Comments on: Weird Searches for Our Blog

By: Pragmatist

Pragmatist — Fri, 18 Nov 2005 17:09:25 +0000

SEARCH: FREE NAKED PEEP SHOWS[.] I’m certain that this person was very disappointed upon learning my post was about airline screening X-rays.

Or decided to become a screener.

By: PropertyProf Blog

PropertyProf Blog — Thu, 17 Nov 2005 17:29:15 +0000

How Blogs Make Google a Legitimate Legal Research Tool

Dan Solove has an amusing post up on some of the odd Google searches that have directed people to Concurring Opinions. I suspect that some of the oddities are the result of comment and trackback spam. Blogs tend to rank

By: Ben Barros

Ben Barros — Thu, 17 Nov 2005 17:23:00 +0000

I have a post up on a related topic at PropertyProf (see the trackback above), but I wonder whether some of the odd searches come from comment or trackback spam. I’m sure you delete it when you see it, but it might register with Google before you get to it.

By: PropertyProf Blog

PropertyProf Blog — Thu, 17 Nov 2005 17:19:06 +0000

How Blogs Make Google a Legitimate Legal Research Tool

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 17 Nov 2005 08:45:43 +0000

SEARCH: Contents of the Dead Man’s Pocket I have no idea what this is possibly about or how it led a reader to our blog.

It’s a moving short story. You should read it sometime. I cited it in a comment to (I think) one of Nate Oman’s posts.

By: Daniel J. Solove

Daniel J. Solove — Thu, 17 Nov 2005 08:14:54 +0000

Kaimi — Now that you’ve mentioned Britney Spears and Pamela Anderson, we can start getting hits for these. Soon we’ll be the most widely read blog on the planet.

Joe — What? Our blog doesn’t pull up first under that search? I guess Google isn’t smart enough yet.

By: Joe Miller

Joe Miller — Thu, 17 Nov 2005 08:04:04 +0000

When I use Google with the search string in your illustration (”the coolest …”), pride of place goes to a list of Canada’s best blogs. Hooray for our neighbors to the North.

By: Kaimi

Kaimi — Thu, 17 Nov 2005 07:50:14 +0000

I’m happy to contribute to our traffic any way I can, Dan. I hope you enjoy my upcoming posts on “The jurisprudence of Britney Spears naked” and “The philisophical meaning of Pamela-Anderson-naked-pics-click-here-they’re-free.”

As for the Star Wars bunny one, that’s clearly being drawn in by my quick post about the IP consequences of knock-off spoof movies, including a Star Wars movie and a series of movies “re-enacted by bunnies.” I kid you not. The post is here: http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2005/10/short_movies.html . (Until your post today, it had the distinction of being the only post on Co-op that included the word “bunnies.”)