It wasn't always like this...

In addition to the pièce de résistance of the day - the safety report, which is finished and sent and invoiced - I've completed three of four short pieces for another client. Looking at the fourth document, with its fuzzy, 4-point type, I observe that just a few short years ago, an agency would have made sure to provide freelancers with readable originals, if for no other reason than because they had to.

The text in the remaining document is by far not the smallest I've had to deal with. About a month ago, I got a TIF file from a client, the full-page image of which, when printed out, would have barely exceeded the boundaries of an ordinary business card.

I suppose I should count my blessings. Knowing how to make the unreadable readable gives me an edge over all them young whippersnappers out there. (I am reminded of a horrid PDF (back in early November) that turned into a visual variant of "Name That Tune," as in: "I can identify that word using no more than.... three pixels of information!")

Hmm. Two calls for me to work on rush-rush stuff as I write this post. (That's in addition to another rush-rush I did earlier today between eyeblinks.)

There must be something in the air.

Cheers...

Trying to make sense of my web stats...

Over at my work-related site, I took a look at my Webalizer stats and was intrigued by a section named "Search Strings."

It appears that, back in October of last year, before my most recent Great Web Buildout™, 80% of the search strings logged had to do with the "prophet mohammed" (that may sound impressive, but there were only 10 items in the log). For November, neither "prophet" nor "mohammed" was to be found among the top 20 search strings, only to reappear with an 8% showing in December.

In January, about 15% of strings contained "mohammed" or some variation. In February, "mohammed" was involved in about 50% of just over 425 strings.

The thing is: you can look all day, there is no reference to "mohammed" or "prophet" or anything of the sort anywhere on my site.

So my question is this: What is the actual significance of the "Search Strings" usage statistic? Someone came to my site after looking up said string at a search engine? They did it because...? (There's something missing, here.)

A quick look through the Internet was less than illuminating.

Cheers...