Similiarly, Judy, what I'd really like to know is what percentage of Internet time is from the 'bots and and what percentage from us humans.
On Thursday, December 12, 2013 12:40 PM, "authfri...@yahoo.com" <authfri...@yahoo.com> wrote: What you want to ask, Share, is not whether "942 members of FFL are bots" (or whether any members of FFL are bots, for that matter) but whether 61.5 percent of visits to FFL are made by bots. There's no way for us to know that (although the answer is almost certainly not, given what bots are for and what FFL is), but at least the question makes sense/ ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <sharelong60@...> wrote: Judy and turq, I'm still amazed by that 61.5 statistic. And it was interesting to me to translate that into the everyday context of FFL. I wonder if there are any real 'bots who at least visit here. On Thursday, December 12, 2013 10:18 AM, "authfriend@..." <authfriend@...> wrote: You see, according to Barry, no post commenting on something he has said has any meaning unless he validates it by responding to it. IOW, it's entirely up to Barry whether one is a bot or not. ;-) Barry bites: > turq, does this mean that 942 members of FFL are bots?! >> >>< < Absolutely. You can always tell the 'bots from the humans because they're >>the ones who keep replying to posts from people who don't reply to them. What >>would do that *but* a 'bot? :-) > > > > > >> On Thursday, December 12, 2013 9:31 AM, TurquoiseB turquoiseb@... wrote: >>> >>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-25346235 >>> >>
