Hey everyone, Karl here. Having issues with Verizon at the moment,
hence the GG post.

My article on Log File Analysis has been published on Boxes and
Arrows. Check it out:
http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/the-limitations-of

Feel free to post comments!


Karl

KarlCore <karl@karlcore.com> wrote:

>My article on Log File Analysis has been published on Boxes and
>Arrows. Check it out:
>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/the-limitations-of
>
>Feel free to post comments!

"An excellent article. Rather wordy, but providing excellent
supporting evidence for the points it makes. Which in short, are, http
log files provide data ONLY about http server utilisation, which bears
no resemblance to web site usage."

X

On Oct 25, 11:05 am, (Secret Agent X) wrote:
> KarlCore <k...@karlcore.com> wrote:
> >My article on Log File Analysis has been published on Boxes and
> >Arrows. Check it out:
> >http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/the-limitations-of
>
> >Feel free to post comments!
>
> "An excellent article. Rather wordy, but providing excellent
> supporting evidence for the points it makes. Which in short, are, http
> log files provide data ONLY about http server utilisation, which bears
> no resemblance to web site usage."
>
> X

Thanks!

Karl

KarlCore wrote:
> Hey everyone, Karl here. Having issues with Verizon at the moment,
> hence the GG post.
>
> My article on Log File Analysis has been published on Boxes and
> Arrows. Check it out:
> http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/the-limitations-of
>
> Feel free to post comments!
>
>
> Karl
I read the article a while back, it is a good one.
I especially like the points that you make about the log files or
website stats not always being relyable.
--
Regards Chad. http://freewebdesign.awardspace.biz

On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 07:01:42 -0700, KarlCore <karl@karlcore.com>
wrote:

>Hey everyone, Karl here. Having issues with Verizon at the moment,
>hence the GG post.
>
>My article on Log File Analysis has been published on Boxes and
>Arrows. Check it out:
>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/the-limitations-of
>
>Feel free to post comments!
>
In no way intended as criticism, just an example, but what precisely
about this post means it *isn't* spam, whereas similar posts from
other people has had snakepiss and pals making multiple complaints to
hosts? Need a clue? Okay, I'll tell ya - its the fact that Karl posted
it, and he's a 'reg', so its okay )
As it happens, its entirely on-topic, appropriate, and useful, and its
*exactly* the sort of post that *should* be in this group. But if it
had been posted by a 'fresh' user, it would already have had a half
dozen replies saying "piss off spammer" etc. Just another example of
how subjective the definition of spam is around here...