DeMoN LaG wrote: > JTK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 05 Feb 2002: > > >>Looks like the most reliable number there is 0.85% today. A far cry >>from LaGgy's mystical 3%, no? >> > > 3 sites targetted: .85, 1.2, 8.1.
Three sites. My numbers cover thousands. I win. Your lies lose. > Averaged together, 3.83%. Far cry > off from your mystical .75 also. You realize a really good reason that > Mozilla has no thecounter.com statistics is because of how rare they > are? Rare? Do they cover more than three sites? > And even still, four of my friends use Mozilla's sweet sweet image > blocking to block out counters. Why aren't they using Proxomitron for that? > Couple that with something like > Proxomitron, and to any counter Mozilla is non existant And I use proxomitron, so my IE is non-existant to any counter. And since so many more people are using IE, so many more are using Proxomitron. So it balances out, doesn't it LaGgy? Or don't you understand basic statistics? Or don't you want to? 0.73%. Suck it down LaGgy.
