No link to SKB ay? heh

P.S. I find it interesting that, for so many visitors, you seem to have such a dearth of commentors. What is your theory on that?

Congrats on the stats. Pardon the rhyme also.

Jeff - I believe that if you keep up with these things, there are some blogs that just invite more commentary than others. While I could, I don't post comments on every single post here, or anywhere, for that matter.

My own thinking is that there are some bloggers that people just read, and others that are writing knowing that they're stirring up trouble, and they do it knowing full well it will invite comments. Bill's writing doesn't generally stir up a lot of debate (again, in my opinion).

Hard facts and logically strong arguments tend not to be arguable. Your mileage may vary.

Congratulations. Clearly you are better than SKB. But we knew that already, because you tell us. Frequently.

Not that size matters or anything, but let's compare real stats (as opposed to those extremely inaccurate Sitemeter stats). Here are my Webalizer stats for January:

Total Pages 140412
Total Visits 72944
Avg./Max Pages per Day 4529/5483
Avg./Max Visits per Day 2353/2816

Of course, I'm sure yours are bigger and better than mine. Hey, Instapundit doesn't link to me several times a week, because as you say, there's no market among wingnuts for Bush Bashing.

Anyway, I'm flattered that you have chosen SKB as the benchmark for third-or-foruth-tier blogs like yours and mine. You really ought to consult someone about your paranoid inferiority complex, though.

Webalizer:
Total Pages: 1,539,206
Total Visits: 104,412
Avg/Max Pages per Day: 49,651/94,301
Avg/Max Visits per Day: 3,368/6,263

Pages are much higher because a lot of my posts are continued to an interior page, which you rarely do. However, visits are apples-to-apples.

Why, you may wonder, would I write such a post? Simple: Over the last three years, a lot of my regular readers have emailed me with comments that boiled down to being mystified why SKB's blog, with its leftist slant and its anonymous writer with no apparent expertise, and its often rude language (and lately its increasingly anti-Christian rhetoric) would be so popular in Tennessee. They were embarrassed by it, frankly, and wondered why a blog that dealt in facts was being bested in terms of traffic by a blog that dealt in the latest left-wing nutball conspiracy theories and baseless political innuendo. I told them not to worry, that it was just a phase. Today, I just thought they would be happy to know where things stood.

What about Donald Sensing's blog, by the way? Doesn't he have bigger traffic than SKB or HobbsOnline? And isn't he a Tennessee blogger? Yes. But I don't see his blog as particularly political. News-driven, yes, but Sensing's blog is not politically partisan in the way this one or SKB's is.

Did skb say up there that Instapundit's a wingnut? Dear lord.

Ewwwww...I enjoy a spittin' contest every once in a while! :)

I'll not weigh in on who is bigger/better...but I believe that it is a good sign that post-election traffic remains high. And as for comments? I feel certain that everyone who blogs on substantive issues and asks pertinent questions would like to generate more/better responses. That does not always pan out the way the author wishes...however, just the idea that the opportunity/option to comment exists is so huge that we often overlook it.

...off to find a spittin' contest meter,
P:)

Hey, my comment got deleted. I intended my analogies as humorous and not as "foul language or personal attack" and I can't see that they could have been taken that way.

My point was in my last line, it's bad form to blog about site stats.

The blogger addressed that criticism in his responsive comment. I am surprised that my comment was deleted.

Bill Hobbs,
Congratulations on providing one of my first encounters with blog envy. Your pathetic attempts to prove that you're traffic is higher than skb's is tantamount to a playground scuffle to determine who is the strongest kid in the class. Those who truly are the strongest don't have to say so because everyone already knows the truth...

Don't bother replying: I only came over to the dark side to speak for Bubba, and I won't contribute to your pitiful little traffic stats again.

Hobbs - delete a comment? Never. He's too open-minded.

If I were skb, I would wear the contempt of people like Hobbs and his readers as a badge of honor.

I echo Rochambeaux.

Accidentally followed link. Won't make that mistake again.

Bill's site is more like an old style newspaper. Along with Donald Sensing, Bill is one of the "Edward R. Murrow" class of bloggers.

SKB's site is more like the New York Times editorial. Anonymous cheerleading to a like-minded audience.

Bill does not received daily cheerleading from the same usual suspects. Comments are few and are from a broader audience. I read Bill's blog weekly and comment occasionally.

SKB is like old time religion with many amens. The same twenty people comment ad naseum on each days editorial. There is a great deal of venting on SKB and that is a good thing. Thank heaven they are provided a place to vent. It can be tiring to some people but to the true believers you just cannot say amen enough. I also read SKB every week and almost never comment.

Each of these are excellent blogs in different ways but they are like oil and water. Each blog makes me think about different issues in different ways. I think each blog is at it’s best when it covers local issues.

Does Bubba still redirect links from your site, Bill?

It matters not what your statistics are. What matters is how you treat those with differing views from you. You are obviously a failure in that department.

It matters not what your statistics are. What matters is how you treat those with differing views from you. You are obviously a failure in that department.

I think you should explain this to SKB. Bill has yet to curse at or condemn a commenter.

Much less banish or censor them the way that SKB does. Here an IP ban comes from abuse. At SKB an IP ban comes from the content of the comment. If you say something SKB doesn't like then you are censored and banned.

That may have changed now but it has been consistent in the past. I hope it has changed. This is good material at SKB. But then again no one tests the water at SKB do they? So post something supporting the President and see what happens.

There is a huge difference Libby. So how do you treat people that have different views from you?

SKB bans and redirects frequent abusers who usually have been warned and given multiple opportunities to play nice unless they are so obvious or obnoxious as to warrant immediate bouncing. Wouldn't you do the same if you ran a corner bar?

Oh, and also a few organzied, paid professional disrupters who try to lure SKB and his commentors into lawsuits or who send SKB viruses or viruses to others with forged headers indicating they are from SKB have also been banned. It's a really weird thing, these internets.

But you should look at the front page today. There is a debate on brutality that should have and would have been cut off long ago if SKB had the strict policy you suggest.

At any rate, it's my blog, my database, my bandwidth, and I'll do with it whatever I like. Just as Bill Hobbs does, and just as you can do when you start your blog.

South Know Bubba kindly directed me to this blog. Thankfully the stay is short. Its smells too much of the beerhall blogosphere though I'll bet folks here know how to march, you know that ol high leg kick. Oy...

I can see why you'd think that, but I wasn't referring to IP blocks or anything like that. If what you say about commenters is true, that is very admirable. However, I was referring to what I saw on your blog -- name calling and stuff like this:

"Perhaps the East Tennessee market for paranoid rantings about President Bush seeking global domination is shrinking..."

What political blogs should do is state their case without lambasting the other side. Assumptions and insults are for juvenile bullies.

Both you and SKB appear to do this. Can't we all just get along?

I'm definitely not perfect, but I respect everyone's right to have an opinion, and I thoroughly enjoy trying to see both sides of every issue. I like talking to people with opinions different from my own.
However, if someone is rude to me, then will probably not listen to them or respect them.

Politically-oriented blogs tend to be lean toward one extreme or the other and tear the other side apart, and that's why I usually avoid them.

I like SKB for the local content. I'll have to spend more time looking at your blog some other time.

SKB will not ban anyone simply for supporting the President. I've seen plenty of pro-Bush comments. Stacy comes to mind.

Thanks Hobbs. Have a good day.

Excuse my crappy typing and messy editing. Yikes. :)

Here are the corrected sentences.

However, if someone is rude to me, then I will probably not listen to them or respect them.

Politically-oriented blogs tend to lean toward one extreme or the other and tear the other side apart, and that's why I usually avoid them.

I visited SKB every week or so for a few months before the election. After reading regular commenters there a few times, I felt that I'd just visited a porno-site. Trash talk gets boring real fast. Those people need to improve their vocabulary. They seem obsessed with oral sex.

Hey, Bubba, maybe nobody's reading you anymore because of your Nazi tactics. Real Americans despise fascists such as yourself. You know, there's just something inherently unamerican about fearing dissenting views, then lying about them to peoples' ISPs and so on just so you can keep your followers in line by preventing them from seeing what good, kind, fair people make up the right. You've got an ego as big as the great outdoors but as fragile as an eggshell. You need to get over that. Get help.

Or maybe it's just your bad manners that's driving them away.

BTW, Libby, you're wrong. Bubba bans anybody who supports Bush, no matter how polite and friendly their approach is. He lets them post for awhile, then makes up stories about them so that it appears he's banning them for good cause, when in reality he's just afraid his little brood of sycophants might actually start considering a point of view that disagrees with his. He's got to keep them on the plantation in order to survive.

Above I referred to his tactics as those of a Nazi, but Stalin leaps to mind, too. Get off the farm, girl, before Bubba butchers you for dinner.

Bill, I would not be surprised if Bubba has a 'bot running page hits for him. The truth is probably something more like a fourth or a third of the numbers he claims. Speaking of truth, given the vast leftwing dishonesty that goes on over there, the stats he posted above are likely no matter credible than he is.

The sycophanticide of Bubba's plantation is proven simply by the number of Bubba's regulars who've come over here to sneer and deny the truth of Bill's stats. Other strong evidence is the lack of one original thought among the entire lot of them.

It sort of reminds me of the moonbat lunacy over the '00 FL vote - if you don't like the results, just make something up, blast away with lies and insults, and then cry foul. Bubba's moonbats are well-trained and his plantation is fully intact.

Very true, Bob, very true. Constructive, civil discourse is much more of a threat to Bubba than some silly troll is. It's much more than him disagreeing with the person - it SCARES him.

Bubba, you said:

"SKB bans and redirects frequent abusers who usually have been warned and given multiple opportunities to play nice unless they are so obvious or obnoxious as to warrant immediate bouncing. Wouldn't you do the same if you ran a corner bar?

Oh, and also a few organzied, paid professional disrupters who try to lure SKB and his commentors into lawsuits or who send SKB viruses or viruses to others with forged headers indicating they are from SKB have also been banned. It's a really weird thing, these internets.

But you should look at the front page today. There is a debate on brutality that should have and would have been cut off long ago if SKB had the strict policy you suggest."

You are a liar. I engaged several of your regulars in civil discussions on a variety of subjects. They initially called me all the usual names that you lefties call conservatives, but after awhile they became civil and began to discuss ideas. Some common ground began to emerge. You couldn't handle that one bit because you don't want your followers even considering an idea that doesn't comport with yours and you especially want to keep a wall erected between the two sides so the notion of establishing common ground just about shook you to your timbers, didn't it, big boy? So you made up some ridiculous, completely illogical cock-and-bull story that a ten year-old could figure out was bogus and then you banned me.

You're not only a liar, you're also a coward.