Dummocrats.com has been the (lucky?) recipient of an increased amount search engine result traffic lately. I was just glancing over the logs, and I noticed a few search strings that are worth sharing.

Before I get to the entertaining searches, let me just say:

Hats off to Google for aptly picking up Kris' recent review of the movie Sideways. A Google search for "sideways payne bush rumsfield" (sic) provides a link directly to the individual archive entry of Kris' directly on-point review as the first result.

This is superb for at least 2 reasons. First, few of the other search engines are "smart" enough to link users to the individual archive entry. Because our main page, like the pages of all blogs, is constantly changing, it makes little sense for a search engine to link users to the main page for content that is likely no longer there. Bravo, Google. The second reason that this is superb is that based on the search terms, Kris' story is exactly on point; in other words, it's exactly what the user was looking for.

It is interesting that other people had the exact same take on the described scene that Kris did, isn't it? One can only wonder how many other users would have found her story through Google if Kris would have spelled Rumsfeld correctly. Perhaps she is only trying to attract the similarly-typo-afflicted few?

The other engines were pretty much hit-or-miss as far as providing users with relevant results. For instance:

• We're the #5 result for a search of "bush inauguration pictures," and
• we're the #1 result of a search for "laura bush inaugural dress,"

• Ironically, we're also the #1 result for "i did not vote for bush bracelets." Awesome, isn't it? We're getting so much traffic from this one that I'm considering offering them for sale, just to cash in and make this site profitable.

• The fact that we're #5 for "sites that look bad" is kind of insulting, I must say,

• and I can't for the life of me imagine why MSN would send this poor fellow, who was looking for "where are blizzards happening today" our way. (#3)

• given the presence of this stuff on the internet, and given MSN Search's startling inability to find relevant content, it didn't really suprise me that we turn up #5 on a search for "jennifer aniston porn," or that we're #3 for "xxx sexy photo 2005";

• but can someone please tell me why we turn up as the #1 result for this one?
  

(bigger, new window)