Now that the changes are in place to support RealRank within PayPerPost.com I wanted to take a moment to explain some aspects clearly.
First of all, the rank itself. You can see the RealRank for your blogs on the My Blogs page within the application, as shown below. If the system has not yet assigned you a rank, you'll see N/A. The Izea RealRank engine runs at 2am each morning (it's a slow time for the systems) and aggregates information from our Tracker system to come up with the RealRank for each of your blogs.
The key for this to happen, is to have the Izea Toolkit installed on your blog. Just click on the Get Code button on the My Blogs page. This will take you to an instructions page to walk you through getting the code and installing it on your blog. The Izea Toolkit sends data for each visitor to your blog to our Tracker systems - without it installed, we can't record your traffic data.
The RealRank is a flat rank. We calculate a score for each blog we track, and then sort the resulting scores to assign each blog a rank form 1 to n. For opportunity segmentation though we normalize the rank.
When creating an opportunity, advertisers are asked to select a rank from 1 through 9. This really equates to a percentage of the marketplace to exclude from an opportunity. If an advertiser chooses a 9, they are effectively excluding 90% of the marketplace and only allowing people in the top 10% of the ranks into the opportunity.
When a blogger looks at the opportunity details we show them the value the advertiser chose, and explain what it means. For example "9 (top 10%)".
Obviously if your rank improves (remember, we calculate it daily), you could find yourself qualifying into opportunities that you previously weren't eligible for. Similarly, if you find opportunities segmented based on RealRank that you do qualify for, it's in your interests to take that opportunity rapidly; you may get pipped to the post tomorrow by a more popular site.
We currently don't show you however where you are in the network. We don't for example show your rank and the total that it's out of. When the Izea RealRank site launches though we will expose a lot more information to you to let you accurately identify your place in the grand scheme of things.
And, that's all there is to it.
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/2488636/23543924
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Getting started with RealRank:
Comments (RSS)
Daethian said...
This sounds great! Will be nice to be ranked against my peers :D
Nov 20, 2007 9:19:07 PM
Darlene said...
This is a great one! I am very excited! Keep it up PPP!
Nov 20, 2007 9:59:16 PM
David Mackey said...
Okay idea, but I imagine you lost a lot of big-time bloggers who are scared of getting penalized by Google. PageRank still matters.
Nov 20, 2007 10:08:16 PM
brad said...
Im sorta confused, so you are either limited by page rank and alexa or Real Rank? If not you could effectively be screwed if your real rank qualifes you for a high paying op but PR takes your out at the knees...
Nov 20, 2007 10:50:57 PM
Jenn said...
So what about Page Rank? Please tell me that you'll be removing the ability to segment by PR!
Nov 20, 2007 10:58:22 PM
Suzanne said...
What if your blog host (such as livejournal) isn't compatable with the ppp tools? Am I about to be excluded out of even more offers than I already am?
Nov 20, 2007 11:03:14 PM
mistipurple said...
Sorry, have to ask what you mean by.. "For opportunity segmentation though we normalize the rank."
I am so excited and frighten at the same time. It's like waiting for my exam results, lol!
A big thank you to everyone at Izea for putting this through.
Nov 20, 2007 11:04:47 PM
Beautiful Minds said...
Thats really cool.. but sad for those sites with high PR and a little low traffic.
What about the geographic location of the blog? will that matter? and geographic segmentation of readers?
Nov 20, 2007 11:21:31 PM
Karah said...
If we changed our code for the Argus testing... do we need to change it back now?
- Karah
www.trackbunnyfilms.com
Nov 20, 2007 11:23:17 PM
abelle said...
i'm excited yet afraid to see the results. i'm still hoping it will work with mine :(
http://abelle.blogrox.com/2007/11/21/real-ranking-by-realrank/
Nov 21, 2007 12:17:22 AM
Irene said...
"it's in your interests to take that opportunity rapidly; you may get pipped to the post tomorrow by a more popular site."
Oh dear... does this mean I write halfway and my rank changed, then when I submit, I can't submit anymore? -.-'
Nov 21, 2007 2:12:15 AM
syikin said...
hmm.. another ranking system.. but what happen when advertisers wants high google PR and high real rank? it will cause low ranking bloggers grit their teeth...
Nov 21, 2007 2:29:28 AM
Pete Wright said...
brad: Kinda. We have, for now at least, left PageRank in there. PageRank and RealRank are not mutually exclusive. RealRank is just a heck of a lot better.
We will be working to educate advertisers of that fact, but ultimately you are still going to find some advertisers in the system that really want to use PageRank.
Nov 21, 2007 4:43:45 AM
Pete Wright said...
jenn: We are looking into removing PageRank, yes. It has not been removed right now because there is a learning curve that we will need to help some advertisers climb in terms of explaining how value-less pagerank is, and how great RealRank is.
Suzanne: As I said in a previous post, if your blog host does not support you using Javascript inside your blog templates, then I'm afraid we can't rank you. It pays a lot of dividend to really consider moving to your own dedicated domain and a self hosted solution in the longer term though. You get more flexibility and control of your blog and less chance an advertiser will ultimately segment you out of an opp because you are in an undesirable blogging neighborhood.
mistipurple: RealRank moves each day. Today it could be from 1 to 10,000, while tomorrow it could be from 1 to 5,000,000. With that in mind we can't have an advertiser enter an arbitrary number to segment on - it would mean nothing. Instead we break the RealRanks down into 10 groups. Advertisers creating an opportunity can pick a number from 1 to 9, which is of course analogous to PageRank and something most people are familiar with, and we apply that to mean a 'percentage' of the network to exclude. A value of 6, for example, means exclude 60% of the network, include the remaining 40%.
Beautiful Minds: That's the whole point. This is a RealRank. If you have a very high PR site, but no traffic, then that once again shows that PageRank is a very weak indicator of your blog's traffic and popularity. RealRank does not take into account geography - it's a global indicator - but opportunities could of course be limited based on geography, just as they always could.
Karah: No.
Irene: No. RealRank is calculated once per day, at 2am Eastern time. While it is feasible it could change on you while you are writing, it's unlikely.
syikin: We'll be working on getting the message out that that would not be a good thing to do, over the next few days. We are looking at the future and considering removing PageRank altogether, but ultimately (in PPP.com at least) that's something we need to elicit a lot more feedback from advertisers about (it's in their interests just as much as yours, to stop using Page Rank).
Nov 21, 2007 4:53:20 AM
papajoneh said...
So, is higher number better or the opposite? is 300 better than 600 or the opposite? Still confused with all this numbers.
Nov 21, 2007 6:10:33 AM
Pete Wright said...
papajoneh: Ok, In terms of the actual real rank, a lower number greater than 0 is best. 0 means we didn't assign you a rank because you have no traffic to measure, etc etc. 1 would be the best blog in the network. 1,000,000 would be the worse, if we were measuring 1,00,000 blogs.
On the advertiser side though we had to come up with a way to make RealRank usable in segmentation that was not too much of a leap from the Google Page rank way of doing things. So we use numbers 1 through 9
9 = Target top 10%
8 = Target top 20%
7 = Target top 30%
.
.
.
2 = Target top 80%
1 = Target top 90%
Nov 21, 2007 6:15:22 AM
Wilson said...
This sounds interesting PPP!.... Keep it up!...c",)
Nov 21, 2007 6:16:26 AM
Rollo said...
How long before we see RealRank make a difference in the number of opps that we qualify for? If an advertiser may still choose to segment by PR and also by RealRank, could it be possible that they may effectively exclude most of the bloggers? Will advertisers be alerted to the possibility that their opps might get limited exposure for this reason?
It makes sense for advertisers to segment by RealRank as it takes traffic into account. After all, a post seen by 20 people is more effective in advertising than a post seen by 1 person, regardless of the PR of the blog on which it was published.
Nov 21, 2007 7:12:40 AM
Corrin said...
I'm anxious to see the ratings of others. Right now the numbers are arbitrary without any benchmarks.
Nov 21, 2007 7:24:11 AM
Robert said...
Mine is listed at 78 - where does that fit in with 1-9?
9 = Target top 10%
8 = Target top 20%
7 = Target top 30%
.
.
.
2 = Target top 80%
1 = Target top 90%
Nov 21, 2007 7:27:36 AM
blackyard.net said...
Looks good so far, let keep our fingers crossed.
Nov 21, 2007 8:05:22 AM
Jennifer said...
My question -- my rankings in the my blogs tab stopped automatically updating a long time ago. It doesn't matter if I log in/log out daily or not, they don't update until I ask for them to be done manually. Is my realrank going to sit there stagnant with the rest of them?
Nov 21, 2007 8:06:55 AM
Melissa Markham said...
Terrific!
Nov 21, 2007 8:30:19 AM
Lisa said...
Pete, here's another question. My blog and this IZEA blog entry are both throwing error codes up on my end. It happens every time I refresh. Any ideas?
"itk.socialspark.com has sent an incorrect or unexpected message. Error code -12263"
Nov 21, 2007 9:47:44 AM
Lisa said...
And not it's not doing it. Figures! ;-)
Nov 21, 2007 10:00:50 AM
Anna said...
So, will we be able to see where we fit into the 1-9 percentage numbers? Or just the actual RealRank number?
Nov 21, 2007 10:33:10 AM
InvestorBlogger said...
I keep getting the error message -12263, too, in FF.
Kenneth
Nov 21, 2007 10:39:05 AM
MacBros said...
ERRORS!
Evey page (Even here) I'm getting an error message in Firefox
"itk.socialspark.com has sent an incorrect or unexpected message. Error Code - 12263"
Nov 21, 2007 10:44:59 AM
Pete Wright said...
Yes we are seeing some reports of errors, but thankfully it's only a small number. We are looking into it and will have the issue identified and addressed within the hour.
Nov 21, 2007 11:00:24 AM
Pete Wright said...
Yes we are seeing some reports of errors, but thankfully it's only a small number. We are looking into it and will have the issue identified and addressed within the hour.
Nov 21, 2007 11:00:33 AM
MacBros said...
Does anybody have the math that will help us see just where we stand as far as the Rank goes. I would like to see if I'm a 1 or a 9. :D
Nov 21, 2007 11:07:38 AM
dragonfly183 said...
Ok so 0 means no traffic to measure? if thats the case i have a zero that is sooooo wrong, lol. I know that blog has traffic. I'm just going to assume you guys aren't done yet. I am glad you guys are going to remove Pr ranking from the system. I just hope its fast. were all sick of not being qualified for things we know we should be qualified for.
Nov 21, 2007 11:27:15 AM
OK said...
I would still repeat my suggestion, in an earlier post, that PR and Alexa scores be left in place alongside RR for many reasons.
Apart from the sake of useful comparison, how else would we know when something goes wrong with RR? For example, I had been shocked to find that PPP gave one of my blogs an Alexa score of about 4 million, while my installed Alexa tool bar gave it a score of less than 100 thousand previously!
The PPP Alexa for that blog is now well below 2 million but I can't help being a bit worried that RR could do the same with none the wiser otherwise.
Nov 21, 2007 3:35:58 PM
Linda R. Moore said...
A popular niche blog could well have a high PR and lower traffic, but would still be more valuable to a niche advertiser than a general blog. I think that real rank is a great step forward, but dismissing high PR/low traffic blogs as proof that PR is worthless is a bit short sighted, IMO.
One solution for this problem would be to be able to pick the top 10% of sites within a specific category, for example.
I too would like to see where I stand in the rankings: top 10%, bottom 10%? That would actually be a lot more useful than the rank itself.
Nov 21, 2007 3:49:25 PM
Peter Wright said...
And that's exactly where we're going with this Linda. When the ranks site gets launched you will be able to select the category of your blog and we will then of course be able to show top blogs in each category.
Nov 21, 2007 3:51:27 PM
Linda said...
I am a bit confused. I have a Real Rank of 896 which I guess should be fairly good, right? If that's the case, why am I still limited to a very small amount of opps that pay at the lowest level? Is this because of the hit my page took with PR? I thought Real Rank was supposed to give us better opps? Can anyone explain this to me? Thank you!
Nov 21, 2007 4:45:52 PM
Peter Wright said...
@Linda. RealRank rolled out yesterday. Any opps created since then that advertisers have segmented using RealRank will open up for you, if you qualify. Unfortunately we didn't call up every advertiser and ask them if we could edit their opps to segment on RealRank instead of something else. For those reasons the opportunities available to you will appear relatively unchanged today.
Nov 21, 2007 4:49:10 PM
Linda said...
Thank you, Peter, I didn't mean to make it seem like I was rushing you or anything (honestly, I'm not!) just trying to understand how PR still figures in with Real Rank (I'm still feeling quite undervalued by the good folks at Google and reeling from the drop down to a 0!). I will be quite interested to see how this all comes together and I thank you very much for rolling out Real Rank so much sooner than you had originally anticipated because of the hits so many blogs took. Again, sorry if it sounded like I was whining, I wasn't!
Nov 21, 2007 5:24:24 PM
David said...
Do you guys not understand that consumers don't want paid reviews? Most of you don't even own the freaking product your writing about. Google did the ethical thing for their customer who wants real content, not fluffed up crap written to get a check from the person selling it.
Hell I just read a review about Home decor from a 22 year old brat who lives at home, just dropped out of school, doesn't work a job. What idiot is going to buy based on her recommendation?
Realrank will go nowhere. Consumers don't want your slanted reviews. Advertisers will figure that out soon.
Realrank, for people not in the real world LOL
Nov 21, 2007 11:26:05 PM
Tim said...
We can't all write about hair loss and migraine keywords, David. I'm sure the blogs you're using for posts with those keywords are REAL quality, bud.
Nov 23, 2007 10:57:20 AM
rachel said...
So I have a real rank of just under 1000. I have 2 ops available to me one of which asks for a Real rank of 1 and the other of 4. Do I assume that because I have been shown these opps that I am eligible to take them? I am afraid to do them in case this is not the case and I will not be paid.
Nov 29, 2007 11:10:17 AM
kanthi said...
the graphycs r g8 that one and only site i have ever meat with the site containg that graphics..finally the sound and what not everythig is extra ordinary work that site was awesome.
Nov 29, 2007 11:15:17 AM
David Tran said...
Hi all,
I'm considering to advertise on this site: http://www.vinamaso.net
Can anyone tell me about that site?
Nov 29, 2007 11:15:22 AM
Sam Nova said...
All sounds good I would say. (Especially since my PR went 3.. then 2..then 1.. and now zero).
My blog got a RealRank of 1124 which says nothing really. Just a number from the whole system.
So when I see that an opp requires RealRank of 5 then it looks messy. We (bloggers) use one RealRank system but the advertisers uses the 0 to 9 one. So what I would really like to see is what 0 to 9 I got, so I have an idea about how I stand in connections with different ops. Am I close to 4 or far from it...
Right now I saw a opp that have requirement of 4 (top 60%) and it is available to me, that's the only hint I have so far.
Keep up the good work.
Nov 29, 2007 11:20:25 AM
Murray said...
My RealRank says "0" (I get about 80-100 uniques per day) and "Get Code" doesn't even mention the Izea Toolkit - ????????????
Nov 29, 2007 11:28:13 AM
James said...
Hi. I'm wondering what kinds of info PPP will store on my visitors? Is it simply hits? Unique visitors? The type of browser they are using? Where they are visiting from?
I'm not sure I feel comfortable putting this on my blog until I know what info will be collected, and what your policy for things like retention time will be.
Nov 29, 2007 11:28:13 AM
sm00bs said...
I was told by someone at PPP that a tool was in the works for LiveJournal users. Was that person just blowing smoke up my skirt or is that actually the case? This is overall pretty annoying for those of us with an established blog on a "less desirable" domain. Even if we have plans to move our blog, it doesn't do us much good for at least 90 days, does it? Had I known about the fact that this wouldn't be made available for LJ users when Argus was released, I would have started the other blog then and would at least be that much closer to having that blog accepted. Instead, I was assured there would be a tool available for me to use at LJ.
Nov 29, 2007 11:32:34 AM
Chad W Smith said...
Not sure if this comment thread is still being read by Izea, but I'll give it a shot anyway.
Why do you have the 2 sets of numbers in opposite directions? I mean, for the specific RealRank - lower is better, but for the advertisers' exclude thingy, higher is better. Wouldn't it make more sense to keep them both in the same direction?
I realize that you're probably wanting to make it easier for the advertisers by pretty much making RealRank look to them just like PageRank (0 - 9 scale for RR 0 - 10 scale for PR), but couldn't you make it "Top 10%, Top 20%, ..., Top 80%, Top 90%" - it would mean the same thing, but it would mirror the actual RealRank (or the real RealRank - ha) instead of cloning PR. It's just as easy for the advertisers (actually, it seems much easier to me, if you throw out comparisons to PageRank). Who doesn't understand the concept of the Top 10%?
That would also make it more positive instead of negative. As it has been explained now - you are talking about excluding bloggers. The Advertiser picks 9 to exclude 90% of bloggers. If you switch to the top % list - you can talk about including bloggers. Select Top 50% to include the bloggers with the Top 50% of RealRank scores.
It would be just as easy and more positive sounding to advertisers, and much easier to understand and more positive sounding to posties. With the added benefit of not looking like you are trying to copy Google.
What do you think?
Nov 29, 2007 11:49:44 AM
Chris said...
my blogs have real ranks of 17, 20, and 77. what does it really mean?
Nov 29, 2007 12:03:37 PM
Satellite TV Guru said...
Sounds easy to game. Why not just put you blog on an autosurf site to get an inflated "Real Rank" score?
Nov 29, 2007 12:14:11 PM
Mark Barrera said...
I work for a marketing agency who uses PPP from the advertiser side and I am also a postie on the othter side so I see the issue from both sides.
As an advertiser, I have told my clients to hold off using the system until a lot of issues are explained and sorted out better. For one, as an advertiser, I do look for more than views on a specific blog. I also look for high quality links that can pass pagerank - this is why your system saw the growth that it has achieved. I have been seeing my posts go onto blogs that have no pagerank even though I specify a certain pagerank which upsets me and my clients.
I also don't see why I wouldn't specify a realrank of 9 EVERYTIME I post an opp b/c it doesn't affect my price, so why would I not request to be on highest trafficked sites for the same price as I was previously paying a site that would get <100 pageviews and no click-throughs? This seems to hurt all the posties who don't make the top 10%.
I also don't want a Realrank 9 site reviewing me if they don't have Pagerank so eliminating Pagerank from the equation would force me to advertise through other systems such as Blogsvertise whose bloggers have not been had their Pagerank pushed to a zero.
In short, the main reason I see most companies using PPP is for leads and links and until the CPL gets closer to that of PPC, then I don't see why companies will continue to use your service if search ranking benefits disappear.
So from an advertiser perspective, PLEASE DO NOT eliminate pagerank and make sure to update the PageRank values of all of the blogs in the system.
On a side note from the postie side. It seems to me like putting your javascript on my blog gives Google a super easy way to see who to penalize and this is why I have not added it to my blog. It seems that Google's algorithm could easily detect the javascript and devalue any blog containing this script. I guess this means I won't be able to be a postie anymore since I am not going to be assigned a RealRank...
Nov 29, 2007 12:42:32 PM
Steve McGrath said...
Just got The Tack today.
Peter: Will nofollow be force now so that bloggers not be penalized by Google?
Is the widget be available to third party and bloggers to show the RealRank(1 to 9) or x ranking(1 to 5000000)? I have a Blog Directory/marketplace category on 1 Cool File so that advertisers can find bloggers for paid reviews/advertisement. I will like to show the RealRank if possible. I already show the PR, Alexa, Technorati using their widgets. I could add that one too.
Speaking from an advertiser point of view: I think it's a good ideal. I buy traffic not PR. Of course, it will hurt niche blogs with high PR.
Nov 29, 2007 1:10:40 PM
Peter Wright said...
Steve: NoFollow will be forced if advertisers choose to u8se it.
We are working on awidget to show the RealRank Index (1 through 9) for each blog.
Nov 29, 2007 1:29:46 PM
Robert MacEwan said...
I received the email today stating that our advertisers are now using the realrank system in their campaigns.
"Advertisers are now using RealRank to segment their campaigns."
This has not been my experience since RealRank kicked in. With a RealRank under 100 the ops are still $12. Nothing to complain about but the real money is going to the Google Rank 6 folks.
Nov 29, 2007 1:57:17 PM
Pete Wright said...
Mark: We're not eliminating PageRank from the system, but we are making the choice between that and RealRank mutually exclusive. PageRank is all about SEO, RealRank is all about eyeballs on a site and REAL traffic, so segmenting an opportunity on both can be counter productive.
IN terms of Google using RealRank to de-list sites, that would be incredibly foolish. RealRank is an open ranking system. We are extremely close to launching the site that will allow anyone on the planet, regardless of whether they are a PPP user or not, to grab the script and start tracking their RealRank. If Google were to use RealRank as a means to target sites and delist them that would be mistake because they would undoubtedly remove a ton of sites that have nothing to do with sponsored posts and paid blogging.
Nov 29, 2007 2:50:19 PM
Pete Wright said...
Satellite TV Guru: Yes, it would be incredibly easy to game if were were just monitoring hits and not analyzing why a hit took place. Thankfully we have code in place that is very accurate at spotting people trying to game the score. The rank calculation itself also plays down things that a typical bot would produce (such as a mass of repeat hits and very few unique visitors). How we identify someone as a unique visitor is also quite special.
Nov 29, 2007 2:52:21 PM
Chad W Smith said...
@Mark - Well, I would imagine eventually it will cost more to stratify this way, but even now it "costs" you in excluding potential posties. Don't you think the top ten percent would (do) have their pick of opps? Unless yours is attractive to them (read high dollar amount), then you have the chance of your opp not getting done, and therefore your money wasted (if it costs you to list them) or at least your time wasted and no ads to show for it.
Nov 29, 2007 3:37:07 PM
Pete Wright said...
Chad: In terms of the two scores, we wanted to come up with a way of ratifying the numbers in a way that advertisers understand them. RealRank has a moving upper limit - it changes are more bloggers come into the system. We decided to go with 0 through 9 since that was something they were already familiar with in terms of Google Page Rank. A 9 essentially means a high ranking site, but mathematically equates to a significant exclusion of the network. The easiest route to go was to map the figures to percentage bands. If you want to target the top 10%, choose 9. THe top 20%? Choose 8 and so on.
For PPP Bloggers we will be exposing the 0-9 value (we're calling it RealRank Index) within the site for each of your blogs in the next update. The next update will also introduce moving averages to the RealRank score to smooth out the movement of that score over time.
Nov 29, 2007 3:46:08 PM
Pete Wright said...
James: In terms of privacy of data we have thought long and hard about what to do there, both in terms of providing the best value to people, and in terms of preserving anonymity of browsers.
If you are a PayPerPost (and ultimately SocialSpark user) we identify you as a visitor to a site. This is used for the face based analytics within SocialSpark; when you visit a blog profile within that system you can see a MyBlogLog type list of the most recent visitors to your profile pages as well as to your blogs.
We realize that some people don't want that, and so you have the option both within PayPerPost and SocialSpark to opt out of that. If you opt out, we don't identify you as a visitor.
For those that don't opt out we aggregate demographics information. So, in effect we keep an anonymized count of people in a certain age range, gender and region of the world against each blog, per day. This is anonymized though. While we can report that x number of visitors live in Georgia, for example, we don't report on who they were.
Nov 29, 2007 3:50:02 PM
Pete Wright said...
@sm00bs: Yes we are researching the best way to implement a non javascript version of RealRank.
That has issues though in that it would feasibly be much easier to game and thus skew the figures. With that in mind it's going to take us a little while to come up with an ideal solution.
Nov 29, 2007 3:51:19 PM
Pete Wright said...
Murray: The PPPTools within PayPerPost.com IS the ITK. We are currently QA'ing some changes to the site to change terminology on things just like this to bring them inline with the company's recent name change.
Nov 29, 2007 3:52:19 PM
Pete Wright said...
rachel: if you can see the opp and take it, and it uses RealRank for segmentation, then you qualify.
We are working on changes that will expose the RealRank index (0 through 9) to you for each of your blogs within PayPerPost.com
Nov 29, 2007 3:53:42 PM
dingsea said...
does this really work? seems lots of questions out there.
Nov 29, 2007 9:05:39 PM
Louis said...
My real concern is that the more that one ranking system is relied on, the easier the system is to be gamed. It's tougher to game Google PR than it is any other system.
Nov 29, 2007 9:26:09 PM
phostan said...
hmm .. sounds pretty interesting :D thx
Nov 30, 2007 6:46:53 AM
danielctw said...
it's interesting calculation. I wonder if Google noticed this and might do another revamp on their ranking instead
Dec 1, 2007 1:03:25 PM
Paul said...
I think this is interesting that you guys are going down your own track, rather than relying on G data. Apparently Google are working on their own API for Analytics. Perhaps you will return to using them as a way of determining visitor stats when this is released. I imagine the logistics of your own system being gamed is a tricky one.
Dec 4, 2007 9:08:20 AM
Meredith said...
Erm, why does my RealRank show as 1755, 1121, and 1206 for my three blogs? Isn't it supposed to be 1-9? :)
Dec 4, 2007 9:13:08 PM
Andrew said...
That's an interesting tool, I will be installing it on my blog.
Dec 5, 2007 5:11:17 PM
Gedas said...
Shame for google!
-----------
takefun.net
Dec 6, 2007 8:59:24 AM
gman said...
As an ADVERTISER the real rank system is good in theory but IMO flawed.
What is to stop a user from faking traffic to boost their real rank? Im sure savy bloggers can find hundreds or thousands or hundreds of thousands of IPs to throw at their blog.
Jan 26, 2008 11:42:55 AM