This rating was determined based on the presence of the following words:
- abortion (9x)
- death (4x)
- kill (3x)
- murder (2x)
- porn (1x)
Hat tip: Good Brownie
Just for fun, I've tried some other sites to see how they come out:
Foxnews.com: R
- death (10x)
- bomb (4x)
- dead (3x)
- cocaine (2x)
- gun (1x)
getreligion.org: NC-17
- abortion (13x)
- kill (5x)
- death (3x)
- suicide (1x)
- sex (3x)
holyobserver.com: PG
- sex (2x)
- missionary (1x)
As you can see, it's an extremely crude measure.
Actually, though it is a very small sample there is a pattern emerging, the more religious sites have higher scores! If the pattern is repeated the question arises: Why?
Actually, I doctored the evidence by selecting the ones that were most unexpected. Playboy was R. My wife's blog was G. La Shawn Barber was G. I tried several news sites and got G or PG. Fox was the only one that was R.
Just goes to show that you can't deal with the hard stuff without the world judging you as too good or too bad. Have to get your hands dirty just to deal with the Lord/s work. Oh well.
Thanks for the link!
Interestingly, my front page gets G, but any of my longer category archives get NC-17. I think that points to a flaw in the ratings: it takes sheer number of occurences, without accounting for the total amount of text.
I think there's a much more fundamental flaw in going by mere occurrences of words to begin with. You can't talk about Dick Van Dyke without setting off two red flags immediately.