View Full Version : Interesting stats
Mr President
07-24-2008, 12:24
http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details/nation-wars.com
Though we are not huge by any means, all our numbers continue to rise.. So thats a good thing :-)
Bram Gotink
07-24-2008, 12:44
more people should visit the wiki :D
Wiki's don't work without people writing stuff
Besides, in the wiki, you have your own page on which you can do whatever you want (or almost) !!
Crimson Shadow
07-24-2008, 13:17
I think dirk mentioned this earlier, but alexa only counts the people who have alexa toolbar on their computer.
So our numbers could be alot higher.
Mr President
07-24-2008, 13:41
huh that is interesting to know..
I won't use there toolbar.. to much spyware and i heard it slows your pc down.
Crimson Shadow
07-24-2008, 13:42
please note this:
http://www.alexa.com/site/help/traffic_learn_more
as you can read, the traffic rank is based on the number of times alexa TOOLBAR users visit this domain!
so unless you use the alexa toolbar, refreshing the forums, will only give mr. P a higher hosting bill..:rolleyes: lol
...
Bram Gotink
07-24-2008, 13:50
huh that is interesting to know..
I won't use there toolbar.. to much spyware and i heard it slows your pc down.
Who does?
All toolbars slow down the pc and all toolbars are stuffed with spyware, probably even google's toolbar.
Use firefox, no toolbars needed lol
jasonlfunk
07-24-2008, 13:50
Doesn't your hosting come with hit stats?
Divine Intervention
07-24-2008, 14:56
Nation-wars.com users come from these countries:
Romania34.0%
Mexico27.7%
Vietnam23.4%
Philippines10.6%
Estonia4.3%
can someone explain this to me? because i know only 4 Romanians are playing this game, roughly 3 philipinos, about 6 or so mexicans and roughly 20 or so Estonians if not more.......so i do not understand these statistics.
Crimson Shadow
07-24-2008, 15:25
Did you get it from the alexa website? Because again it only reflects those who use the toolbar.
So it might look like the numbers are messed up since only a handful have it installed.
Bram Gotink
07-24-2008, 15:33
it shows the Romanian people use the stupid toolbar more than the rest :D
Nation-wars.com users come from these countries:
Romania34.0%
Mexico27.7%
Vietnam23.4%
Philippines10.6%
Estonia4.3%
can someone explain this to me? because i know only 4 Romanians are playing this game, roughly 3 philipinos, about 6 or so mexicans and roughly 20 or so Estonians if not more.......so i do not understand these statistics.
--->
I think dirk mentioned this earlier, but alexa only counts the people who have alexa toolbar on their computer.
So our numbers could be alot higher.
so my interpretation is that peopel from developed countries don'T use the alexa tool bar
Divine Intervention
07-24-2008, 23:33
--->
so my interpretation is that peopel from developed countries don'T use the alexa tool bar
i hope minimus doesn't notice your racist abuse in calling mexico undeveloped:unsure:
i hope minimus doesn't notice your racist abuse in calling mexico undeveloped:unsure:
well he can look it up in a book. its fact.
Well I'd like to see that book, depends what you called developed, is an African tribe that has existed for thousands of years not developed? Its lasted longer than our current electronic age. I think you can argue its less economically developed, but not for very long if the economy carries on down this path
Divine Intervention
07-25-2008, 15:48
if no progress was made for those "thousands of years" ,and tbh it looks like it in some places, then yeah...they are still undeveloped.
Well I'd like to see that book, depends what you called developed, is an African tribe that has existed for thousands of years not developed? Its lasted longer than our current electronic age. I think you can argue its less economically developed, but not for very long if the economy carries on down this path
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/undeveloped
undeveloped (comparative more undeveloped, superlative most undeveloped)
1. not developed or used
2. lagging behind others, especially in economic or social matters
Does every thread that is posted have to become some sort of political commentary? I mean come on, some of this is getting rediculous. Would you consisder the congo to be developed as is the western world? No, and that is all that is meant. A comparison to what is widely accepted as developed in the industrial sense. Quit being so sensitive like you were all insulted by everything that is written. If this keeps up the dforums will be no more as too many ppl will be offended by everything. Come on people!
Lol like I actually give a crap Dogma, I'm just arguing semantics, as I believe undeveloped is a point of view word, and just saying a country is undeveloped is too vague, should be more specific, Americans are less developed from an obesity point of view than most countries.
edit: mainly I'm just bored, and politics often gets good reactions from people
Well, argueing for the sake of argueing is not my way of spending enjoyable time on here, so I will refrain from posting anymore or reading this thread.
Not to mention giving certain ppl reasons to feel like they have been offended, it only serves to inflame certain ppl and I see no point in doing it. Just my opinion.
Lol like I actually give a crap Dogma, I'm just arguing semantics, as I believe undeveloped is a point of view word, and just saying a country is undeveloped is too vague, should be more specific, Americans are less developed from an obesity point of view than most countries.
edit: mainly I'm just bored, and politics often gets good reactions from people
if you're bored go read a book, magazine or newspaper so you can actualy learn something rather than posting uneducated stuff on the forums.
You obviuosly have no idea of politics or economics, so why not spare us the hassle and don't start on it.
My post wasn't meant to be about politics/economics (though contained elements of it), was just discussing your use of the word developed. No need to be insulting, constructive criticism please, you didn't even respond to anything in my last post thus letting me carry on in my deluded state when you could have taught me the truth.
My post wasn't meant to be about politics/economics (though contained elements of it), was just discussing your use of the word developed. No need to be insulting, constructive criticism please, you didn't even respond to anything in my last post thus letting me carry on in my deluded state when you could have taught me the truth.
I did post an dictionary entry telling you the meaning of undeveloped in a neconomic context.
If you failed to read that, it aint my fault. And how was my criticism unconstructive? I told you what you lacked and how you could amend that situation and spare us and yourself a lot of hassle.
It was constructive by any mean.
Ok yes, I'll grant that the idea of reading a book might help, but the other two are so censored and biased that I'll only end up learning what the powers that be intend for me to learn, ie. not the truth.
I'm not denying that from an economic stand-point that those countries are less developed, I'm not deluded enough to argue that; just the use of only using the word developed, I apologise if my pedanticness (yes I see the irony of making up a word at this point) offended anyone.
Ok yes, I'll grant that the idea of reading a book might help, but the other two are so censored and biased that I'll only end up learning what the powers that be intend for me to learn, ie. not the truth.
And books are not censored? LOL
But bias is the reason why you should read more than 1 magazine but several different ones so you can understand everyones standpoint. I for example read the economist eventho i disagree with many of their views. I've got enuogh other magazines that agree with a lot of my views, but there is little point in reading those as well.. i don't need t oread my own oppinion elsewhere do i?
No offence, but your horizon seems very limited at this stage, mostly because you apparantly refuse to broaden it. Change that. read magazines and newspaper even if they are biased and censored. It helps you understand others.
I'm not denying that from an economic stand-point that those countries are less developed, I'm not deluded enough to argue that; just the use of only using the word developed, I apologise if my pedanticness (yes I see the irony of making up a word at this point) offended anyone.
well its your language not mine. Undeveloped is the right term to use, if you don't like it, use antoher langauge.
I'm just trying to say that it would be me saying I'm better than you, I haven't specified at all, there are many things I'll be better than you at and there will be just as many if not more that you are better than me at.
Its not even your fault though, its the way the English language is used, words don't have their true meanings, pathetic being a great example. So while everyone knows what you mean when you say it and most people will use the same terminology, that's not the point I'm making; it was more a dig at the English language than anythign else.
I'm just trying to say that it would be me saying I'm better than you, I haven't specified at all, there are many things I'll be better than you at and there will be just as many if not more that you are better than me at.
and what does this have to do with anything?
Its deomnstrating the point of calling something undeveloped, its not specific, while you're probably using it in an economic sense, there will be aspects in which they are more developed.
Its deomnstrating the point of calling something undeveloped, its not specific, while you're probably using it in an economic sense, there will be aspects in which they are more developed.
your jsut doing this for the sake of an argument are you?
jasonlfunk
07-26-2008, 08:27
Oh man, look at those hit statistics :dblthumbup:
Divine Intervention
07-26-2008, 12:52
Its deomnstrating the point of calling something undeveloped, its not specific, while you're probably using it in an economic sense, there will be aspects in which they are more developed.
unless they have made significant progress in many various aspects of life such as medicine, culutural, political, social etc etc...then they are not developed. Exisiting as a society with barely any change for thousands of years does not make them "more developed" than the relativly young western civilizations. Sure they have more history etc but in relative terms their progress :thumbdown:
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.