On Sep 6, 8:50 am, Grant Edwards <gra...@visi.com> wrote: > On 2009-09-06, John Nagle <na...@animats.com> wrote: > > > > > Bing > > A 3 2.4% () > > A 1 0.8% (non_commercial) > > Q 50 40.0% () > > Q 15 12.0% (no_location) > > U 5 4.0% (no_website) > > U 33 26.4% (non_commercial) > > X 1 0.8% (negative_info) > > X 17 13.6% (no_location) > > > Google > > A 1 0.8% () > > A 4 3.3% (non_commercial) > > Q 46 38.3% () > > Q 20 16.7% (no_location) > > Q 1 0.8% (non_commercial) > > U 4 3.3% (no_website) > > U 28 23.3% (non_commercial) > > X 16 13.3% (no_location) > > Test complete: Evil trend report > > I've absolutely no clue what those tables are supposed to > represent (well, I do know what Bing and Google are, but beyond > that...).
I think it's pretty obvious, Grant. Clearly, for the second of the two U's, Bing has a 33, while Google only has a 28. I mean, Google doesn't even HAVE a 2nd X (the so-called "negative_info" that we've all heard about). I haven't seen numbers and letters like this in a long time, let me tell you. CM -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
