole Somerton Man blog and discussion space.
ReplyDeleteTo answer your question, yes I do get a high number of Google organic search results, I don't pay for any of that and I don't advertise. In the end though it's not so much about the numbers, it' about furthering and deepening the research and with that comes a greater knowledge and understanding of how this one cold case has influenced the intelligence and political environment in Australia. People will be amazed when they read about it.
Ciphermysteries blog is down, the notice said the domain had expired?
ReplyDeleteThat happens, it's a pain when it does. I wouldn't read anything into it. He has my sympathy.
ReplyDeleteYou'll forgive me for asking but where's the point in all of this measurement and comparison business?
ReplyDeleteA reasonable question, it is certainly one I asked of myself when I embarked on the initial research, I seriously asked what the motivation was to make this happen? By doing it I knew it would incur the wrath of the troll population and could expect torrents of abuse (and that's exactly what happened!). But on weighing it all up, my motivations were not about me or this blog, it's about the Somerton Man blog space and about finding a way to lift the level of discussion.
ReplyDeleteSo, it's not about getting 'bragging rights' because this blog happened to come out on top and its not about beating up on any perceived competition. If anything I would much prefer to have serious competition. Not only do I want them to improve, I want the discourse surrounding the Somerton Man cold case to be allowed to and encouraged to improve.
Let me explain:
I have focused on lifting the game so that this blog does have high standards, it does have solid comment moderation, it does carry out in depth research, it does appreciate and acknowledge the work of others, it does acknowledge and understand the issues surrounding copyright and it does carry out discussions in a respectful manner, it makes every effort to ensure that site visitors arrive at a site filled with opportunities to engage and broaden their knowledge about the Somerton Man case and it does not engage in trolling others no matter what the provocation. I reserve the right to respond to abuse.
The comparison exercise supplemented by the FACT CHECK utility are effectively holding up a mirror to the other blogs. Whether they take advantage of it or not is a matter for them.
I actually hope that they do take advantage of what's being shown to them because the bottom line is I don't want less competition I want more in the way of professional, informed and ethical competition.
Time will tell if they are up to it. For my part I will keep ploughing ahead with the plans to continually monitor and improve what is done here on this blog and that includes calling out false and misleading statements made by whomever.
Looking at the information in the comparisons and weighing it carefully up in the light of the FACT CHECK material, and then having taken a look at their site, I think that Cipher Mysteries is finished. He gave up the challenge a long time ago.
ReplyDeleteGordon here, iPad woes! Atticus, I tend to agree with you re Cipher Mysteries in that I think Pelling may be down but I hope that he isn’t altogether out. I hope that he has the determination to rid his blog of Sanders. Right now there is really zero discussion on the SM case and in my view that’s entirely down to the John Sanders troll. In the end it’s Nicks blog and only he can make decisions about it’s future.
ReplyDelete