UCC.org web site traffic bottoms out
Friday, October 12, 2007
According to Alexa.com, which monitors web site usage, traffic to UCC.org is at a historic low. It should come as no surprise that UCC web site traffic spiked in July 2005 and again in 2006 presumably due to the controversial television ads and the news generated from the 2005 General Synod.6 Comments:
Not sure what point you're trying to make here...ucc.org still has more hits lately than, say, the Republican Party website (which follows the same declining trend as ucc.org, over the same time period). Trends like this don't necessarily imply a decline in affiliation, as surely there are more Republicans than members of the UCC.
commented by 
Tom, 9:09 PM
Tom, 9:09 PM
Usually I don't comment here, but since you didn't ask us why this might be or contact me in any way I thought I might. The forums, which constitute a large part of our traffic, are currently at uccforums.com and therefore are not included in this traffic count. I know you don't like to get actual facts, but try once in awhile. Also, using "historic low" and "bottoms out" without providing any historical context or proof is sketchy at best.
Also, this comment is from Dan Hazard - not the UCC. I don't presume to speak for anybody other than myself.
Frankly Dan, that's nonsense - The statistical graph is historical and goes back to 2002. Also, uccforums.com (or .org) do not even register on Alexa which means traffic there is less than UCC.org.
And another thing... I have contacted you in the past and you have given me good information that I have shared online when I thought the information you might have would be valuable. In this case, I couldn't think of anything meaningful you could have possibly contributed to the post... and your response certainly verified that for me.
I was a little too charitable in the article by not mentioning that the schizophrenic web strategy of a zillion domain names (i.e. Still Speaking, i.ucc, CongregationalVitality, etc) is part of the reason for the drop off - and a serious flaw in the branding campaign. I don't hold you responsible for it, but it's effects can't be diminished.
And another thing... I have contacted you in the past and you have given me good information that I have shared online when I thought the information you might have would be valuable. In this case, I couldn't think of anything meaningful you could have possibly contributed to the post... and your response certainly verified that for me.
I was a little too charitable in the article by not mentioning that the schizophrenic web strategy of a zillion domain names (i.e. Still Speaking, i.ucc, CongregationalVitality, etc) is part of the reason for the drop off - and a serious flaw in the branding campaign. I don't hold you responsible for it, but it's effects can't be diminished.
Look at the one, three, and five year charts also. There is clearly flux that is must more complicated than your selected chart would suggest.
Interestingly, the UCC web activity is higher than the Republican website (gop.org) - and Playboy (playboy.com) is much higher than both of them put together. Does this prove anything interesting to you, too?
Your posting shows nothing but the ability the manipulate numbers to prove a preconceived point. Competitive business and unethical science do this from time to time also.
Interestingly, the UCC web activity is higher than the Republican website (gop.org) - and Playboy (playboy.com) is much higher than both of them put together. Does this prove anything interesting to you, too?
Your posting shows nothing but the ability the manipulate numbers to prove a preconceived point. Competitive business and unethical science do this from time to time also.
GOP and Playboy? Good thing you are anonymous because that is really idiotic. This isn't a comparison of traffic between completely different sites, it's relative to the UCC.org history of traffic and clearly traffic to UCC.org has gone down from it's historic highs during the ad campaign controversy.
