Making fun of music, one song at a time. Since the year 2000.
Check out the two amIright misheard lyrics books including one book devoted to misheard lyrics of the 1980s.
Song Parodies -> "A Hundred Thousand Hits (parody page views) - TT 5th Anniv. At AIR"
Original Song Title:
"A Hundred Pounds Of Clay"
Original Performer:
Gene McDaniels
Parody Song Title:
"A Hundred Thousand Hits (parody page views) - TT 5th Anniv. At AIR"
Parody Written by:
Tommy Turtle
The Lyrics
Actually, 104,215 as of yesterday's (Feb. 2, 2011) update, plus the three or four hits it's hoped that this and today's other post will draw. ... But hey, who's counting? ;)
Hardly a big deal for writers like Airfarcewon (455,265 page views) and John A. Barry (586,589), whose song parodies themselves number in the thousands, but for a certain weird number-crunching geek, who liked watching the car's odometer turn over from 99,999.9 (back when odometers had five-digit mileage readings), it was a bit of a kick to reach this mark in a little more than 400 songs.
Also, celebrating five years on (and off) the site since his first posts (all ten of them on one day) on January 30, 2006. For those who have too much time on their hands, the self-mocking explanation of that noob move is below the copyright stuff, in note [2] :-D
Is this ridiculously self-aggrandizing? Yes.***
HQ-stereo original don't-miss-it OS (with a pretty lady) here.
*** Not really. ... (Aw, c'mon, ya knew there'd be a catch! ;) ... Others undoubtedly have done it in fewer songs; it's not a competition AFAIC; read the parody as to why it's a good thing *for the site*; and skip the long dull discussion in the outro of some things that affect page view stats
Hardly a big deal for writers like Airfarcewon (455,265 page views) and John A. Barry (586,589), whose song parodies themselves number in the thousands, but for a certain weird number-crunching geek, who liked watching the car's odometer turn over from 99,999.9 (back when odometers had five-digit mileage readings), it was a bit of a kick to reach this mark in a little more than 400 songs.
Also, celebrating five years on (and off) the site since his first posts (all ten of them on one day) on January 30, 2006. For those who have too much time on their hands, the self-mocking explanation of that noob move is below the copyright stuff, in note [2] :-D
Is this ridiculously self-aggrandizing? Yes.***
HQ-stereo original don't-miss-it OS (with a pretty lady) here.
*** Not really. ... (Aw, c'mon, ya knew there'd be a catch! ;) ... Others undoubtedly have done it in fewer songs; it's not a competition AFAIC; read the parody as to why it's a good thing *for the site*; and skip the long dull discussion in the outro of some things that affect page view stats
He booked a hundred thousand hits
Although his brain is missin'
With songs chock full of-a a** and t*ts
The ovine flock, he's jissin'
But he rolled his numbers up
Syndicated ads all ran
He created some income for the .. world's best web site and The Man
Whoa-oh-oh, lots of quid
Amassed a hundred thousand views
For ChuckyG: bucks, givin'
And we should thank him; praise, effuse:
The site is free; no "tithin' "
And I thank you all, AmIRight
For your v/c, both: friendly or spite
'Cause I've had a ball, and ... hope all hundred-K amuse!
(What an id! Whoa, blew his lid!)
Now can'tcha' just see him a-sittin' in his shell
Flippers on keys makin' typing hell?
Doin' some a little "blue"
Yet, laughs, he's givin'; (screams, a few?)
He built his home page up
Gotten panned, but thanks each fan
He: sheep, mated, not woman, but-a ... gets pedantic when he can
Whoa-oh-oh, loves to kid
Hope: second hundred thousand hits
[fade to fond reminiscing]
Also, it's been swell to get with Fid'
Another sixteen thousand (yay!)
THE BOTTOM LINE:
The site is free for all of us, no charge, despite the expense of buying and maintaining a server and bandwidth, writing and maintaining the code, and administering the whole thing, because advertisers pay to have their ads displayed. When you view a song, a few more are displayed, the count rises, and the monthly check from Amazon, Google-syndication, etc., rises accordingly. (One reason TT welcomes unabombers, heh heh! ;)
Ergo, TT is proud to have contributed a little to the expense of running a "free" site, and also perhaps for giving a few readers a few Chuckles (heh!) from time to time.
Side note: I DK ChuckyG personally, but from public and private interaction, I'm absolutely certain that he would want *none* of what's called "click-fraud" -- deliberately repeatedly clicking pages and links to run up ad-display counts, or especially, clicking on the ads themselves without any actual interest in the product being advertised. It's illegal, immoral, and slimy.
On the *other* hand, you are certainly entitled to revisit any parody that you enjoy, as often as you like, and to pass the link on to friends, family, co-workers, enemies, random strangers, forums, restroom walls, etc. ;-D
And *if* you truly *are* interested in buying the latest CD from Justin Bieber, Madonna, The Beatles, The McGuire Sisters, whatever, from Amabay or whomever, there is no reason why, being a fan of their music, you couldn't enjoy parodies of their music, view some of them, and click through that ad to look at and/or buy the product. Nothing at all wrong with that, and the site gets a few cents from your purchase.
Cheers!
Although his brain is missin'
With songs chock full of-a a** and t*ts
The ovine flock, he's jissin'
But he rolled his numbers up
Syndicated ads all ran
He created some income for the .. world's best web site and The Man
Whoa-oh-oh, lots of quid
Amassed a hundred thousand views
For ChuckyG: bucks, givin'
And we should thank him; praise, effuse:
The site is free; no "tithin' "
And I thank you all, AmIRight
For your v/c, both: friendly or spite
'Cause I've had a ball, and ... hope all hundred-K amuse!
(What an id! Whoa, blew his lid!)
Now can'tcha' just see him a-sittin' in his shell
Flippers on keys makin' typing hell?
Doin' some a little "blue"
Yet, laughs, he's givin'; (screams, a few?)
He built his home page up
Gotten panned, but thanks each fan
He: sheep, mated, not woman, but-a ... gets pedantic when he can
Whoa-oh-oh, loves to kid
Hope: second hundred thousand hits
[fade to fond reminiscing]
Also, it's been swell to get with Fid'
Another sixteen thousand (yay!)
THE BOTTOM LINE:
The site is free for all of us, no charge, despite the expense of buying and maintaining a server and bandwidth, writing and maintaining the code, and administering the whole thing, because advertisers pay to have their ads displayed. When you view a song, a few more are displayed, the count rises, and the monthly check from Amazon, Google-syndication, etc., rises accordingly. (One reason TT welcomes unabombers, heh heh! ;)
Ergo, TT is proud to have contributed a little to the expense of running a "free" site, and also perhaps for giving a few readers a few Chuckles (heh!) from time to time.
Side note: I DK ChuckyG personally, but from public and private interaction, I'm absolutely certain that he would want *none* of what's called "click-fraud" -- deliberately repeatedly clicking pages and links to run up ad-display counts, or especially, clicking on the ads themselves without any actual interest in the product being advertised. It's illegal, immoral, and slimy.
On the *other* hand, you are certainly entitled to revisit any parody that you enjoy, as often as you like, and to pass the link on to friends, family, co-workers, enemies, random strangers, forums, restroom walls, etc. ;-D
And *if* you truly *are* interested in buying the latest CD from Justin Bieber, Madonna, The Beatles, The McGuire Sisters, whatever, from Amabay or whomever, there is no reason why, being a fan of their music, you couldn't enjoy parodies of their music, view some of them, and click through that ad to look at and/or buy the product. Nothing at all wrong with that, and the site gets a few cents from your purchase.
Cheers!
Stuff that boosts page stats:
1) Living in a college dorm, e. g., where you can get lots of people to visit your pages. (Not so good for those living under water and avoiding people as much as possible. ;)
2) Having a large, extended family, aunts, uncles, cousins, etc., to whom to pass your links. (See [1] re: TT. Doesn't apply.)
3) Having a very large circle of friends, being a party-goer and general socializer, including online penpals. (See [1] again...)
4) Entering song contests, which requires other entrants to read your songs, and you, theirs. TT has never entered on his own, because he dropped off the musical planet sometime in the early 70s, and DK most OS after that (except for the ones from the birth-and-growth-of-rock era that they keep remaking to this day, which proves something about the original generation) -- and therefore, couldn't fairly judge many other submissions, and wouldn't care to listen to the OSs. Yes, he knows the feeling can be mutual regarding his chosen OSs. Still, not good for contests. ('Sides, the turtle, for most of his life, has preferred to compete only with himself. Then, no one loses. ;-)
Also, there's a commitment of *time* in entering a song contest: to read and vote on the other entries. Given the unpredictability of availability of time due to TT's Real World obligations -- sometimes here every day for a long time, sometimes gone for months, etc. -- it's not a commitment he could fairly make. Also, whatever AIR-time (heh! ;) is available, he'd rather use it for writing, posting, and reading other posts of interest than for becoming involved in the above process. But for those who can commit the time (usually, their employer's time, lol ;), the contests are a great thing.
5) Time on site and average "age" of song posts. Quickie: Writer A, a noob, posts 100 songs during 2010. Writer B posts 100 songs during 2004, then doesn't post at all for the next six years. *If* both writers received the same response rate over time, B is going to have a much higher total of hits, because of the additional time for revisits, recommendations, word-of-mouth, search engine hits (accidental or otherwise; it's happened to moi - gotten hits from a British rugby club that was searching for a different song), etc.
*************************************************
Some stuff that tends to lower hits:
1) Obscure OSs, which can be fun to do anyway.
2) Arcane subject matter, especially for those who DK the meaning of "arcane". ;-D
3) Speaking one's mind honestly, which tends to p*ss off people, as opposed to praising (and Fiving) everything, with the favor generally returned.
To each, their own. And these are why this author does NOT view the stats as a competition per se, or as an indicator of anything except which of *his own* songs are his most popular. And you don't want to know what that says about you all. ... mwahahaha! [1]
[Yes, there was a bit of double meaning in "get with Fid'(legirl)", though nothing racy. (Darn! ;)
1) "get with" - as in "to get together with" ... and co-write parodies;
2) "get" - as in "receive" ... to get, along with FG, another 16,444 views.]
© 2011 Tommy Turtle. All rights reserved. E-mail: tomm...@yahoo.com **************************************************************
[1] OK, you *do* want to know. Well, for most of this writer's five years on site, it's been consistently true that seven or eight of his top ten all-time page-hitters have been a bit on the "racy" side in some form or other, even if only a joke on readers in the title. The all-time #1 on his charTT, very consistently for the past four years, is about "feminine hygiene". Sheesh... (Would apologize for shameless "plug", but that's a monstrous double-entendre/pun in the context of that latter song. ;) What a feelthy-minded audience... (Love you all !!!! - TT)
[2] How The Turtle Posted Ten Songs On His N00b Day: Found the new site; excited, as we all were; DK anything about the submission/approval/update process; and there used to be weekend updates. (*not* a "Saturday Night Live" reference. ;) Yep, there used to be a lot more songs back then -- TT was later told of a Monday with more than 100 song posts. (Another factor that gives an edge to older posts. Back then, a decent parody might get 10-15 votes and comments on the day posted; a great one, 20-30 *or more*. These days, it seems that any song that gets into double-digit v/c on the posting day is a smashing success, and well above the norm.)
ANY-way ... Noob turtle (nurtle?) submits three songs, all from his back catalog, on a Friday. Checks site on Saturday; doesn't see them; assumes that they weren't approved for some reason. (Not much that was racy in them; that came later. ;) Submits three more on Saturday. Doesn't see them on Sunday. (Like most noobs, looking only for his own songs; hence, not noticing that the same songs that were on the home page on Friday were there on Sat. and Sun. also - d'oh.) So submits four on Sunday. BOOM! -- All ten show up on Monday (worst possible day to make an entrance, too. ;)
Peter Andersson commented at this one that to post so many as a debut was a common noob mistake.
TT: "They were posted over several days. The FAQ does say the site is updated over the weekend, but it apparently wasn't this past weekend. Perhaps the editors needed some time off (don't we all?) Hence they all showed up today."
PA: "Yes, this was one of few weekends without an update ... " and went on to recommend posting only 1-2/day, which has been TT's policy ever since (a few rare exceptions, all for just cause ;), and which he has *suggested* to others as well. Peter's reasons made sense, and were similar to my own to this day.
On the other hand, TT did get his own author page immediately, with links at all ten songs, having met the ten-song minimum in one day, so ... but no, it wasn't for that reason, nor deliberate at all. Just a fortuitous misunderstanding. :)
First-day comment so prescient that it's uncanny, by "carol", re: unauthorized wiretaps, etc.,:
carol - January 30, 2006
"Keep on writing them. It's getting harder and harder for Chimpy to defend his actions, esp. the illegal spying on all Americans. Next thing you know, he'll be wanting to spy on our undergarments 'just to make sure there's no bombs or WMD in there ya know'."
And what is the TSA doing these days? ... Exactly that.
For anyone curious about early, unevolved Turtle, here are the other eight first--day posts.
(Due to a software problem at the site a few years ago, some older songs lost many or all of their votes and/or comments, while others seemed to have retained most or all.)
Finally (*finally*! ;), thanks to *all* writers for providing the material that draws the views, and to *all readers* for the views that support the site.
(And shouldn't TT get some kind of award or extra credit or something, just for *counting* John A. Barry's page hits? 579,861, 579,862, 579,863, 579, ... ;)
1) Living in a college dorm, e. g., where you can get lots of people to visit your pages. (Not so good for those living under water and avoiding people as much as possible. ;)
2) Having a large, extended family, aunts, uncles, cousins, etc., to whom to pass your links. (See [1] re: TT. Doesn't apply.)
3) Having a very large circle of friends, being a party-goer and general socializer, including online penpals. (See [1] again...)
4) Entering song contests, which requires other entrants to read your songs, and you, theirs. TT has never entered on his own, because he dropped off the musical planet sometime in the early 70s, and DK most OS after that (except for the ones from the birth-and-growth-of-rock era that they keep remaking to this day, which proves something about the original generation) -- and therefore, couldn't fairly judge many other submissions, and wouldn't care to listen to the OSs. Yes, he knows the feeling can be mutual regarding his chosen OSs. Still, not good for contests. ('Sides, the turtle, for most of his life, has preferred to compete only with himself. Then, no one loses. ;-)
Also, there's a commitment of *time* in entering a song contest: to read and vote on the other entries. Given the unpredictability of availability of time due to TT's Real World obligations -- sometimes here every day for a long time, sometimes gone for months, etc. -- it's not a commitment he could fairly make. Also, whatever AIR-time (heh! ;) is available, he'd rather use it for writing, posting, and reading other posts of interest than for becoming involved in the above process. But for those who can commit the time (usually, their employer's time, lol ;), the contests are a great thing.
5) Time on site and average "age" of song posts. Quickie: Writer A, a noob, posts 100 songs during 2010. Writer B posts 100 songs during 2004, then doesn't post at all for the next six years. *If* both writers received the same response rate over time, B is going to have a much higher total of hits, because of the additional time for revisits, recommendations, word-of-mouth, search engine hits (accidental or otherwise; it's happened to moi - gotten hits from a British rugby club that was searching for a different song), etc.
*************************************************
Some stuff that tends to lower hits:
1) Obscure OSs, which can be fun to do anyway.
2) Arcane subject matter, especially for those who DK the meaning of "arcane". ;-D
3) Speaking one's mind honestly, which tends to p*ss off people, as opposed to praising (and Fiving) everything, with the favor generally returned.
To each, their own. And these are why this author does NOT view the stats as a competition per se, or as an indicator of anything except which of *his own* songs are his most popular. And you don't want to know what that says about you all. ... mwahahaha! [1]
[Yes, there was a bit of double meaning in "get with Fid'(legirl)", though nothing racy. (Darn! ;)
1) "get with" - as in "to get together with" ... and co-write parodies;
2) "get" - as in "receive" ... to get, along with FG, another 16,444 views.]
© 2011 Tommy Turtle. All rights reserved. E-mail: tomm...@yahoo.com **************************************************************
[1] OK, you *do* want to know. Well, for most of this writer's five years on site, it's been consistently true that seven or eight of his top ten all-time page-hitters have been a bit on the "racy" side in some form or other, even if only a joke on readers in the title. The all-time #1 on his charTT, very consistently for the past four years, is about "feminine hygiene". Sheesh... (Would apologize for shameless "plug", but that's a monstrous double-entendre/pun in the context of that latter song. ;) What a feelthy-minded audience... (Love you all !!!! - TT)
[2] How The Turtle Posted Ten Songs On His N00b Day: Found the new site; excited, as we all were; DK anything about the submission/approval/update process; and there used to be weekend updates. (*not* a "Saturday Night Live" reference. ;) Yep, there used to be a lot more songs back then -- TT was later told of a Monday with more than 100 song posts. (Another factor that gives an edge to older posts. Back then, a decent parody might get 10-15 votes and comments on the day posted; a great one, 20-30 *or more*. These days, it seems that any song that gets into double-digit v/c on the posting day is a smashing success, and well above the norm.)
ANY-way ... Noob turtle (nurtle?) submits three songs, all from his back catalog, on a Friday. Checks site on Saturday; doesn't see them; assumes that they weren't approved for some reason. (Not much that was racy in them; that came later. ;) Submits three more on Saturday. Doesn't see them on Sunday. (Like most noobs, looking only for his own songs; hence, not noticing that the same songs that were on the home page on Friday were there on Sat. and Sun. also - d'oh.) So submits four on Sunday. BOOM! -- All ten show up on Monday (worst possible day to make an entrance, too. ;)
Peter Andersson commented at this one that to post so many as a debut was a common noob mistake.
TT: "They were posted over several days. The FAQ does say the site is updated over the weekend, but it apparently wasn't this past weekend. Perhaps the editors needed some time off (don't we all?) Hence they all showed up today."
PA: "Yes, this was one of few weekends without an update ... " and went on to recommend posting only 1-2/day, which has been TT's policy ever since (a few rare exceptions, all for just cause ;), and which he has *suggested* to others as well. Peter's reasons made sense, and were similar to my own to this day.
On the other hand, TT did get his own author page immediately, with links at all ten songs, having met the ten-song minimum in one day, so ... but no, it wasn't for that reason, nor deliberate at all. Just a fortuitous misunderstanding. :)
First-day comment so prescient that it's uncanny, by "carol", re: unauthorized wiretaps, etc.,:
carol - January 30, 2006
"Keep on writing them. It's getting harder and harder for Chimpy to defend his actions, esp. the illegal spying on all Americans. Next thing you know, he'll be wanting to spy on our undergarments 'just to make sure there's no bombs or WMD in there ya know'."
And what is the TSA doing these days? ... Exactly that.
For anyone curious about early, unevolved Turtle, here are the other eight first--day posts.
(Due to a software problem at the site a few years ago, some older songs lost many or all of their votes and/or comments, while others seemed to have retained most or all.)
Finally (*finally*! ;), thanks to *all* writers for providing the material that draws the views, and to *all readers* for the views that support the site.
(And shouldn't TT get some kind of award or extra credit or something, just for *counting* John A. Barry's page hits? 579,861, 579,862, 579,863, 579, ... ;)
Your Vote & Comment Counts
The parody authors spend a lot of time writing parodies for the website and they appreciate feedback in the form of votes and comments. Please take some time to leave a comment below about this parody.
Place Your Vote |
Voting Results
| ||||||||||||||||||
Voting Breakdown
The following represent how many people voted for each category.
| Pacing | How Funny | Overall Rating | |||||||||
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||||
| 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||||
| 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||||
| 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||||
| 5 | 9 | 9 | 9 |
User Comments
Comments are subject to review, and can be removed by the administration of the site at any time and for any reason.
TT - And the hits just keep on coming! Congrats! ;D
As ridiculous self-aggrandizement goes, this one is pretty easy to swallow... ;) Well-deserved props to Chucky G. as well. Hitting you with 3 5's, (which should make a nice change from the usual frying pans!) ;)
Congratulations on the hits. I just recently posted my 100th parody. I don't check the number of hits very often, but I think my biggest "hit" was an ode to the Nestlé Aero chocolate bar sung to the tune of "O Canada". I think Canadians and others check in to see what parodies have been done to this melody, which accounts for the high number of views, much more so than any shared affection for air-puffed chocolate or my poetic tribute to same. Like you, my musical education slowed down after the 1970's. You like sheep. I like cloning. Maybe someday I'll clone some sheep. I have an aversion to bawdy material, while you revel in it. I did submit one song I consider a bit risqué but I did so under a pseudonym, the only time I have done this. See if you can identify it. I am glad Chuck found a way to make money from this site. I'll likely never meet him, but I am always grateful that I have been provided this outlet for my "creative" talents and the chance to read what others of like mind have achieved. Glad to have you back, too.
Watch out! Your ratio of footnotery to parody is rapidly approaching infiniTT---asymptoTTically! Really enjoyed the parody and perhaps even more-so, the interesting-n-in-depth behind the (ob)scene analysis! Me thinks you're more 'jollymathic' than poly---!
A turtle on his high shell. Great tribute!
Hats off to Chuck! Without this site I don't know what I'd do with my time.
If you did it under a different name, and only one song under that name, there won't be an Author page for that nick. And even if there were, we wouldn't know which author. So as for reading 70,000 or so songs to see if your style is recognizable, sorry, but, uh ... you'll have to point us to the URL, or give us the title or nick or some other keywords that would make it show in a search engine.
As for cloning sheep, they don't like it:
"Ewe: Don't Clone Me"
http://www.amiright.com/parody/60s/lesleygore23.shtml
Your comment mentions your fondness for the topic, and puzzlement at cloning cats. Cheers. - TT
Security Code XXX - never seen *that* one before! So, the site *is* going "adult"?!
(46,656 possible sec. codes; guess they'll all come up sooner or later, what with 70k songs and probably close to a million comments.)
As for cloning sheep, they don't like it:
"Ewe: Don't Clone Me"
http://www.amiright.com/parody/60s/lesleygore23.shtml
Your comment mentions your fondness for the topic, and puzzlement at cloning cats. Cheers. - TT
Security Code XXX - never seen *that* one before! So, the site *is* going "adult"?!
(46,656 possible sec. codes; guess they'll all come up sooner or later, what with 70k songs and probably close to a million comments.)
Congrats on 100K and 5 years, TT. I don't really care about pageviews, as long as I get constructive or funny comments once in a while. Now as for the odometer mention, I LOL'd when the odometer in an old, trashed-out Honda Accord hatchback my uncle gave me back in high school hit 382,000 miles back in 2001, but my laughter gave way to frustration, smashing the windshield with a brick and leaving it alongside Interstate 5 when the engine threw a rod later that day. 5s.
I wrote parodies of "Mr Tambourine Man" and "Eleanor Rigby" (which Professor Incubus graciously recorded). Both deal with airport security. Michael Pacholek commented that someone should do a similar song to the Beach Boys "Good Vibration" . I cranked out one called "Wood Vibrations" which I thought was a bit too racy to be associated with my good name. So I used the name "Phred Phlips". Oddly, he never commented on the song.
Congrats on being hit that many times - you deserve it. Interesting footbook. Surprised that you've heard of Justin Bieber.
Read & commented on Wed's Egypt. You asked a while back for the link to my "Bonnie Prince Charlie" parody. It's below if you're still interested
http://www.amiright.com/parody/misc/theplatters48.shtml
Read & commented on Wed's Egypt. You asked a while back for the link to my "Bonnie Prince Charlie" parody. It's below if you're still interested
http://www.amiright.com/parody/misc/theplatters48.shtml
Got caught up in detailed reply to Patrick's question about fatal crash @ Buddy Holly tribute posted today. Need food; back later with individual thanks and replies!
Wow, congrats on your 100k as Andria said....and more to come! Great work as always, TT and on to your tribute! Hope you don't mind if I hit you with 555's!!
Old Man Ribber: Can only hope so! Thanks for v/c!
Fiddlegirl: OH, no, you're *not* getting sweet, innocent TT into your "swallow" trap! (And it's not nice to trap birds, anyway. ;) ... Yes, the numbers are much better than the cast iron, TUVM
Fiddlegirl: OH, no, you're *not* getting sweet, innocent TT into your "swallow" trap! (And it's not nice to trap birds, anyway. ;) ... Yes, the numbers are much better than the cast iron, TUVM
Patrick: Wow, I'll have to do a dozen "O Canada"s! Thanks for the tip! ... Will check out your mortal sinning in the near future -- running late on replying as is (mostly thanks to the encyclopedic reply @ Buddy Holly parody today, but happy to do it! ;) Thanks for v/c/tip.
TJC: Did someone learn a cool new word? (wink) heh! Thanks for v/c!
Mark Scotti: Thank you!!
John Barry: I'm envious: How do you have so much free time? Retired? Wealthy? Staff of servants to do everything for you? ... This writer never seems to have enough time; would love to participate *much* more here. Thanks for v/c.
Andria: Thank you! I'm not hung up on page hits, for all those reasons mentioned and others, but they do tell me what readers like and what they don't. E. g., at OMR's post today, "If I had the only song..." see TT reply to JAB: The six- and eight-round smooshes flopped, so, no more.
Andy Primus: Thanks -- I think (?) ;-D ... Hey, I'm old enough to remember that famous sitcom, "Leave It To Bieber"! ... Will check out Prince C in the next few days; am already late in replying tonight. Yes, I'm still interested, and nice to se you back!
Christie: As they say at the blackjack tables, "Hit me again!"
TJC: Did someone learn a cool new word? (wink) heh! Thanks for v/c!
Mark Scotti: Thank you!!
John Barry: I'm envious: How do you have so much free time? Retired? Wealthy? Staff of servants to do everything for you? ... This writer never seems to have enough time; would love to participate *much* more here. Thanks for v/c.
Andria: Thank you! I'm not hung up on page hits, for all those reasons mentioned and others, but they do tell me what readers like and what they don't. E. g., at OMR's post today, "If I had the only song..." see TT reply to JAB: The six- and eight-round smooshes flopped, so, no more.
Andy Primus: Thanks -- I think (?) ;-D ... Hey, I'm old enough to remember that famous sitcom, "Leave It To Bieber"! ... Will check out Prince C in the next few days; am already late in replying tonight. Yes, I'm still interested, and nice to se you back!
Christie: As they say at the blackjack tables, "Hit me again!"
It's guys like YOU that give PARODIES a good name..............Indeed .......
Dave W.: I tihnk some people might debate that, based on some of the rest of the cattalog ;-D .. thanks for v/c! (vote/comment)
I didn't get your joke until I Wiki'd it and found out it was Beaver. I don't think we had that one in the UK - or maybe we did, but it was a bit before my time.
In the US, it still plays on the "oldies" TV channels. You soooo don't know what you're missing! (Kidding! It was pretty corny.)
(Does the BBC sill have a monopoly on TV broadcast, and still only four or five channels? Cable users here have somewhere between 200 and 400, most of them worthless. ;)
Fun facts re: child star Jerry Mathers, who played The Beaver. His family was rather discordant; he was estranged from his brother Sean, who became (don't know if still is) a cop in Los Angeles.
Oooold jokes: ("Parents" in the show: Ward and June Cleaver)
Q:. What did June Cleaver say as she hobbled down the stairs one morning?
A.: "Ward, don't you think you were a little hard on the Beaver last night?"
Of course, there were innumerable puns based no his fictional (nick)name, "Beaver Cleaver". Use your imagination ... or see this use of it, in an Ed Fitzgerald parody that you've not seen:
http://www.amiright.com/parody/70s/gordonlightfoot78.shtml
Cheers! .... and Prince C is on the to-read list for tonight, but apparently, there's some (American) football game on now.... ;-D
(Does the BBC sill have a monopoly on TV broadcast, and still only four or five channels? Cable users here have somewhere between 200 and 400, most of them worthless. ;)
Fun facts re: child star Jerry Mathers, who played The Beaver. His family was rather discordant; he was estranged from his brother Sean, who became (don't know if still is) a cop in Los Angeles.
Oooold jokes: ("Parents" in the show: Ward and June Cleaver)
Q:. What did June Cleaver say as she hobbled down the stairs one morning?
A.: "Ward, don't you think you were a little hard on the Beaver last night?"
Of course, there were innumerable puns based no his fictional (nick)name, "Beaver Cleaver". Use your imagination ... or see this use of it, in an Ed Fitzgerald parody that you've not seen:
http://www.amiright.com/parody/70s/gordonlightfoot78.shtml
Cheers! .... and Prince C is on the to-read list for tonight, but apparently, there's some (American) football game on now.... ;-D
Read; v/c'd; thanks for enlightenment re: back-story to TT's explanation of "My Bonnie".
Normal UK TV is still only 5 channels (BBC1 & 2, ITV1, Channel 4 & Channel 5). The next step up is to buy a freeview box which gives you about 20 more (mostly other BBC, ITV, C4 & C5 channels). If you still want more, you need a cable or sat-dish subscription from one of the rip-off cartels.
The joke reminded me of all the "Muffin the Mule" (UK only show?) gags from when I was a kid in the early 70's.
From my "Bonnie" parody: How is it you KTOS, but DK "Leave It To Beaver", which was cotemporaneous?
Because the OS is an absolute classic that still gets lots of airplay over here, whereas the show sounds like a dud and has probably never been shown in the UK.
I'm just about to check out your Fitz parody & will leave a comment.
The joke reminded me of all the "Muffin the Mule" (UK only show?) gags from when I was a kid in the early 70's.
From my "Bonnie" parody: How is it you KTOS, but DK "Leave It To Beaver", which was cotemporaneous?
Because the OS is an absolute classic that still gets lots of airplay over here, whereas the show sounds like a dud and has probably never been shown in the UK.
I'm just about to check out your Fitz parody & will leave a comment.
Unfortunate. For the equiv of about £25/month, we can get channels with just about any sport that exists, any type of music that exists, 24/7 "news" (read, "BS"), movies old and new, documentaries, sitcoms old and current, etc. -- yet there still is very little worthwhile on the telly. ;-(
DK "Muffin", but I can see the gags already... :-D
Agree "Great Pretender" was a hit throughout Anglophone world. "Beaver" was quite popular here for its time, but doubt that UK/Aussie/other could relate to it. Count your blessings.... ;)
Thanks for revisit, Going eagerly to see your comment @ TWOTEF.
DK "Muffin", but I can see the gags already... :-D
Agree "Great Pretender" was a hit throughout Anglophone world. "Beaver" was quite popular here for its time, but doubt that UK/Aussie/other could relate to it. Count your blessings.... ;)
Thanks for revisit, Going eagerly to see your comment @ TWOTEF.
Very clever look at how we all (and one turtle in particular) help Chucky G keep his playground open for all of us. But I think you are undercounting your contribution for two reasons:
1. I think Chucky G just started keeping track of the page views about 4 years ago - after your first submissions. So you got some hits before the meter started.
2. I think that the counts that are shown on the author pages and the bottom of the parody pages are of different viewers. So, if one reader visits a page 10 times from the same computer, it only counts once.
1. I think Chucky G just started keeping track of the page views about 4 years ago - after your first submissions. So you got some hits before the meter started.
2. I think that the counts that are shown on the author pages and the bottom of the parody pages are of different viewers. So, if one reader visits a page 10 times from the same computer, it only counts once.
John Jenkins: Thank you for reading and for your insightful comments.
I'm aware that some votes, comments, and possibly view counts were lost at some point around the time you say, due to a software glitch. I don' know the exact history of the page view count. Perhaps an editor or someone who does know can enlighten us.
On point (2): If you vote or leave a comment, a cookie gets set on your machine. (That's one way of preventing flooding.) Then what you said might be true. Some of us have our browsers set to delete cookies at the close of each session, so if we go back to the song a week later, it's a new hit.
Unless, of course, the site is logging IP addresses and comparing a given page to see if that same IP has visited. But that would count against schools, libraries, etc., where many people share one IP address, and it seems like a lot of trouble for little purpose.
I have observed that the numbers on the Author page only update with each day's song updates (hence, not at all on the weekend -- your weekend hits don't show until Monday.)
The counts on the pages themselves do not seem to increment if, say, the author revisits repeatedly, which is entirely proper. Many eager noobs, self included at one time, check every hour or two for comments, and it's inaccurate to have each of their own page-checks count as a unique view.
I *think* that if, say, I visit one of your songs several times in one day, whether each hit counts might depend on the cookie issue. But perhaps we're better off not knowing that -- not just for the advertisers' sake, but to discourage the insecure from hammering their own, or their friends', pages repeatedly to inflate counts.
These questions, too, are why it was said that to this writer, the counts are only valid relative to my own other songs, as feedback regarding which songs have enduring appeal and which don't. Thanks as always for your thoughtful comments. Security code: JTJ. Please don't tell me your middle initial is T!
I'm aware that some votes, comments, and possibly view counts were lost at some point around the time you say, due to a software glitch. I don' know the exact history of the page view count. Perhaps an editor or someone who does know can enlighten us.
On point (2): If you vote or leave a comment, a cookie gets set on your machine. (That's one way of preventing flooding.) Then what you said might be true. Some of us have our browsers set to delete cookies at the close of each session, so if we go back to the song a week later, it's a new hit.
Unless, of course, the site is logging IP addresses and comparing a given page to see if that same IP has visited. But that would count against schools, libraries, etc., where many people share one IP address, and it seems like a lot of trouble for little purpose.
I have observed that the numbers on the Author page only update with each day's song updates (hence, not at all on the weekend -- your weekend hits don't show until Monday.)
The counts on the pages themselves do not seem to increment if, say, the author revisits repeatedly, which is entirely proper. Many eager noobs, self included at one time, check every hour or two for comments, and it's inaccurate to have each of their own page-checks count as a unique view.
I *think* that if, say, I visit one of your songs several times in one day, whether each hit counts might depend on the cookie issue. But perhaps we're better off not knowing that -- not just for the advertisers' sake, but to discourage the insecure from hammering their own, or their friends', pages repeatedly to inflate counts.
These questions, too, are why it was said that to this writer, the counts are only valid relative to my own other songs, as feedback regarding which songs have enduring appeal and which don't. Thanks as always for your thoughtful comments. Security code: JTJ. Please don't tell me your middle initial is T!
I think the view count issue is separate from the lost vote issue. I don't remember comments being lost, but votes were lost on parodies written in 2003 or 2004. But Chucky G did not start tracking page views by parody until the summer of 2007 (I think). Since they were not tracked before then, they were not lost.
For the cookie issue, I suspect that I am lazier than you. I don't reset cookies very often because cookies preserve some information that I prefer not to retype. But I definitely agree that we are probably better off not knowing all of the details behind the hit count tabulations. Hit counts do reveal some interesting stuff, but we should not read too much into high or low hit counts as you pointed out in your first sentence of your last paragraph above.
No, middle initial is E, not T.
For the cookie issue, I suspect that I am lazier than you. I don't reset cookies very often because cookies preserve some information that I prefer not to retype. But I definitely agree that we are probably better off not knowing all of the details behind the hit count tabulations. Hit counts do reveal some interesting stuff, but we should not read too much into high or low hit counts as you pointed out in your first sentence of your last paragraph above.
No, middle initial is E, not T.
Cookies also can be privacy leaks, and I'm very privacy-conscious. (the whole "shell' metaphor, get it?) Actually, it's surprising that I post as Tommy Turtle, rather than sign some silly pseudonym instead.
Thank you for your comment, JEJ. ... btw, if the cookie info saved is login info. I use a free tool that will auto-type all of your usernames and passwords, and store them with CIA-strength encryption, so that you only need to remember the one master password to the safe, so to speak, rather than 20 or 50. If interested, I can point you to it.
It can be dangerous to store login cookies - not here, of course, but for your bank, etc. - they could get "sniffed", (read or stolen) by various attacks.
Thank you for your comment, JEJ. ... btw, if the cookie info saved is login info. I use a free tool that will auto-type all of your usernames and passwords, and store them with CIA-strength encryption, so that you only need to remember the one master password to the safe, so to speak, rather than 20 or 50. If interested, I can point you to it.
It can be dangerous to store login cookies - not here, of course, but for your bank, etc. - they could get "sniffed", (read or stolen) by various attacks.
The author of the parody has authorized comments, and wants YOUR feedback.
Link To This Page
The address of this page is: http://www.amiright.com/parody/60s/genemcdaniels1.shtml For help, see the examples of how to link to this page.
This is view # 1821
