Main

processing priority

4

site type

3 (personal blog or private political site, e.g. Blogspot, Substack, also small blogs on own domains)

review version

11

html import

20 (imported)

Events

first seen date

2024-10-10 07:16:15

expired found date

-

created at

2024-10-10 07:16:15

updated at

2026-02-24 21:51:40

Domain name statistics

length

21

crc

24062

tld

2211

nm parts

0

nm random digits

0

nm rare letters

0

Connections

is subdomain of id

13642151 (wordpress.com)

previous id

0

replaced with id

0

related id

-

dns primary id

0

dns alternative id

0

lifecycle status

0 (unclassified, or currently active)

Subdomains and pages

deleted subdomains

0

page imported products

0

page imported random

0

page imported parking

0

Error counters

count skipped due to recent timeouts on the same server IP

0

count content received but rejected due to 11-799

0

count dns errors

0

count cert errors

0

count timeouts

0

count http 429

0

count http 404

0

count http 403

0

count http 5xx

0

next operation date

-

Server

server bits

server ip

-

Mainpage statistics

mp import status

20

mp rejected date

-

mp saved date

-

mp size orig

137058

mp size raw text

30208

mp inner links count

11

mp inner links status

20 (imported)

Open Graph

title

Speak with the vulgar.

description

Think with me.

site name

Speak with the vulgar.

author

updated

2026-02-17 21:22:47

raw text

Speak with the vulgar. | Think with me. Speak with the vulgar. Think with me. Oops with 2 comments I’ve been cleaning up my “Indefinite Divisibility” paper from last year. One of my arguments in it concerned supergunk : X is supergunk iff for every chain of parts of X, there is some y which is a proper part of each member of the chain. I claimed that supergunk was possible, and argued on that basis against absolutely unrestricted quantification. I even thought I had a kind of consistency proof for supergunk: in particular, a (proper class) model that satisfied the supergunk condition as long as the plural quantifier was restricted to set-sized collections. Call something like this set-supergunk . Well, I was wrong. I’ve been suspicious for a while, and I finally proved it today: set-supergunk is impossible. So I thought I’d share my failure. In fact, an even stronger claim holds: Theorem. If is atomless, then has a countable chain of parts such that nothing is a...

Text analysis

redirect type

0 (-)

block type

0 (no issues)

detected language

1 (English)

category id

Książka (126)

index version

1

spam phrases

0

Text statistics

text nonlatin

0

text cyrillic

0

text characters

23232

text words

4980

text unique words

1177

text lines

569

text sentences

255

text paragraphs

64

text words per sentence

19

text matched phrases

0

text matched dictionaries

0

RSS

rss status

32 (unknown)

rss found date

2024-10-10 07:16:17

rss size orig

81354

rss items

10

rss spam phrases

0

rss detected language

1 (English)

inbefore feed id

-

inbefore status

0 (new)

Sitemap

sitemap status

30 (processing completed, results pushed to table crawler_sitemaps.ext_domain_sitemap_lists)

sitemap review version

1

sitemap urls count

20

sitemap urls adult

0

sitemap filtered products

0

sitemap filtered videos

0

sitemap found date

2024-10-10 07:16:16

sitemap process date

2024-10-10 07:16:16

sitemap first import date

-

sitemap last import date

-