«

"Andy Luddy" <> wrote in message
news: ...
> Alan M wrote:
>> "Andy Luddy" <> wrote in message
>> news: ...
>>>> We also have collected stats on our web sites and currently firefox has
>>>> only 3.97% and Safari has 0.14% Opera 0.05% the rest is Internet
>>>> Explorer
>>> Such a staggering coincidence! You have nearly the same browser usage
>>> statistics as Mosley, and you have the exact same posting path showing
>>> in your extended headers! Probably just a coincidence. Or a sock
>>> puppet.
>>>
>>
>> We both seem to be with IINet, being one of the biggest ISP's in
>> Australia its not such a coincidence is it.
>
> Perhaps. It remains a strong coincidence that the only supporter for his
> view ALSO collects browser statistics for an unidentified web site, has
> the same level of statistics that are at odds with most other statistics
> collected by reputable information sources, and posts via the same path,
> from an anonymous address (though there are many valid reasons for munging
> your email address on Usenet). You have many of the characteristics of a
> stereotypical sockpuppet.


Can you tell me what web sites these reputable information sources use for
there stats, and how you know they are reputable?

Are you sure you are not lying and don't really know what sites are used and
if they are reputable?



>
> I don't consider it an unusual coincidence that you are both from Oz,
> since that was part of the OP's point.
>
> --
> Andy Luddy
> Perform appendectomy to reply
>

"John Thompson" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On 2006-12-16, Mosley Jones III <> wrote:
>
>> We host many web sites and a few months ago we started keeping stats of
>> visits.
>>
>> Our stats show that Firefox has less than 5% market share.
>
> Stats from a single site are useless in determining total market share.

Not one site, a collection of sites that we host

> There may be issues with your site that discourage Firefox users
> e.g. lack of pertinent content, IE-only "features" that either prevent
> Firefox users from accessing your site or force them to disguise Firefox
> as Internet Explorer (by changing the User-Agent string) in order to
> access your content.

no, we have made all our sites firefox friendly, so in fact we should have
higher stats because 100%of our sites are firefox friendly, where as the
internet as a whole is not so. In fact our stats should inflate firefox
market share
>
> Here's a more broadly based market-share report:
>
> http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=0
>
> --
>
> John ()

<> wrote in message
news: ups.com...
>
> John Thompson wrote:
>> On 2006-12-16, Mosley Jones III <> wrote:
>> Stats from a single site are useless in determining total market share.
>> There may be issues with your site that discourage Firefox users
>> e.g. lack of pertinent content, IE-only "features" that either prevent
>> Firefox users from accessing your site or force them to disguise Firefox
>> as Internet Explorer (by changing the User-Agent string) in order to
>> access your content.
>>
>
> take a look at his email address: Mars and Gov!!!! That should explain
> everything
>

look at your email you idiot

As if the email makes a difference to the stats, you seem to be more
interested in abuse than the facts