I checked Beggar’s All and the result was:
Then I checked my own blog and got:
I was surprised that my blog scored better and wondered what was pulling Beggars All down. Perhaps Rhology’s blog result is a clue:
Sunday, February 17, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
16 comments:
It's not Rho's fault, it'sprobably my use of Mad Magazine!
Actually James, according to TF the Aomin blog is a lower level than this blog's rating. So I did suspect perhaps it is you pulling down both blogs. :)
Yeah, well I ain't helping any with mine being rated at High School level.
Mark
Something is certainly amiss since my blog is rated genius level. I have concluded that it is written so incomprehensibly as to be useless to my readers. All two of them.
I don't know, PA. I always find your blog well worth the read. My only beef is that you write too little. The Pilgrim's Arbour is a wonderful, restful place where minds and souls can find refreshment.
My blog, [Insert shameless plug.] The Relecutant Catholic Blogger (Readership = approx. almost two, including me) scored "High School." Given that I use words like "POW!, Ka-BLAM!" and “Oogie-boogie-oogie,” in my posts, I should be glad mine did not score "Third-grade Drop-out," so I take it as a hearty endorsement.
I recall learning somewhere (Perhaps it was in High School) that the New York Times is mostly written to a fourth-grade vocabulary. If so, we're all at least a little ahead of the game, including Rho, eh?
Your bro,
--Theo
Very interesting test. My little blog received a “COLLEGE (UNDERGRAD)” rating.
At least a ‘beat’ James White’s blog which received a “HIGH SCHOOL” rating.
Maybe the quotes from James' blog in some of my posts dragged my rating down [grin].
Grace and peace,
David
AOMin.org scores higher than High School. That's what mine got!
AOMin got a post grad level.
Mark
Why hasn't Rhology commented?
I hope he isn't crying over his keyboard - it was just a joke!
Hey John,
Just moments ago, I checked the AOMIN blog again, and got "HIGH SCHOOL"...
Don't know what to say except maybe you did not test the BLOG...
http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/
Grace and peace,
David
If you really want to see if Rhology is at fault, you can check the readability of individual posts, which may be different from the readability of the blog as a whole. If Rhology's posts on average score lower than yours, then you know that therein lies the problem... ;)
However, in many cases, a greater degree of readability is to be desired over abstruse profundity, which would make a lower score a tribute to Rhology's lucid style.
What?!?!?
Abstruse profundity is my middle name!!
Not to mention pedantic obfuscation!
And Carrie, yeah, I've tried that tool. The result discouraged me from embedding it on my sidebar. LOL
Relax guys, it's all my fault: the software must've detected my deviously poisonous commentaries, and sank the blog's readability below sea-level: actually, I think that's the *ONLY* possible explanation: Rhob's blog squared worse because of the plethora of heretical comments I've left there; BeggarsAll second because of the many comments I've left here (but not in industrial proportions, as on Rhob's blog), and Carrie's blog best, because of the almost inexistent number of comments I've left there. >:) :D
And besides, ... the Gospel of John (which is the most profound theologically) could be easilly read even by a five year old. :-)
Chin up, Rhology. The incredible intellects of Steve and Gene haven't saved Triablogue from a High School rating.
And besides, ... the Gospel of John (which is the most profound theologically) could be easilly read even by a five year old. :-)
Actually, I asked my five year old not too long ago if she thought she would getting a spanking for her sins when she got to heaven (thinking of purgatory). She said no, Jesus's blood had washed her sins away (in a tone like I was a big dummy for asking in the first place).
Yes, the gospel is easy enough for a five year old to understand.
My guess the numerous "HAW HAW!!1" comments left on Triablogue anchors the ranking.
And yes, the 1 was intentional. On my part, but not on theirs.
Post a Comment