Sunday, February 01, 2009

Cranmer’s Pulpit and monthly statistics

Cranmer has had a record month – 45,759 unique visitors, representing 57,020 page-views.

This is 129% growth in a year, and 10% higher than his previous highest month.

He now has a total of 11,211 referrers, of which the Top 20 are:

20.35% Iain Dale’s Diary
11.58% ConservativeHome
2.25% Fark
1.48% Witanagemot
1.13% PoliticsHome
0.84% The Devil’s Kitchen
0.75% To Miss With Love
0.71% Forward in Faith
0.69% Blogsearch
0.67% Gates of Vienna
0.63% Obnoxio the Clown
0.57% The Corner on National Review Online
0.57% John Redwood’s Diary
0.55% Eursoc
0.47% The WebElf Report
0.42% House of Dumb
0.41% If Sam Tarran Were In Charge
0.41% Dizzy Thinks
0.39% Adam Smith Institute
0.34% DizzyFatPlonka

41% of Cranmer’s traffic is through referrers. The highest by far continue to be Iain Dale’s Diary and Conservative Home. 56% of Cranmer’s readers are regular communicants, with 7% of them visiting more than 200 times over the month. Since this amounts to about 7 times a day, His Grace exhorts them to get out a bit more.

Cranmer’s 10 most popular keyword searches (after ‘Archbishop’, ‘Cranmer’ and ‘blog’) are:

Abortion - 4954
Muslim - 4682
Birth - 4232
Partial - 3683
Catholic - 3233
Church - 2893
England - 2803
Islam - 2505
God - 2285
Obama - 2250

Cranmer’s most-viewed page (which has gone to the top in a very short space of time) is that of Lord Ahmed’s threat to bring 10,000 Muslims to Parliament to protest about a planned screening of Geert Wilder’s film Fitna (3,667 views). It appears to have been linked to throughout the world.

In celebration of Cranmer’s growing popularity, and in perpetual commemoration of the spiritual liberation afforded by his own pulpit experience with the Provost of Eton, Dr Henry Cole, His Grace is pleased to offer this ‘Cranmer’s Pulpit’ to his communicants for the raising of whatever religio-political or politico-religious concerns they do so wish (intelligently and eruditely, of course).

His Grace has been so plagued this month with unedifying comments from undesirable contributors that, with regret, he is considering banning ‘anonymous’ contributions. He is open to comment from his communicants on this move. He is considering making it obligatory to open a Google account and to log in before one’s voice may be heard. This will not impede His Grace's regular communicants or those who will understand the reason for the action. It is simply that His Grace has neither the time nor the inclination to trawl through hundreds and hundreds of entries which are manifestly neither intelligent nor erudite, and are frequently antithetical to the stated aims and purpose of this blog. Discuss.


Anonymous len said...

Congratulations your Grace, keep up the good work!

1 February 2009 at 11:55  
Blogger Damo Mackerel said...

maith thú!

1 February 2009 at 12:01  
Blogger Anguished Soul said...

Your blog is very interesting and informative. I usually find out here what's really going on in the nation, unlike the mainstream press!

1 February 2009 at 12:28  
Blogger McKenzie said...

Ban anonymous comments. There is probably no bigger pain in one's erudite bum than me, but you have my real surname, and I make comments that I myself stand by. I value people's opinions and ideas though, but anonymous comments lack any integrity. Another aspect, one which I have been guilty of exploiting myself in the past, is the ability to sometimes use the anonymous facility to simply grate Your Holy nerves, out of sheer mischief and bedevilment. But I am happy to sacrifice this indulgence in the best interests of intelligent and erudite debate in this highly esteemed blog, which I believe would become all the more intelligent, erudite and highly esteemed, if such an irritating facility were to be revoked.

1 February 2009 at 12:44  
Blogger len said...

Onward and upward!

1 February 2009 at 12:50  
Blogger McKenzie said...

It is necessary to point out that 'getting out more' is no barrier to visiting his Grace's blog 12 times a day if so desired. I have been know to pay visit from a position no less 'out more' than being half way up to the summit of Snowdon! Re visiting at least twice from the summit in order to check replies, and then a further three times on the way down (sad but true). All thanks to the miracle of mobile phone technology.

1 February 2009 at 12:57  
Blogger McKenzie said...

Len has got himself a Google account at long last.

Seeing how this is an open post as it were, I would like to make a contrast.

A contrast between the sever and harsh treatment the Tibet protesters have received today in London, in comparison with the 'run away' style of policing that the sacred and Holy Jihad protesters get when they go on the rampage......a certain video clip springs into mind

1 February 2009 at 13:09  
Anonymous oiznop said...

I have been a loyal communicant from the very beginning, but I can't be bothered to log in every time. I just post now and again when I feel like it. If you want a place of free speech, you've got to make it easy to speak.

Congratulations, by the way, on your impressive stats. You deserve it - this blog is head and shoulders above other religious blogs and most of the political ones. I've said it before, but if you did this full-time you'd have one of the best blogs in the country.

1 February 2009 at 13:12  
Blogger Dissenter said...

The trouble with anonymous comments is that when they are offensive and unpleasant, if you wish to reply, you don't know whcih of the nameless ones you are replying to! I thnk people are often ruder and/or stupider when anomynous, even than when using a peudonym. Better to be open and inclusive, but when the abuse gets out of hand, may be no alternative but to ban.

1 February 2009 at 13:19  
Anonymous oiznop said...

Another problem oiznop is if people simply type in your name and make spurious comments, which I shall refrain from doing seeing how I am using your name.

1 February 2009 at 13:25  
Anonymous oiznop said...

You bastard. How dare you use my name. I've used this for years. It is mine. My identity. You are an imposter.

1 February 2009 at 13:31  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's good to see that 'God' is still above 'Obama' - just.

1 February 2009 at 13:35  
Blogger TB said...

Dear Cranmer,

I have recently seen the play called "plonter" (meaning strife) by a company of Israeli Jewish and Arab actors in the barbican.

I would thoroughly recommend that you see it. It brought the issues about the conflict that everyone in the region faces and it is something I believe you would enjoy.

It's in Hebrew and Arabic with English subtitles but don't let that put you off.

1 February 2009 at 14:21  
Blogger Bob said...

You Grace,

You would know better than any of us as you have the stats.

Do you think this is organised or that the subject matter arouses a certain element?

I only ask because it is happening on Guido's as well.

Are Labour really that rattled?

1 February 2009 at 14:32  
Blogger Timothy Belmont said...

I can understand Your Grace's predicament regarding anonymous comments. Many anonymous comments, by no means all, can be abusive personally and in other ways. Those who are abusive often hide behind the anonymity.

I, regrettably, banned anonymous comments several months ago for the above reason.

1 February 2009 at 14:36  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh dear, I've enjoyed visiting this site and as with all sites I visit, I do not swear, endeavour to be grammatically sound (though known to miss words out because the fingers won't work fast enough!) and have never understood what is gained by being offensive.

Thank you for allowing to comment in the past

1 February 2009 at 16:13  
Blogger McKenzie said...

Has anyone ever written a massive comment, then hit the submit button only to get this message which says "duplicate entry"?

It completely swallows away your comment and places a MASSIVE strain on your self control. God becomes the recipient of a MASSIVE temper tantrum, and yet another keyboard leaps up into the air and throws its self at the wall in some kind of suicidal murderous attempt to dissemble its self into a thousand pieces.

Somehow the original comment completely loses its enthusiasm to be written ever again....its nothing short of human tragedy.

1 February 2009 at 16:14  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

1 February 2009 at 16:33  
Blogger Miss Middle of Manchester said...


After a few too many such incidents, I now try and draft all of my comments in word/an email browser and C+P accross (or at least copy before clicking 'submit')

OCD? yes. Less frustrating oh-so-many times? Oh yes.

If you will forgive the schadenfreude element of this though, I am glad to hear I am not the only person!

1 February 2009 at 16:35  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your Grace,
I have used anonymous comments simply because I rarely make comments unless I feel that I have something constructive to add to the debate. However, within my posts I have always provided a direct means to identify myself should one have the reason or inclination to do so.
That said I must state respectfully that based upon one of the comments made earlier I can see the reason for you action. It is the actions of a few whom it would appear, in my personal opinion only, to be incapable of conducting themselves in a manner befitting a gentleman.
Clearly I must take steps to obtain a google account.
Thank you for your time and I apologise if my comments may in any way cause offence to earlier commentators.
Michael G7AZW

1 February 2009 at 18:00  
Blogger McKenzie said...

Miss Middle of Manchester

You have somehow repaired my soul. I am going to have a cup of tea and then attempt to re-draft it again and capture the original passion of expression I intended it to have. It could well appear later this evening.

Thank you.

1 February 2009 at 18:11  
Blogger McKenzie said...

From The Movie....DOUBT 2008

What do you do when you are not sure?
'Which way, what now'?
'What do I tell my self'?
When our bond with our fellow beings is one of despair, it can be an awful experience, but there is consolation knowing we are in it together.
How much worse is it then for the lone man, the lone woman, stricken by a private calamity - "no-one knows I'm sick", "no-one knows I have lost my last real friend", "no-one knows I have done something wrong".

Imagine the isolation: you see the world as though through a window. On the one side of the glass you see happy and the un-troubled people, and on the other side, you.


A cargo ship sinks one night; it caught fire and went down. Only one sailor survived, he found a life boat and rigged a sail, and being of a nautical discipline, he turned his eyes to the heavens and read the stars. He set a course for his home, then exhausted, he fell asleep.

Clouds rolled in! For the next twenty nights he could no-longer see the stars. He 'thought' he was on course, but there was no way to be certain. As the days rolled on, the sailor wasted away. He began to have doubts: "had he set his course right?" "Was he still going on towards his home, or was he lost and doomed to a terrible death?" No way to know!

The message of the constellations! "Had he imagined it because of his desperate circumstance?" Or had he seen the truth once, and now had to hold on to it without further reassurance?

"There are those of you in church today who know exactly the crisis of faith I describe, and I want to say to you",
"Doubt can be a bond as powerful and as sustaining as certainty"!

When you are lost, you are not alone.

The end (but the beginning of the movie).

1 February 2009 at 19:08  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

1 February 2009 at 19:28  
Blogger Dave said...

Could you not implement the comments system that guido has been talking about? Allows others to push the rubbish comments to the bottom of the pile

1 February 2009 at 19:35  
Blogger len said...

There as a small boy who was lost.
A policeman found him.
"Where do you live "said the policeman.
" I don`t know "said the boy.
"Can you remember anything from where you live?" said the policeman.
"There was a church with a cross on it near my house " said the boy,
" if I can find the cross I can find my way home".

1 February 2009 at 19:42  
Anonymous treefacedimpleweedgas said...


Am I to understand that Guido is going to implement a comments system which allows others to push comments to the bottom if they are not to their liking?

Is it me or can any one else see the fundamental flaw here?

Also, are you suggesting that not all comments on Guido are rubbish? Hmm, this could be the root of your dilemma.

1 February 2009 at 20:47  
Blogger Wrinkled Weasel said...

It depends on what your Grace discerns the purpose of comments to be.

My guess is that Your Grace is interested in "discourse".

The premise of patriarchialist discourse holds that context is created by communication, but only if narrativity is interchangeable with culture; otherwise, we can assume that narrativity is capable of truth. Many dematerialisms concerning subcultural narrative may be found.

But you knew that, didn't you?

Accordingly, I would ban irrelevant, hectoring, and plain daft posts. Like this one.

1 February 2009 at 20:49  
Blogger Preacher said...

Your Grace.
congratulations on your success, a well deserved accolade & may you have even more during the coming year. I'm sorry to hear that you are experiencing problems with some idiots, but it does prove that you are hitting the target, or as a friend once commented "If you throw a rock up a dark alley & there's a thud & a yell, you've hit something"

1 February 2009 at 23:06  
Blogger an ex-apprentice said...

Dear Mr Weasel, 20:49pm

You guess that His Grace is interested in discourse, whereas the stated purpose of this thread was for the expression of "concerns".

Proper compliance would necessitate an examination of the concept of concern.

Concepts, pretheoretically, are the constituents of thoughts. But the pre-theoretic notion only goes so far as an entry point into philosophical theories of concepts. This is partly because concept has become a term of art among philosophers and partly because of the diversity of projects and concerns that tend to get lumped under this one heading. Adding to the confusion is the fact that disputes about concepts often reflect deeply opposing approaches to the study of the mind, language, and even to philosophy itself.

Accordingly, I would contend that my post embraces the concept of plain daft, and even extends it to the realms of the distinctly loopy, in a way that is more successful than yours, and is therefore far more deserving of deletion.

1 February 2009 at 23:27  
OpenID BL@KBIRD said...

Your Grace must pay with notoriety when you have news that others do not or are too afraid to tell. I bore this westward myself to some other branches I haunt. I hope your Grace approves.

By all means force an identity of some official source on all who wish to pass gas or wisdom here.

2 February 2009 at 01:19  
Anonymous not a machine said...

yes congratulations your grace , before christamas you seemed fed up with it , then after rest you found your pen and re injected debate , and to some it may seem like nit picking, but we do so need informed minds , and not burger wrappers discussion boards.

what to do ? well your traffic is going up , which suggests you are either lucky or controversial.

the dull and the ignorant may indeed be blogging agaisnt you , in some blogs case deliberately and for political reasons .

it is inetresting that other bloggs are having the same problems .

sacred discussion hall of the great intellects only , or open for anyone including the poor and the begging .

blogging names will become property .

up to you your grace , if maintenance is getting you upset , then switch to google accounts only , but it will not stop a deliberate attempt , dont think the technology is here yet for what your grace wants .

somthing similar to mail block only for ip adresess i think .

membership by agreement ??

2 February 2009 at 01:55  
Anonymous Paul B said...

I agree with Mckenzie- when he/she says that anon`comments have no integrity. I`m not by nature a person who advocates bans, thinking they are often counter productive, so I'm loath to suggest introducing a ban. I would say to Anon posters is that I tend to skip over your comments and believe they the show a degree of moral cowardice.If you want to be read, you need to stand up and be counted.

2 February 2009 at 15:12  
Anonymous Ross Warren said...

I am quite happy to give my full name but I'll be buggered over a barrel before I'd open an account with google.

2 February 2009 at 16:07  
Anonymous martin sewell said...

I post in my own name as a personal discipline. If I am not prepared to put my name to it, I should probably not be saying it in the first place

3 February 2009 at 10:41  
Anonymous Edward Keene said...

God Bless Your Grace and all your wise sermons. They are truly treasured.

5 February 2009 at 17:42  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older