please empty your brain below
That background colour question confused me as well, I answered it wrong as I read on a RSS feed due to your site being horrible on mobile (sorry!).

It's great to read on the commute.

theo | 03.03.16 - 7:28 a.m. | #

" visitor numbers are probably 11% higher than I think they are. "

Even better: 133/1027 = 13%

timbo | 03.03.16 - 7:33 a.m. | #

And for the first time of doing this survey over many years, I am a 30-something male in the London area.

Kirk | 03.03.16 - 7:37 a.m. | #

First week of *March* 2018, surely.

dg writes: Surely.

Andrew | 03.03.16 - 7:53 a.m. | #

Q1 - "Male / female" and then "other" or "non-binary" perhaps? (and you might want to add "identify as" - I doubt you are really asking about chromosomes or genitalia)

More options over here.

Andrew | 03.03.16 - 7:58 a.m. | #

Given the spread of broadband, sticking stuff on Youtube has replaced writing - I surprise myself at the extent to which I have stopped using established media, I don't bother with a paper anymore, Spotify has replaced much of my radio listening, I've even ended up using i-player instead of watching TV or recording it to watch later.

| 03.03.16 - 8:22 a.m. | #

The result of the survey showing that 30something males are reading your blog more than others comes as no surprise to me. In fact I came to the same conclusion some time ago. Simply by reading the comments page,you can soon get the feeling of being surrounded by 'the lads'. I don't mind though,as your results show,they are all getting older,maybe grumpier with each passing year. Keep on blogging DG,from a 60+ Lady 😉😉😉

Jo W | 03.03.16 - 8:26 a.m. | #

@Anonymous - maybe dg could get a YouTube channel!

Tube Geek | 03.03.16 - 8:36 a.m. | #

I suspect all the ladies (numbers different to males...not ALL the ladies, obviously), are on Facebook. Such ladies prefer two way conversations and virtual meet-ups instead of the 'pontificate and wait for comments' blog model . DG's mostly solitary and anonymous wanderings, transport obsessions and such like aren't really 'ladies' stuff.

B | 03.03.16 - 9:11 a.m. | #

Totally agree with Jo W's first sentence.

I suspect that you may have lost a few female readers and/or commentators (and, indeed maybe some male ones!) when you started categorising the 'validity' of the comments people are kind enough to take the time to post.

Women often comment in a different way to men, taking wider and less direct persepctives. Your analysis of comments 'validity' felt belittling and judgmental.

On an open blog, everyone should have the right to comment as they wish on a post (provided it is not abusive etc etc). Comments are a privilege, not a right.

*awaits unwanted categorisation of this comment and umpteen people disagreeing that men and women comment in different ways*

Blue Witch | Homepage | 03.03.16 - 9:15 a.m. | #

The simplest third gender option is "prefer not to say". And if the existence of that option helps to move society towards the day when gender is treated more like eye-colour, so much the better (probably).

Malcolm | 03.03.16 - 9:18 a.m. | #

@ Jo W

"maybe grumpier"?! ...don't push it! ;)

Grumpy Anon | 03.03.16 - 9:25 a.m. | #

Many thanks DG for your daily efforts. Always first class writing, and much appreciated.

Next survey, please do include 70+. There are plenty of us, we are active and interested in the world and by no means over the hill.

Don't contribute to the general trend that we in our seventh decade are invisible.

Pam | 03.03.16 - 9:31 a.m. | #

Perhaps a "get ready with me" blogpost will draw the female readers

Louise | 03.03.16 - 9:38 a.m. | #

Usually the only way to get a feel for the readership of this blog is to look at the comments, where yes, it does feel heavily male-based. That's often especially the case later in the day, as people stop commenting so much on the post and start commenting on points of interest to them. Apologies if anyone's feeling squeezed out.

But I love the diversity of comments, and the number, which as I've said before is phenomenal for 2016. So thanks!

And if a comment ever makes me think "oh blimey, why are you posting that here?", it's almost never from a woman :)

diamond geezer | Homepage | 03.03.16 - 9:40 a.m. | #

I chose Computer, but I sometimes read on a phone, and I hate sites that try to be "mobile-friendly".

DG content is difficult to be mobile friendly, as it requires looking at a large blob of text and large photos. It also requires looking up lots of references and links, so is best done on a computer or tablet.

JQ | 03.03.16 - 9:44 a.m. | #

You can always post more about kittens to increase the female readership ... I've been reading for donkeys years but now on phone rss feed. Look forward to the blog every day DG . Please keep it up.

Debster | 03.03.16 - 9:53 a.m. | #

Don't overlook the possibility that many of the non-London readers are just Londoners in exile.

Petex | 03.03.16 - 10:04 a.m. | #

Crap, my RSS reader has gray background.

Geza | 03.03.16 - 10:14 a.m. | #

in 2011 I was housebound for 2 months, and, among many other activities, I read through most of the DG archive, in order. It was interesting to see how the topics changed and the numbers of comments grew. I can't remember all the details, but now there's much less pop music and many more buses. And, of course, there still aren't enough kittens.

amber | 03.03.16 - 10:23 a.m. | #

What about a category for us web-crawling 'bots?

@debster - I read that as you've been reading for donkeys - but you want kittens?

@Pam
If you're 70+ you've completed your seventh decade and are in your eighth

and Happy Significant Birthday to Dan (see 0827pm yesterday), whichever decade you've just completed.

robby the gender-neutral web-bot | 03.03.16 - 10:26 a.m. | #

@Blue Witch - thank you for articulating what I have been feeling for some time, especially since that comment hierarchy post last year. I've stopped commenting because I don't see why my voluntary gift - which I take time and care over - should be judged and belittled in this way. The closest comparison I can make is when you bring in food or clothes donations for a charitable cause and someone is stood there with a clipboard dismissing them because they've decided they're not good enough. Luckily other readers are not so sensitive and continue commenting regardless.

I do comment in a more personal way, because I feel that is the most authentic contribution I can make to this blog, given my lack of in-depth knowledge about buses and tube stops and whatnot.

I'll still continue reading, not least because the comments make this one of the more lively blogs I follow, but I'm unlikely to comment anymore. From one of those rare female readers in her 30s who's been reading daily since September 2003.

s | 03.03.16 - 10:54 a.m. | #

As a female reader I was surprised to find myself in such a small minority, but don't change to try to cater for 'the ladeez' - there's plenty of food and diet and fashion and spirituality and children and kittens out there for those as wants it. Ditto Facebook and Twitter for those that like that sort of 'interaction'. I come to this blog to get what dg does so well - whatever the subject matter it's (very nearly) always interesting and always a pleasure to read.

I ticked yes, I have my own blog - it's coming up to its tenth anniversary in April - but I find myself posting less and less frequently and it's hanging on to existence by its fingertips for which I feel slightly guilty (especially when I compare myself to dg - similar age and lifestyle so the difference must be down to my laziness).

How do the results for age and length of readership correlate? Is the changing age profile largely a reflection of a stable readership?

Sarah | Homepage | 03.03.16 - 11:04 a.m. | #

I don't think DG was entirely serious about his comments hierarchy. That said, a categorisation of comments into neat boxes is catnip for certain sorts of reader.

And even if he was serious, so what. He could just delete the less relevant comments if he wished, but most of the time he just lets us witter on. Keep calm and carry on.

One of the reasons I keep coming back - other than the excellence of DG's writing of course - is the diversity of the comments: some of the more interesting threads veer entirely off topic. And some trigger subsequent DG blogposts.

Andrew | 03.03.16 - 11:20 a.m. | #

strange that not more women read your blog, not all of us are into scatter cushions and six inch heels (although I do like kittens, but you obviously don't have any felines in your life DG)

Caz | 03.03.16 - 11:26 a.m. | #

I would like a post of 'what is in DG's man bag today?'

dg writes: DG doesn't carry a manbag, sorry.

Jen | 03.03.16 - 11:42 a.m. | #

It's interesting that some people took the item about categorizing posts personally, I looked upon more as a wry observation.

Putting comments in here is in itself utterly pointless - in that it doesn't pay any bills, or alter my life chances, but then again a lot of the stuff people do is utterly pointless - such as watching boxsets, or climbing Everest with a piano, or sorting out whatever collection of crap you've acquired.

| 03.03.16 - 12:04 p.m. | #

I use your RSS feed via the excellent Feedly, and am always very glad of people that supply a "full feed."

Although I realise most people never properly understood how feed readers work, they are so good at highlighting when people have published new articles.

I would hope that whatever you use for you stats should also count views via the feed!

Adam Bowie | Homepage | 03.03.16 - 12:08 p.m. | #

I'm one of the 'worldwide' readers, and add observed earlier, I'm basically a Londoner in exile (not a true Londoner, but close enough)... for 20 years now. DG is a good place to keep an eye on the place without the added drama you get in a lot of media.

Kevin A | 03.03.16 - 12:41 p.m. | #

Dang-it! I fail for the first time this year to look in on the same day...and I miss the biennial chance to be counted. Are those in the same boat permitted to complete the survey retrospectively..?

Frank F | 03.03.16 - 1:00 p.m. | #

I too was surprised about how few female readers there are. As a 60+ London lady I find your posts interesting and informative. I'm always telling my friends about it. Perhaps some people who only read it occasionally missed the survey yesterday?

Cornish monkey | 03.03.16 - 1:02 p.m. | #

When I first discovered DG in 2008 or 2009 I too was a "Londoner in exile", but I'm home now and this is one lady you won't be losing!
I find your blog invaluable for things I'd never have found otherwise, like the Love London pass for the Shard!

With respect to the comments categorising, I'm not 'put out' by it at all! I thought it was a wry, tongue in cheek observation which was brilliantly done! It's that sort of thing that keeps me coming back!

Cornish Cockney | 03.03.16 - 1:44 p.m. | #

Like Adam Bowie, I get your RSS feed through Feedly. Most feeds I follow I read there (whether it's on the Feedly website on a desktop computer, or in the app on my phone or tablet), but dg is one of the few I almost always click through to read natively. In which case, I think I answered 'white background' yesterday, but should probably have ticked 'grey'.

This is because Feedly doesn't reproduce your formatting well—any post to do with the Tube particularly, with multi-coloured text and tables galore, just doesn't work on Feedly. So I click through.

I just looked you up on my phone, and it's not remotely as awful as I was expecting actually :p Please, please don't go mobile-friendly—not that you're in any particular danger of that!

Rich Thomas | 03.03.16 - 2:03 p.m. | #

I am another one for whom the white/grey question was too subtle - I read everything I possibly can in an RSS reader so will rarely show in the stats here (or anywhere else) despite being a daily reader. But I answered 'grey' and so am counted in the wrong category.

marek | 03.03.16 - 2:07 p.m. | #

I too am surprised that anyone took the comment value hierarchy personally or seriously. It was fun to read as well as making me think first before firing off some 'smart alec' comment just for the sake of it.

popartist | 03.03.16 - 5:03 p.m. | #

Very good community feel, knowing so many and such an age range look in each day. I'm one of the 70+ sector now living in mid-Essex, so in semi exile and getting into town less frequently now. It's good to delve with DG in such variety and depth, and humour. Looking in on iPhone more often now: it's really no problem, turning to get landscape format and spreading text to screen width. Thank you for staying with us DG and it is great to read all comments each day too.

Herbof | 03.03.16 - 5:29 p.m. | #

What is the ratio of survey responders to visitors to your blog?

dg writes: Almost exactly 50%. Which is damned impressive.

Nick | 03.03.16 - 7:26 p.m. | #

DG, why did you only keep the survey open for 24 hours? I responded but there was a good chance I could have missed it.

I'm female too. If you start posting about fashion and kittens, I'll stop visiting.

Hedgehog | 03.03.16 - 9:32 p.m. | #

The survey is always open for 24 hours precisely, so that the data is comparable year on year. And it always takes place midweek in early March in years ending in even numbers, if you want to be better prepared next time.

diamond geezer | Homepage | 03.03.16 - 9:38 p.m. | #

Please, ladies, don’t stop commenting because of DG’s ‘hierarchy’ post. I thought it was DG in analytical/humorous mode – not to be taken personally, or indeed too seriously.

Great Aunt Annie | 03.03.16 - 11:00 p.m. | #

DG, I suggest that in 2018 the survey include age categories for 80+, and 90+.
I'm in the former now and will be in the latter then. And you might want to add USA (or at least N. America) to your 'where are you' category. In the past 50 years I have managed to get to London 13 times from the Washington, DC area. Fell in love with it on the first visit.

Colesville Garth | 03.03.16 - 11:33 p.m. | #

Yo, DG...

I'm NOT your typical reader, ha, being a 60+ reader from that place you call 'world'.

Though, happily, I do still know what gender I am!

Love your prose style .. and the way you consistently come up with 'Now, we are going THERE next time we hit Deepest Darkest Lundin' pieces...

I'd offer to give you some of these here cashews if only I wasn't so frightened you might take some!

Prop | 03.03.16 - 11:59 p.m. | #

@Colesville Garth: According to the (unreliable?) tracker DG has on his page, 6.2% of his readers are in the USA. Click on the left-hand globe at the very bottom of the screen.

Great Aunt Annie | 04.03.16 - 12:36 a.m. | #

I'm female and I like kittens. And transport. But I would not say no to more kittens, especially since there is a cat cafe in Bow ... (hint, hint).

Antipodean | 04.03.16 - 8:20 a.m. | #

"surprised that anyone took the comment value hierarchy personally or seriously."

It was vaguely amusing as a post.

What was not amusing was when it appeared again, more than once IIRC, categorising a day's comments in the comments box.

As someone else said to me recently, comments here are now much more of a "my train's longer than your train" variety, and much less fun, or discusive, than they used to be.

But, if comments/commentators are chastised/deleted/'ridiculed', that's unfortuantely what happens. Most of those who don't like this modus operandi have long gone, I suspect, which is why I was just dropping in my analysis of the situation, as someone who stuck around, despite feeling uncomfotable about the situation.

As ever, though, the blog writer has a right to their own 'rules' (and to the consequences therof).

Blue Witch | Homepage | 04.03.16 - 8:33 a.m. | #

I fear that some of the comments about the so-called comment hierarchy are going to get female readers a reputation for being over-sensitive. I took it as a passing observation, and altered my commenting practice not one whit. Anyone who is put off by something that mild hasn't seen much of the internet...

Sarah | Homepage | 04.03.16 - 8:45 a.m. | #

Not over-sensitive Sarah, just sensitive to people's feelings (and unafraid to add my analysis of the situation). There is a huge difference.

All this 'I don't see why you're upset' stuff actually just makes the original situation worse.

(and apologies for all the missing letters in previous comments; keyboard nearly dead)

Blue Witch | Homepage | 04.03.16 - 10:12 a.m. | #

All I can say is that there are some rather odd and *unevidenced* assertions about gender and or sex in some of the comments above. Not only do men like kittens as much as women :), there are assertions about gendered / sexed commenting styles and sensitivity to the bureaucracy of categorisation. Lots of assertions made, but where is the evidence? (awaiting an off topic klaxon, which is more likely than a visit to Ladt Dinah's Cat Cafe (with piccies), sadly)

Antipodean | 04.03.16 - 12:30 p.m. | #

Sorry I missed your survey.
I can boost your regular female regular readership by one and although I'm off the scale in the age category, quite happy to be amongst the 30 something lads...

Margaret | 04.03.16 - 2:43 p.m. | #

Female. Feedly. World. Daily.
Really, really like reading you. Rely on you continuing. It is amazing that someone does something so worthwhile free of charge. Thanks dg.

Sally Hirst | 04.03.16 - 9:03 p.m. | #

A new reader from Jan 2016, I must compliment you not just on the length of time you have kept this going, but also on the breadth and scale of your interests. Plus some great photography - what more can anyone ask?
Nice to see some nastier comments creeping in - keeps the rest of us awake.
Sorry to say I missed your one day every two years survey - I'll make sure I catch the next. There's optimism from a very nearly eighty year old reader from East Northants.
Don't ask me how - I can't remember!

Robin King | 04.03.16 - 10:30 p.m. | #

"...*unevidenced* assertions... about gendered / sexed commenting styles..."

While 'where is the evidence?' is often the first thing I shout at any statement that sounds at all unlikely to me, my next reaction is generally to use Google / Google Scholar / EBSCO to check things out.

Antipodean - try searching "gender differences in communication styles". I know of at least three undergrad and two postgrad theses from the UK into gender differences in online styles. Not sure if they are all published, or availalbe online.

Undoubtedly there are studies from other countries too, as this area is of interest to academics who are sociologists, psychologists, linguists, and those intersted in media and marketing etc etc.

Trains are definitely not my forte (and, other than steam trains, hold no use or interest for me), but this area, and other similar research, is.

Blue Witch | Homepage | 05.03.16 - 9:01 a.m. | #

I'm female. I don't like surveys. Or bloody Facebook! But I do like this blog.

God | 05.03.16 - 7:36 p.m. | #

For those who may contend that the comment hierarchy was a piece of whimsy... consider why it was pinned to the right hand menu as a reminder, for future reference, etc. That said, I believe it has had a generally positive effect.

Frank F | 06.03.16 - 6:56 a.m. | #











TridentScan v2.10.0 | Privacy Policy