July 30, 2005

Life in old comment threads.

I get email whenever anyone posts a comment here, so I'm aware when there's action in an old comment thread. There's little chance that regular readers will check back to this old post about "out asexuals" without my pointing to it. I notice from my Site Meter records that that post gets more visitors than just about any old post on this blog. Anyway, if you're interested in the topic, especially long comments by professed asexuals, you might want to go over there.

8 comments:

Bruce Hayden said...

Didn't realize you got email for all of our inane comments. Must be getting to be a problem, given the increasing popularity of your site, and, thus, invariably, the number of people responding to your posts.

downtownlad said...

Why can't they hook the assexuals up to the same electrodes they used for the bissexuals? Then we can see if they're lying like the bisexuals were....

downtownlad said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
downtownlad said...

Why can't they hook the assexuals up to the same electrodes they used for the bissexuals? Then we can see if they're lying like the bisexuals were....

vbspurs said...

Talking of old posts, I'm sure you're aware, Ann, that Plaidgate, featuring your say in the matter, has been Wiki'ed?

It's called Joke turned to Rumour.

(Yeah, I bet Catherine the Great is in fits of laughter about the horse thing)

Either way, soon, there'll be a Wikipedia for everything, including asexuals.

Cheers,
Victoria

Ann Althouse said...

vbspurs: Thanks. I hadn't noticed that. Wikipedia actually does not cause much traffic at all. Looking at my records now, I see one visitor from the last one thousand -- not enough to make me noticed I'd been linked.

I'm reasonably accurately portrayed there, except that my role did not originate in the two noted joke posts, so the title is wrong from my point of view.

vbspurs said...

Well Ann, I think it may be down to two reasons:

1- The Wikipedia article is under a week old. Give it time, give it time.

2- Did you mean, you don't get traffic from Wikipedia in general or just Plaidgate? Because, I'm sure most people understand, Plaidgate was the quintessential blogger insider reference.

I bet you dollars to donuts most of America has no clue what Plaidgate is -- even very intelligent people (like my parents -- who aren't in blogosphere at all).

I wonder who wrote the article on Plaidgate...trust it be some low-level proofreader at the NYT.

Cheers,
Victoria

Ann Althouse said...

VB: I'm not getting visitors clicking here from Wikipedia.