Battle for the LGF Tweet Counter: Episode III

Now Why Would Anyone Think That’s a RETWEET Counter?


How could anyone mistake that thing for a ‘retweet’ counter? I mean, other than because it looks like one, and Charles characterized it that way in one of his Tech Note posts, and the mouse-rollover on the LGF Pages called it a retweet counter, and… I mean, was it something Charles said?

Is Buck defending Charles, or rubbing it in here?

Engineer #1012, using The World's Greatest Blog Search Engine™, has recovered a sample of confusing statements by Charles about his retweet counter. We hasten to add that they’re ‘confusing’ only because none of us are as smart as Charles is about this technical stuff.

Here’s a GIF (ten second delay – click the GIF for a montage) of thirteen different occasions when Charles Johnson mentioned his number of times the short URL has been clicked retweet counter:

How exactly does the number of clicks on the short URL act as a reliable proxy for retweets anyway? [Hint – it doesn’t.] Sounds like a job for timed-out, post-modern, science-guy LudwigVanQuixote.

Original LGF counter

Addendum (ChenZhen): The old tweet counter was used for the first year, as far as we can tell, before it was changed to the current one.

Oh, and I found another one:

Motherload!


125 Comments on “Battle for the LGF Tweet Counter: Episode III”

  1. Banshee says:

    Whoa, Chunk!

  2. Grandjunctionite says:

    Look! Over there! Racists!

    • Village Idiot's Apprentice says:

      So I started looking for the racists.

      Then I saw a Bachman thread.
      Then there was a Palin thread.
      Then there was a Breitbart thread.

      Then there was a….Oh, look…a squirrel

      And something shiny!!!

      *Or, as it’s known at the swamp…..a day that ends in “y”.

  3. phoenixgirl1 says:

    i think buck was being a little passive aggressive in his comment there……maybe he should be send to time out……..

  4. Voltaires Crack says:

    Buck knew Chaz called them “retweets” more than once, didn’t Buck.

    • a-naughty-mouse says:

      It is clear that Buck was giving both Chuck and Obdicut a shot. They both nit pick single words and try and attack that instead of the actual topic.

      Chuck did it to him quickly with the Apple page.

  5. pat says:

    What the hell is a retweet?

  6. charpete says:

    on the left hand side of his blog, there is a “tweeted articles” drop down. I would think that means that the number after the article shows the number of times the article has been tweeted…no? At least to me… Then when I click on the palin article it shows the little counter at the same number…so the front page calls them “tweets”, but its really clicks…no? The Palin article shows 8715 tweets on the front page, but then on the article page itself, it’s 8715 clicks.

    It may be splitting hairs, but obviously he’s trying to portray that the articles are being tweeted all over the internet.

    • nils says:

      See, you have to float your cursor over the little Tweet icon by each article and then read the pop up, which says “number of times this article’s short URL has been clicked”.

      Then you have to realize that – appearances notwithstanding – “number of times an article’s short URL has been clicked” has NOTHING to do with the number of times the article has been tweeted (much less ‘retweeted’).

      You also have to ignore all Charles’ characterizations of this number as “retweets”.

      Finally you have to realize that since this number is the same as the number you’re seeing on the “Tweeted Articles” drop down that, here too, this number actually has NO CONNECTION to number of tweets.

      Simple when you get it – just don’t neglect to read the fine print.

  7. nils says:

    Charles has removed the retweet number-of-times-this-article’s-short-URL-has-been-clicked counter from last night’s Overnight Thread – the one that was showing 666…

    Odd since he never reads here.

    • nils says:

      I see – previous thread – it’s already been noted that Charles has commented on the missing ‘tweet counter’ for this (and, apparently subsequently, all) open threads:


      36Charles Fri, Jun 17, 2011 10:37:26am
      You may notice that I turned off the tweet counters on open threads, because they were obviously being inflated by the usual idiots

      And still the liar calls them ‘tweet counters’. They’re ‘click counters’. One person could tweet the link to 100 friends, and if each friend clicked the link that would be ONE tweet with the ‘tweet counter’ showing ‘100’.

      Similarly, FIFTY people could tweet the link to four friends each, and if half the friends click the link you’d have FIFTY tweets and a ‘tweet counter’ showing ‘100’ (again). Or you could have ZERO tweets and ‘100’ on the tweet counter, as has been demonstrated.

      The point is – the number showing in Charles Johnson’s ‘tweet counter’ has NO CONNECTION to the number of times the article’s link has been tweeted.

      And still he calls it a ‘tweet counter’. And he thinks that people pointing and laughing at this latest fraud are proof he’s not irrelevant. Lol.

  8. charpete says:

    omg…off topic, but I just saw an only poll from the NY Post to vote for your favorite Weiner headline.

    the upper left headline is “Obama beats Weiner”

    http://www.nypost.com/d/weiner/covers_vote.htm

  9. ISpeakJive says:

    And then when you google for the bit.ly address + twitter you see that it went out maybe 3 times for an article that was “retweeted” 500 times.

  10. garycooper says:

    I think I saw one that said “Koch Gives Weiner A Tongue-Lashing,” referring to ex-mayor Koch. That was pretty expressive.

    I want to make sure Chunky sees this admonition from his doctor: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50w19lGOYWg

    • charpete says:

      I like the one

      “Weiner: I’ll stick it out”

      • charpete says:

        I still can’t believe they had a headline…Obama beats Weiner…I wonder how many ties in NY were ruined from people opening the newspaper while drinking their coffee…

  11. Whatever says:

    Chuck’s retweeted from his earlier statement.

  12. garycooper says:

    http://thespeechatimeforchoosing.wordpress.com/2011/06/15/expert-analysis-sarah-palins-writing-scores-higher-than-that-of-most-educated-americans/

    Expert Analysis: Sarah Palin’s Writing Scores Higher Than That Of Most Educated Americans

    June 15, 2011 · 9:41 pm
    By Gary P Jackson

    One of the biggest media failures in quite some time has been the spectacle of going through Sarah Palin’s e-mails from her time as Governor of Alaska. The media was so overjoyed at what they perceived as an opportunity to find all kinds of juicy stories about corruption, incompetence, and so on, they dropped all pretense of being actual journalists, and begged readers to help them sort through the 24,000 some odd e-mails and reporting on “the dirt.”

    I haven’t seen something blow up in someone’s face this bad since Diane Oughton was making bombs for Obama’s best buddy Bill Ayers!

    Instead of finding the incompetent boob our corrupt media had been telling their readers about for years, those going through Governor Palin’s e-mails found a solid CEO who worked long hours doing the people’s business. They found a Governor who was incredibly intelligent, and unlike our current president, almost fanatical about making sure there was transparency in her government.

    The democrats, their corrupt media partners, and the GOP elites have assured us that Sarah Palin is stupid to the point of barely being able to tie her own shoe. They’ve also told us for years that her well written newspaper op-eds, and Facebook notes MUST have been written by someone else. So too her two NY Times best selling books.

    Well, thanks to the media’s zeal, yet another lie about Sarah Palin has been shot down.

    From the NY Daily News:

    It turns out Palin’s writing skills are still better than most educated Americans. Global Language Monitor gave Palin’s emails a score of 8.2, which actually exceeds that of most chief execs. “She’s very concise. She gives clear orders. Her sentences and punctuations are logical,” said Paul Payack of GLS. “She has much more of a disciplined mind than she’s given credit for.”

    John Katzman, CEO of another company, 2tor, gave Palin a score of 8.5. He said the potential presidential candidate’s emails scored higher than his own, when based on the widely-used Flesch-Kincaid readability test.

    But what do the scores actually mean? Payack offered Abraham Lincoln’s “Gettyburg Address” and the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech as points of comparison. They earned scores of 9.1 and 8.8, respectively.

    Hmm, being compared to fellow Republicans Abraham Lincoln and Dr Martin Luther King. That’s pretty heady stuff.

    You may have noticed the media’s interest in Governor Palin’s e-mails died almost as quickly as it was born. Now you know why. It’s hard to sell someone as corrupt, inept, and stupid when every piece of evidence shows that not to be true..

    One thing about it, when she takes office in 2013, President Sarah Palin will be the most vetted President in our nation’s history. The exact opposite of Barack Obama!

    • Mr Caps says:

      According to Rasmussen, 63% feel she’s not qualified to be prez.

      However, voters feel strongest that Palin, the Republican vice presidential nominee in 2008, is not qualified. Twenty-three percent (23%) say the former Alaska governor is qualified to serve as the nation’s chief executive, but 63% say she is not qualified. Palin is the best-known of the Republicans with just 15% undecided about her.

      link

      • OldLineTexan says:

        This from the country that elected Obama.

        Pardon me while I laugh my ass off. The bar has been set impossibly low. At this rate, Loodie will be President.

      • Mr Caps says:

        You’re right about that, it’s a long way before election day.

      • Whatever says:

        Don’t say that.

      • Basement Cat says:

        Nobody is qualified to be prez. The office itself has too much power associated with it, which was never intended in the US Constitution.

        That said, a good candidate will demonstrate the capability of growing into the job. A bad candidate is too pigheaded and self-absorbed to do that.

    • Roger says:

      “I haven’t seen something blow up in someone’s face this bad since Diane Oughton was making bombs for Obama’s best buddy Bill Ayers!”

      have to rememeber this one! 🙂

  13. antilgfwarrior says:

    @ Charles Johnson… YOU LIE!

  14. His life has to be miserable.

  15. Internet Septic Tank Engineer says:

    We didn’t really need to go digging through the archives to find where Charles Johnson called his “Roll your mouse over the counter, and tell me what it says.” counter a Tweet counter.

    He did it again today!

    36 Charles Fri, Jun 17, 2011 10:37:26am

    You may notice that I turned off the tweet counters on open threads, because they were obviously being inflated by the usual idiots.

    Charles Johnson is either extremely dishonest or extremely stupid.

    I am trending towards thinking he is stupid.

    • nils says:

      He’s stupid, but this is dishonesty – blatant in-your-face A. Weiner lying, for the benefit of the loyal loozards too stupid to understand that in no way can “short URL clicks” function as a proxy for “tweets”. I.e. that – ‘too stupid to understand’ – is most of them.

  16. Internet Septic Tank Engineer says:

    I know everyone here gets it but some over at Little Green Footballs are not too bright so we will spell it out clearly for them.

    “clicks” on a shortened link can come from anywhere. They can be clicks by humans or search engines and other automated programs that harvest links and headlines and stuff.

    “tweets” can be sent out automatically but usually it is an indication of human intervention.

    By displaying automated “clicks” next to a Twitter symbol Charles Johnson is giving the false impression that there is more human activity and interest in his site than there actually is.

    If you look behind the scenes then very few real live humans tweet any of his articles, and even less so the user pages.

    “Charles Johnson, fake and not even accurate”

  17. JohnsonEsque says:

    All this is becoming very sad. What a pathetic individual. It’s like picking on the annoying autistic kid at school at this point. He really can’t help what he does and continues to be annoying, but it’s so easy to mock him (and everyone does it) and ultimately it breaks the kid and you feel really bad about yourself (although I don’t feel bad…yet).

    • Mr Caps says:

      The difference being that CJ can help himself and is fully aware of what he is doing.

    • nils says:

      His latest projection is his supposedly ironic description of himself and LGF as ‘irrelevant’, supposedly disproved by the number of people pointing and laughing at his phony statistics, and by the phony statistics themselves.

      He’s sad, pathetic, and irrelevant to all but a couple dozen loyal sycophants.

  18. Mandingo Warrior says:

    Posted without comment (given current events):

    “175 Charles Wed, Jun 15, 2011 8:00:27pm replyquote
    * 0
    * down
    * up
    * report
    re: #157 Dark_Falcon
    The retweet stats come directly from bit.ly’s API.
    I have much better things to do with my time than worry about their latest idiotic smears.”

    • freetaxkiller says:

      Question is, Charles why do you smear your own reflextion in your own dam mirror?

      • freetaxkiller says:

        Of some note: Just looked at the stat report, only 640 or so post today, lgf’s .0001 may fall under 1,000 today if not soon.

        “milstone”

    • 300 says:

      Sour something or other.

    • nils says:

      True, other than the hyper-technicality that they’re NOT ‘retweet stats’ that he’s getting from the bit.ly API.

      What’s amazing to me is that his loyal cohort of loozards are either too stupid to know they’re being consistently and shamelessly lied to, or they just don’t care.

  19. antilgfwarrior says:

    Not sure if this is a repost,but here goes.

  20. Banshee says:

    Meanwhile, Chunk has the journos in a fierce bidding war for his story of stalkage and harassment. The New Yorker looks like its deep pockets will win the day.

  21. Internet Septic Tank Engineer says:

    13 Charles
    Fri, Jun 17, 2011 2:12:14pm

    ssshhh… don’t tell anybody… I’m rigging the Twitter counter again…

    OK Charles, we won’t tell anyone.

    [Flips Chuckie the bird]

  22. freetaxkiller says:

    Hi, CJ,

    Realwest says hi, he does not think your a nice guy now by the way.

    Me I like to see you live blog here all day, its cool.

    Jack ass.

  23. Juan Epstein says:

    Uh oh. B’Bart went and crashed a party.

  24. DEZ says:

    “You may notice that I turned off the tweet counters on open threads, because they were obviously being inflated by the usual idiots”
    Well, the usual idiots would be CJ and his merry band of socks.

  25. DEZ says:

    ISTE :
    It wasn’t me, he calls me a moron.

    Chuck thinks anyone not willing to kiss his unwashed ass is a moron, so you’re in good company.

  26. DEZ says:

    Charles Johnson inflates his blog stats, his Tweet stats, his retweet stats, and I am betting his girlfriend.

  27. Grandjunctionite says:

    idiots? I thought we were all creeps. Damn Chuck, this is getting confusing.

  28. OldLineTexan says:

    Grandjunctionite :idiots? I thought we were all creeps. Damn Chuck, this is getting confusing.

    Better a creep than a Stalker.

    /waves at Charles

    Hi, you fucking coward!

  29. Archonix says:

    I really do wonder about this. He’s presenting a fraudulent image and using twitter’s imagery to do so. Wouldn’t that count as a breach of trademark or come under some sort of passing-off law? Twitter have trademarks on the look of the various widgets that they let people use on remote sites and on the name Twitter and Tweet, and they have specific rules on how people are allowed to use thosw trademarks in order to prevent precisely what CJ is doing.

  30. Mr Caps says:

    I put a twitter button on my doorbell, every time a Jehovah Witness comes to the door I get 2 clicks..err retweets!

  31. garycooper says:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/14/koalas-chlamydia-climate-change_n_876937.html

    Chlamydia And Climate Change Killing Koalas

    Worth checking out just because the title is so got-damn hilarious. 😆

    • garycooper says:

      Don’t you blind deniers see?!

      This is congruent with Fox Sluts flashing their diseased crotches at the camera, and then cuddling with koalas. It’s not a coincidence. 😡

  32. buzzsawmonkey says:

    Totally OT:
    This goes out to Formercorpsman and to Nevergiveup, who posted the news about the new general commanding Parris Island in the main blog today:

    The Last Time I Saw Parris
    —apologies to Jerome Kern and Oscar Hammerstein

    The last time I saw Parris, the training there was tough
    Drill sergeants made you give your all, but that was not enough
    The last time I saw Parris, you learned to conquer fear
    Crawling through mud from dawn to dusk, and then polishing gear,
    Marching for miles o’er hill and dale, policing the latrine
    It’s all part of what it takes to make men into Marines

    But now if I see Parris it will not be quite the same
    They’ve decided that the general in charge will be a dame
    She’s got a sterling record, true, but still I cannot get
    Quite rid of the sense she’s less Marine than marionette
    Chosen to oversee the repeal of “Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell”;
    War’s rough enough; we don’t need guff to add to “war is hell.”

  33. Pretzel Logic says:

    So… who had Newton coming back to LGF in the pool?

  34. Martin says:

    Tweets are for losers anyway.

  35. Pretzel Logic says:

    gizbot7 :
    Me too. I thought Pretzel had seen something I hadn’t.

    Holy Moly… you’re fucking buttons can get push so easily. All I did was ask who had Newton coming back to LGF and you all go off on a tangent, and not one of you managed to answer the question. I didn’t say I had seen him over there. I was just curious which DoD users expected him to come back to LGF.

    If I say anymore, Chuckles will know who I am and ban my account. I’ll drop the subject.

    • Whatever says:

      Don’t tempt me to go gramma Nazi on you with Banshee around.

    • gizbot7 says:

      What tangent are you talking about? Nobody here freaked out on you for goodness sake. The reason I didn’t respond to your direct question was because I don’t know the freaking answer. Relax and take a chill pill.

    • Mr Caps says:

      I don’t think anyone had Newton coming back, we’ve come to the conclusion he had to much dignity. If he did come back I for one would be surprised.

    • snowcrash says:

      Still fear the ban stick? Lol

    • nils says:

      I picked Newton going back – still do.

      Within the last couple of days Newton was floating the idea – via his bud albusteve – that the reason he hadn’t returned from timeout was that he wasn’t able to log on.

      E.g. special hostility from CJ, or maybe a glitch in the matrix.

      He wants to go back, the latest ‘glitch in the matrix’ overture wasn’t his first try.

  36. OldLineTexan :
    Miss Sssssssss is cheating on Loodie?
    NO!

    Yesssssssssssssssssssssss!

  37. Pretzel Logic says:

    Mr Caps :
    I don’t think anyone had Newton coming back, we’ve come to the conclusion he had to much dignity. If he did come back I for one would be surprised.

    Your own damn stupid poll had 92 DoD users claiming he’d be back in more than two weeks through less than one week. The poll only had 16 people voting “Never.” You don’t think? Right, you don’t think.

  38. Pretzel Logic says:

    Hey Ludwig… try this on for size…

    Is climate change raising sea levels, as Al Gore has argued — or are climate scientists doctoring the data?
    The University of Colorado’s Sea Level Research Group decided in May to add 0.3 millimeters — or about the thickness of a fingernail — every year to its actual measurements of sea levels, sparking criticism from experts who called it an attempt to exaggerate the effects of global warming.

    http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/06/17/research-center-under-fire-for-adjusted-sea-level-data/#ixzz1Pa4bsGPK

    Fudging data again. Just like CRA and Hadley.

  39. ryannon says:

    Pretzel Logic :

    Mr Caps :
    I don’t think anyone had Newton coming back, we’ve come to the conclusion he had to much dignity. If he did come back I for one would be surprised.

    Your own damn stupid poll had 92 DoD users claiming he’d be back in more than two weeks through less than one week. The poll only had 16 people voting “Never.” You don’t think? Right, you don’t think.

    This guy sounds suspiciously dickish.

  40. gizbot7 says:

    Walter was classy in his dickishness. This guys not even in his league.

    • snowcrash says:

      We have plenty of cranky people here and they post under a variety of names.Lol. Let’s not be hasty and out anyone. Except windasigo.

  41. DEZ says:

    OldLineTexan :
    Miss Sssssssss is cheating on Loodie?
    NO!

    Even plastic has needs.

  42. Wow…just four days before 9/11/2001, Chuck posts this…

    http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/1074_does_it_hurt

  43. mrpaulrevere says:

    Somebody needs to get out more often:

    Charles Fri, Jun 17, 2011 5:30:05pm

    4
    down
    up
    report

    Check out the earth-shaking new look for the Tag Cloud, in the left sidebar. Now with much more cloud-like appearance, thanks to CSS 3 background color opacity manipulations and other subtle CSS effects.

    You’ll feel as if you’re flying through the clouds above Paris, France.

    • Whatever says:

      IOW: “Hey everybody, look at me! I used to program an Atari 400 in BASIC, and I can still do sprites and shit like that!!!”.

  44. mrpaulrevere says:

    xesaie :
    Just goes to show how content-dead the web was back then.
    There really wasn’t anything for him to write about until the post-9/11 crazies set in.

    So, you think a sound mind wrote that post, because they were bored and the web was ‘content-dead’ ? Fascinating.

    • xesaie says:

      It’s not exactly a question that hasn’t been asked about 1.5 million times.

      Criticism where criticism is due, but that’s stretching.

  45. ryannon says:

    mrpaulrevere :
    Somebody needs to get out more often:
    Charles Fri, Jun 17, 2011 5:30:05pm
    4
    down
    up
    report
    Check out the earth-shaking new look for the Tag Cloud, in the left sidebar. Now with much more cloud-like appearance, thanks to CSS 3 background color opacity manipulations and other subtle CSS effects.
    You’ll feel as if you’re flying through the clouds above Paris, France.

    Tweeting and re-tweeting as you go…

  46. Whatever says:

    Hey Chuck. Why don’t you get a gig like this?

    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20072106-503544.html

  47. William Standish Knowels says:

    Think of it an not flavored naturally but rather naturally flavored.

    Chunk. Face it. You’re a Wiener.
    (in your face)

  48. mrpaulrevere says:

    Have a good Saturday all.

  49. Chuckieisajoke says:

    Chuckles don’t you recognize tweeting your butt in a bikini doesn’t count.