I don't pay much attention to my Blog Ecosystem Rankings -- haha, right -- but it's interesting to notice how many more links would be required for me to move up in the world.
Here's a chart -- me me me, the world revolves around me -- with each site being ranked twice as high as the one after it.
| Rank | Links | Site |
| 1 | 2313 | Instapundit |
| 2 | 1453 | AndrewSullivan |
| 4 | 1420 | Talking Points Memo |
| 8 | 990 | Little Green Footballs |
| 16 | 670 | Matthew Yglesias |
| 33 | 562 | The Truth Laid Bear |
| 65 | 359 | Arts & Letters Daily |
| 130 | 250 | Wampum |
| 261 | 155 | Master of None |
| 522 | 96 | Semi-Intelligent Thoughts |
| 1044 | 53 | brainstorming |
| 2088 | 22 | commons-blog |
| 4176 | 6 | Contains 2 |
The slope isn't as steep as I would have expected. For example, if my number of inbound links were to double, my rank would jump from #261 to around #95, a 270% improvement for 200% the links. If my inbound links increased five-fold I'd leap to #13, 2000% improvement for 500% the links. Each link is more valuable than the one before it!
The question then is: is each link harder to obtain than the one before? One might argue that, since there are only a limited number of blogs to get linked from. However, the Ecosystem currently lists 8076 blogs, and even Glenn Reynolds penetrates only 29% of the market. There are plenty of blogs out there who'd probably link to me, if their owners became aware of my site.
Michael,
What are the chances you would pick my blog, Brainstorming, as one of the 13 in the Ecosystem listed and that I would end up on your blog for the first time, (that I remember), from an entirely different route, (through Technicalities, then Bill Hobbs commenting on your Passion post), on the same day?
Whatever, those odds may be, we hit them today.
Maybe we should both buy lottery tickets?
DC: Wow, that is pretty weird.
I hope our chances of being stuck by lightning aren't also increased today, because it's pretty stormy outside.