Re^6: Is PerlMonks relevant for one's Perl marketability?

[Your Mother]

I agree about the value of the site, or I wouldn't be here. There is at least a million hackers/sysadmins of whatever variety that sling Perl at least some of the time. This site is something like 120,000^th most visited site in the world right now (and this is a big gain over what it was a few months ago; not sure where the spike originates though the historical traffic is pretty spiky overall). I've worked with a couple dozen Perl hackers in the last decade and only one of them is a current/active monk and many were unaware of the site's existence.

Update: HURRRR… meant to reply to Re^4: Is PerlMonks relevant for one's Perl marketability?

[BrowserUk]

Whilst I agree that any expectation that the membership here is anything more than a small percentage of the Perl programmers (as opposed to users for whom the percentage would probably be immeasurable :) around the world, is naive; I think your most visited stats are maybe suspect.

I guess it depends on who's numbers you believe; but also what they choose to measure.

For example, by one particular supplier, perlmonks.com is below the 10 millionth globally, but by the same supplier, perlmonks.org is in the top 20,000.

Lies & damned lies aside, it'd be interesting to see an aggregate score.

First time I ever looked at such statistics. For all the billions of websites, the vast majority must get precious little traffic.

[Your Mother]

Alexa's stats are mostly based on a proprietary plugin so the data are crap. :| I was going by Quantcast which, in my experience as a webmaster using it and comparing it to logs, is quite reliable (/ in the ball-park). quantcast.com/perlmonks.org