<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
xmlns:rawvoice="http://www.rawvoice.com/rawvoiceRssModule/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Heath Ledger spikes my website, Day 9</title>
	<atom:link href="http://stilgherrian.com/internet/heath_ledger_spikes_website_9/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://stilgherrian.com/internet/heath_ledger_spikes_website_9/</link>
	<description>All publication is a political act. All communication is propaganda. All art is pornography. All business is personal. All hail Eris. Vive les poissons rouges sauvages!</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 21:24:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stilgherrian</title>
		<link>http://stilgherrian.com/internet/heath_ledger_spikes_website_9/#comment-10330</link>
		<dc:creator>Stilgherrian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2008 04:35:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stilgherrian.com/internet/heath_ledger_spikes_website_9/#comment-10330</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;@Rhys:&lt;/strong&gt; Good question. The short answer is that it&#039;s all bullshit, because the graph shows total traffic to this website, not just the traffic to the &lt;a href=&quot;http://stilgherrian.com/internet/heath_ledger_dead_jokes/&quot;&gt;Heath Ledger jokes&lt;/a&gt; page. However, since that traffic dominates the site at the moment, it&#039;ll do as an approximation.

The light blue shows &quot;pages&quot; viewed, which is the more accurate measure. The dark blue shows &quot;files&quot; which depends. A page with three included graphics plus some JavaScript is 5 files: one for the page plus one for each of the other elements.

When I post my more detailed analysis, I will use Google Analytics and my own software to isolate the data &lt;em&gt;just&lt;/em&gt; for the jokes page.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>@Rhys:</strong> Good question. The short answer is that it&#8217;s all bullshit, because the graph shows total traffic to this website, not just the traffic to the <a href="http://stilgherrian.com/internet/heath_ledger_dead_jokes/">Heath Ledger jokes</a> page. However, since that traffic dominates the site at the moment, it&#8217;ll do as an approximation.</p>
<p>The light blue shows &#8220;pages&#8221; viewed, which is the more accurate measure. The dark blue shows &#8220;files&#8221; which depends. A page with three included graphics plus some JavaScript is 5 files: one for the page plus one for each of the other elements.</p>
<p>When I post my more detailed analysis, I will use Google Analytics and my own software to isolate the data <em>just</em> for the jokes page.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rhys</title>
		<link>http://stilgherrian.com/internet/heath_ledger_spikes_website_9/#comment-10329</link>
		<dc:creator>Rhys</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2008 04:14:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stilgherrian.com/internet/heath_ledger_spikes_website_9/#comment-10329</guid>
		<description>So are we looking at the light blue, or the dark blue?

There was something in the news last night, about some video that was purchased with something or other on it from 2 years ago. I wasn&#039;t paying much attention clearly but he did make the news again, and the fron page of some paper which I picked up also. I&#039;m really unobservant, and I apologise</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So are we looking at the light blue, or the dark blue?</p>
<p>There was something in the news last night, about some video that was purchased with something or other on it from 2 years ago. I wasn&#8217;t paying much attention clearly but he did make the news again, and the fron page of some paper which I picked up also. I&#8217;m really unobservant, and I apologise</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

