ernst jünger in cyberspace

mailing list archive - site updates

Evening all!

There are a couple of small updates on the site:

- mail archives from February to July 2002 have now been processed from t=
raw pairlist data to their nicer looking form.

- I have improved the layout of the mailarchive index page=20
( to make a more=20
user-friendly tabular layout.

In the process of so doing, I noticed that there are no entries for Febru=
and September 2000. Given that pair have no archives for September, I ass=
that this is because there was no traffic in September 2000 (not unlikely=
given how sleepy we can all become on this list).

But I am slightly concerned about February 2000 - there is nothing in the=
archive prior to March 2000. Now, this was the time when we moved from th=
old Oxford system to the current pairlist system - and I suspect that may=
be a=20
few mails got lost round about that time. Or no mails were sent. If anyon=
has still got their old mail archives, could you check for me and see if=20
we're missing anything?? I have tried to be very diligent with preserving=
juenger-list material, but I have made enough mistakes with archives of m=
own email to know that things can go very wrong.

- My curiosity finally got the better of me and I ran some web log analys=
processing the logs for January 2001-August 18 2002, all in all, about 50=
filles making up 810,000 lines of log file. You can see the results (for =
time being - I won't keep them up for ever) on=20

To be honest, I think the figures are inflated by search engines (includi=
myself with ht://dig!!) crawling over the mail archives which tends to gi=
an exaggerated figure and I haven't fine tuned the configuration to provi=
more "accurate" results. Nevertheless, there is no doubt that there are n=
substantially more visitors to the site than a year or two ago which is v=
encouraging considering the total lack of marketing on my part.

I'd also like to add that  the logs reveal that my thesis has been downlo=
4427 times. Not bad and a lot cheaper than Peter Lang ;-))) (Ok, it's not=
the report but if anyone would like 130Mb of log file to check...)

- I fixed a small problem with the main style sheet. You may not have not=
but the roll-overs weren't quite right.

I will update the search engine to take into account the new mail archive=
files in the next day or two. In general, more automation of mail archive=
search engine updates can be expected very soon now that I've lost my fea=
r of=20
bash shell scripting.



Markup © John King, July 2001.