PI searching being disabled

IITYWYBMAD

Wibbs wrote: »

That and those who link into threads in there or look to start trouble with people and like has been said that certainly went on and still does. Even innocently where someone will quote an OP's problem in another part of the site. Only last week I snipped one of those and I've snipped a fair few of the more dodgy ones too.

And do you think that the search function being disabled is actually preventing more incidents of this nature? As I've pointed out earlier in the thread, those who want to act the muppet, can, quite easily tbh. There are already mechanisms in place to address those issues, as you yourself highlighted above.

The retrospective argument doesn't really hold water, as there are actually two forums setup to discuss change, and a number of such changes, if implemented, will have effect retrospectively.....I really don't see why PI gets this "special" treatment tbh.

Anyhow, it's no skin off my nose, it just seems to be using a sledge hammer to crack a nut...

IITYWYBMAD

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Providing an in-house facility for those who wish to cause trouble to save them any added effort surely wouldn't be a rational reason to re-instate the search function anyway, would it?

There's the home page right there. With a Google search customised for Boards. My point being, it's already there.

Nevyn

IITYWYBMAD wrote: »

The retrospective argument doesn't really hold water, as there are actually two forums setup to discuss change, and a number of such changes, if implemented, will have effect retrospectively.

When the new more open S&S forum is created it will be created brand new and there will be no retroactive exposing of posts which were made in a more protected setting.

IITYWYBMAD wrote: »

....I really don't see why PI gets this "special" treatment tbh.

Fair enough, plenty of us do.

IITYWYBMAD wrote: »

Anyhow, it's no skin off my nose, it just seems to be using a sledge hammer to crack a nut...

You are entitled to your opinion.

IITYWYBMAD wrote: »

There's the home page right there. With a Google search customised for Boards. My point being, it's already there.

PI forums threads don't appear on the generic front page, they were removed some time ago.

Wibbs

IITYWYBMAD wrote: »

And do you think that the search function being disabled is actually preventing more incidents of this nature?

Yep I do and have seen it. EG when PI threads were listed on the front page of the site we got a lot more drive by muppetry and it was noticeably lessened when that was changed

The retrospective argument doesn't really hold water, as there are actually two forums setup to discuss change, and a number of such changes, if implemented, will have effect retrospectively.....I really don't see why PI gets this "special" treatment tbh.

Lots of forums get "special" treatment. Every single private forum out there for a start. Each forum has it's own rules and vibe and what you would post in one forum would not be welcome in another. So I really don't see why you think PI should be any different, while suggesting it is at the same time.

IITYWYBMAD wrote: »

There's the home page right there. With a Google search customised for Boards. My point being, it's already there.

Yes and no. The google search on the site is much harder to narrow down to PI or any forum for that matter. Yes one could search like you suggested on page one and get it more narrowed down, but the main page boards search isn't as easy. Hey maybe the mods want a better class of troll who does know how to do it. Simply put it would make it a lot easier for trolls and trouble makers to kick off if PI was searchable. So while it can be done, the current policy limits it and I personally don't see what's wrong with that. The only thing I see as the disadvantage is what dudess remarked on earlier, namely someone genuinely looking for a previous thread that may be relevant.

Anyway if your point is that its already there, why have issue at all?

IITYWYBMAD

Thaedydal wrote: »

When the new more open S&S forum is created it will be created brand new and there will be no retroactive exposing of posts which were made in a more protected setting.

That's not what I was referring to, but example is not a valid argument tbh...

PI forums threads don't appear on the generic front page, they were removed some time ago.

I know that. I'm not talking about what posts appear on the front page, I'm talking about the big "Search Boards.ie" on the right hand side of the page, which will give you every conceivable search option for all forums.

Ickle Magoo

IITYWYBMAD wrote: »

I know that. I'm not talking about what posts appear on the front page, I'm talking about the big "Search Boards.ie" on the right hand side of the page, which will give you every conceivable search option for all forums.

Exactly, so it makes tracking posts or posters specifically in PI more difficult while allowing posters to search a generic topic of interest to them...I thought that was the point of the current set up?

IITYWYBMAD

Wibbs wrote: »

Yes and no. The google search on the site is much harder to narrow down to PI or any forum for that matter.

No it's not.

Simply put it would make it a lot easier for trolls and trouble makers to kick off if PI was searchable.

My point is (was) that PI is as searchable as any other publically searchable forum, whether the VB search is enabled or not. I think easier is quite subjective tbh.

So while it can be done, the current policy limits it and I personally don't see what's wrong with that.

I have no issue with the "rule" per se, I'm merely pointing out that if somebody is sad enough to go around cross forum linking, for the purpose of trolling, whether the forum is "searchable" or not from the mods perspective is moot.

Anyway if your point is that its already there, why have issue at all?

Reasoning and discussion, is that ok with you?

Ickle Magoo wrote:

Exactly, so it makes tracking posts or posters specifically in PI more difficult while allowing posters to search a generic topic of interest to them...I thought that was the point of the current set up?

I disagree, and I could show you exactly why, but tbh....at this stage, I couldn't be arsed..../ tips hat

Ickle Magoo

I'm not following...and storming out the thread isn't particularly helpful either. If there's an issue with searching/not searching some forums or posters open to abuse then I think that warrants discussion - possibly further action in terms of the search parameters of the homepage, if that's possible.

I always viewed it as; if someone wants to know if anyone else has posted about a break up caused by cheating then they can search for that and pick out the PI posts that are relevant to them. At the same time if someone wants to have a nosey about what topics X poster answers and asks in PI/RI/Bereavement then they have to trawl through possibly hundreds or thousands of other posts - even by doing a search on a particular handle - and what's more if they go to the added effort and use the information to troll, we know they had to do that to get the info and they can't hide behind "I just did quick search of the forum and look what popped up"...

omega666

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

I'm not following...and storming out the thread isn't particularly helpful either. If there's an issue with searching/not searching some forums or posters open to abuse then I think that warrants discussion - possibly further action in terms of the search parameters of the homepage, if that's possible.

I always viewed it as; if someone wants to know if anyone else has posted about a break up caused by cheating then they can search for that and pick out the PI posts that are relevant to them. At the same time if someone wants to have a nosey about what topics X poster answers and asks in PI/RI/Bereavement then they have to trawl through possibly hundreds or thousands of other posts - even by doing a search on a particular handle - and what's more if they go to the added effort and use the information to troll, we know they had to do that to get the info and they can't hide behind "I just did quick search of the forum and look what popped up"...

i think he making the point, on the front pages of boards is a Google search facility which if i simply input personal issues "omega666" and search it will bring up my personal issues posts.

So you don’t even have to leave the boards website to find what you want, making disabling the search in the forum itself for privacy reasons pointless.

IITYWYBMAD

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

I'm not following...and storming out the thread isn't particularly helpful either.

I'm not storming out (I actually tipped my internet cap) , I just find some of the replies hmmm....agendized, and I have no reason to get into an argument about something I have experience in. (Not a slant at you btw)

My bottom line is, that Google is a multinational public cloud computing and Internet search technologies company with a budget of billions. It's very powerful. Using it is not actually that difficult, and anybody with a bit of research can whittle down searches to a minutia.

There's a Google CSE on the front page, which can return customised results, it works.

omega666 wrote:

i think he making the point, on the front pages of boards is a Google search facility which if i simply input personal issues "omega666" and search it will bring up my personal issues posts.

So you don’t even have to leave the boards website to find what you want, making disabling the search in the forum itself for privacy reasons pointless.

That, and I could specify the dates I want, keywords, where in the post I want to see certain words, thread title, thread starter,etc..........

I hope that clears up my point.

Ickle Magoo

I know you chivalrously tipped your hat but you also said you couldn't be arsed; I'm interested in what you have to say. I'm a newbie mod and I don't view the points you are making as a slant on me, it's good to have issues or glitches pointed out.

While I appreciate it's certainly do-able, searching using another engine does takes the extra time and effort...I just tried a search of someone on PI and the google home page search shows three posts at a time and none of the three were actually from PI...it takes trawling through the posts to build up any discernible picture and it's certainly not as neat and easy for everyone to do a search as it would be if the forum search function were available.

I'm just not sure why there would or should be motivation to make abuse of PI/RI/bereavement posts/posters even easier.

Wibbs

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

I'm just not sure why there would or should be motivation to make abuse of PI/RI/bereavement posts/posters even easier.

It boils down to this. Why make it easier? Where's the benefit? Plus you(IITYWYBMAD) may say it being easier is subjective, but I would argue you're being subjective when you're saying that. For you it's easy enough as clearly you know what you're doing, many, if not most(especially web newbies) actually don't. Check out helpdesk on a daily basis... Like has been said it would make it far easier if searching was enabled and yes it would mean more drive by idiocy. I have seen it for myself quite noticeably as a mod in there when just the PI threads were on the front page. The dodgy traffic went up. That traffic went down when it was removed. Simple as that. In that case it was even easier just to click into the PI forum and see the threads. On the back of that experience I would be 100% sure they would get more signal to noise going on with search switched on.

The other aspect to this which I don't think has been mentioned yet is the dragging up of old threads. Zombie threads are frowned upon sitewide. They happened in PI the odd time, but with search enabled they would get a lot more of them. People jumping in on dead threads rather than starting their own(some were even people looking for updates on long dead threads and it often felt for prurient reasons). In there it was common enough where folks would dive in on an existing thread with a somewhat related PI of their own(sometimes not even connected that much) and mods would have to start splitting threads etc. Again IMHO search would ramp that up. It would get messy. If nothing else you would need even more mods and more coverage to cover it. That's fine in one sense as PI IME never had too many, but again where is the benefit? That for me is what it would boil down to in the end.

PS the stuff about the "special nature" of PI is a red herring and a well old one at this stage. I never really understood some people having issue with that TBH. Damn near every forum on Boards has a special nature to some degree or other.

tbh

there's a definite and defined benefit wibbs, and that is that the total pool of knowledge becomes more easily available to the people who aren't technically able to find it through google. We'd only be able to quantify that benefit by allowing search in PI and trying to figure out how much traffic was generated by it - which I think we all know isn't going to happen.

I feel it's a red herring to say there's no benefit to be had, but it's totally fair to say that the benefit may not be worth the cost.

Nevyn

PI posts are not just data/info/knowledge they are posts containing people's hopes, dreams, dreads, sorrow, worries and misery; and that should be respected and not just turned into 'Data' for searches.

seamus

I would be in favour of enabling PI searches and pruning the forum on a daily basis - delete every thread where the least post was more than a year ago. This would of course create problems with stickies and the like but not insurmountable.

Perhaps even allow users to delete their own threads? The obvious implication here is that a problem posted today is something that I want people to see and to comment on, but that doesn't mean I want people to be able to see and archive it forever more. PI is a special forum, and I've always said it. Yes, it should exempt from things which apply to other forums specifically because it has a different function than just being a standard discussion forum.

Nevyn

Given that PI and it's subforums can easily see between 20 and 60 new threads a day, deleting that sort every day or evening every few days may cause issues with the database.
But I am not opposed to that idea but I would still be against enabling site search.

Google search does bring in people who type their problem into google and get PI and then start their own thread.
We can get zombie threads bumped by this but the Pi mods just move the posts to a thread of it's own.

IITYWYBMAD

Wibbs wrote: »

It boils down to this. Why make it easier? Where's the benefit? Plus you(IITYWYBMAD) may say it being easier is subjective, but I would argue you're being subjective when you're saying that. For you it's easy enough as clearly you know what you're doing, many, if not most(especially web newbies) actually don't. Check out helpdesk on a daily basis... .

Again, I disagree. While your example of HD is a valid example of useless threads, compare that against the traffic this site gets on a daily basis, and it's a fraction of a percent.

Anybody with web access can find out, within 15 minutes, how to use web searches, and this is not confined to google....

As an aside I would introduce a CAPTCHA hack specifically for HD to stop the useless posts. Have you ever "googled" the useless posts on HD?

Like has been said it would make it far easier if searching was enabled and yes it would mean more drive by idiocy.

My point is, that it would not, and it does not.

tbh wrote:

there's a definite and defined benefit wibbs, and that is that the total pool of knowledge becomes more easily available to the people who aren't technically able to find it through google. We'd only be able to quantify that benefit by allowing search in PI and trying to figure out how much traffic was generated by it - which I think we all know isn't going to happen.

I feel it's a red herring to say there's no benefit to be had, but it's totally fair to say that the benefit may not be worth the cost.

Totally agree.

Thaedydal wrote:

PI posts are not just data/info/knowledge they are posts containing people's hopes, dreams, dreads, sorrow, worries and misery; and that should be respected and not just turned into 'Data' for searches.

I see where you are coming from, but to be honest the same could be said about a lot of posts on Soccer (and a lot of other forums), and yet they are searchable? I'm not being factious here but your POV is tinged by your connection to PI.

At the end of the day, all posts on PI are data, despite your protestations otherwise. I understand where you are coming from, and I actually think that most of the advice you give is ok, but I still think you have to come to terms with the realisation that, at the end of the day.......'it's the internet'...

seamus wrote:

I would be in favour of enabling PI searches and pruning the forum on a daily basis - delete every thread where the least post was more than a year ago. This would of course create problems with stickies and the like but not insurmountable.

Perhaps even allow users to delete their own threads? The obvious implication here is that a problem posted today is something that I want people to see and to comment on, but that doesn't mean I want people to be able to see and archive it forever more. PI is a special forum, and I've always said it. Yes, it should exempt from things which apply to other forums specifically because it has a different function than just being a standard discussion forum.

I think the above is a great suggestion.

Nevyn

So you won't accpet any of the opinions/arguement of PI mods cos we are 'tinged', fair enough.

The Recliner

IITYWYBMAD wrote: »

Anybody with web access can find out, within 15 minutes, how to use web searches, and this is not confined to google....

The fact is though they don't, it is more effort then people are prepared to do

My point is, that it would not, and it does not.

Experience modding the forum tells us it would, the effect of being removed from the front page was remarkable
Drive-by muppetry came to a halt and became a miniscule part of Modding the place whereas before it would take up a large part of our time
Thread traffic suffered for a while but soon came back up to previous levels and the forum is much better for it imo

I see where you are coming from, but to be honest the same could be said about a lot of posts on Soccer (and a lot of other forums), and yet they are searchable? I'm not being factious here but your POV is tinged by your connection to PI.

At the end of the day, all posts on PI are data, despite your protestations otherwise. I understand where you are coming from, and I actually think that most of the advice you give is ok, but I still think you have to come to terms with the realisation that, at the end of the day.......'it's the internet'...

Just because it is there doesn't mean it should be searchable

I have yet to see a single reason for enabling search that would make the forum better for the users and that is the most important thing imo

I think the above is a great suggestion.

I don't see what that would add at all to be honest, surely if you are in favour of treating everything as data and having it available for all to see then deleting data is the exact opposite of what you want

IITYWYBMAD

thaedydal wrote:

So you won't accpet any of the opinions/arguement of PI mods cos we are 'tinged', fair enough.

Where did I say that? Your histrionics are getting silly.....(and I mean that in the scientific definition)

The Recliner wrote: »

The fact is though they don't, it is more effort then people are prepared to do

That's actually beside the point.

The Recliner wrote: »

Experience modding the forum tells us it would, the effect of being removed from the front page was remarkable
Drive-by muppetry came to a halt and became a miniscule part of Modding the place whereas before it would take up a large part of our time
Thread traffic suffered for a while but soon came back up to previous levels and the forum is much better for it imo

Removing it from the front page, and disabling VB search are two totally different things.

The Recliner wrote: »

Just because it is there doesn't mean it should be searchable

I have yet to see a single reason for enabling search that would make the forum better for the users and that is the most important thing imo

I've no idea what you mean about it not being searchable tbh, but I agree with your premise that it may not make the forum better.

The Recliner wrote: »

I don't see what that would add at all to be honest, surely if you are in favour of treating everything as data and having it available for all to see then deleting data is the exact opposite of what you want

I actually chuckled at the "treating everything as data" comment. It is data, whether you like it or not.

omega666

The Recliner wrote: »

Just because it is there doesn't mean it should be searchable

I have yet to see a single reason for enabling search that would make the forum better for the users and that is the most important thing imo

Well to be fair, the whole reason i created this thread in the first place was because as a normal user of this site i had a minor personal issue that i know
has come up in PI previously and just wanted to have a look some old threads to see what other people had done and what advise was given.

I created this thread to give my personal feedback on what would have made the forum better to me as a user. Now obvious that’s only my opinion, there are valid reasons which have been pointed out by various people on why the search has been removed. But I’m sure if I came across the problem so did other user’s of the forum i.e. Dudess

So there is defiantly a benefit to being able to search. But as tbh said “ the benefit may not be worth the cost”

I’ve gotten around the issue now anyway thanks to IITYWYBMAD’s suggestion of a google search instead.

The Recliner

omega666 wrote: »

Well to be fair, the whole reason i created this thread in the first place was because as a normal user of this site i had a minor personal issue that i know
has come up in PI previously and just wanted to have a look some old threads to see what other people had done and what advise was given.

I created this thread to give my personal feedback on what would have made the forum better to me as a user. Now obvious that’s only my opinion, there are valid reasons which have been pointed out by various people on why the search has been removed. But I’m sure if I came across the problem so did other user’s of the forum i.e. Dudess

So there is defiantly a benefit to being able to search. But as tbh said “ the benefit may not be worth the cost”

I’ve gotten around the issue now anyway thanks to IITYWYBMAD’s suggestion of a google search instead.

Apologies, in my previous post I may have indicated that your problem was trivial, this was not my intention

Of course having search would have been a benefit to you and many other genuine users and enabling it would make the forum better in cases like this

But it is a cost benefit analysis thing and to us it seems that the cost outweighs the benefit, if people cannot find a thread that containsw the advice they are looking for they will start a new thread and will get relevant advice

People who search tend to attach themselves to existing threads and we end up creating a new thread for them anyway

IITYWYBMAD wrote: »

I actually chuckled at the "treating everything as data" comment. It is data, whether you like it or not.

Technically you are correct, of course it is data

The problem is however it is so much more than data to the people who post looking for advice or the people who pour their hearts out in an effort to improve things for themseleves or others, comparing it to the likes of soccer as was done earlier really isn't comparing like with like

In that respect I don't feel it should be treated as data and as Mods it is our duty to protect our posters so unless someone comes up with a compelling reason to enable search I wont be requesting it

Dudess

Re the "digging up dirt" thing: it seems unlikely a regular poster would EVER start a PI thread using their registered name. The unregistered facility offers quite a bit of protection that would eliminate a lot of the concerns, IMO.

Silverfish

Dudess wrote: »

Re the "digging up dirt" thing: it seems unlikely a regular poster would EVER start a PI thread using their registered name. The unregistered facility offers quite a bit of protection that would eliminate a lot of the concerns, IMO.

Not now, but a lot of people signed up and posted on PI and went on to use that username across boards.

Wibbs

seamus wrote: »

I would be in favour of enabling PI searches and pruning the forum on a daily basis - delete every thread where the least post was more than a year ago. This would of course create problems with stickies and the like but not insurmountable.

It's a thought, but like I said before and have direct experience of it's a very high overhead forum from the modding side at times. I can certainly say for myself that at one stage two years ago it was actual work to mod it during the 9 to 5 period. This would take a fair bit of work to roll out and then maintain, thereby more mods would be required. Now I'm just taking this from my own experience and that may have changed in the last year plus since I was modding there, but I'd be surprised if the workload had gone down?

Perhaps even allow users to delete their own threads? The obvious implication here is that a problem posted today is something that I want people to see and to comment on, but that doesn't mean I want people to be able to see and archive it forever more

Certainly another idea and anytime anyone asked me to lock/delete a post or thread I always did no question and that was the policy for the reason you gave. As for it being a user facility? I dunno pming a mod is quick enough, plus I don't know how you could set database permissions for an anon poster to allow them to do that. Would that not be a security risk?

PI is a special forum, and I've always said it. Yes, it should exempt from things which apply to other forums specifically because it has a different function than just being a standard discussion forum.

True but I would also extend that to many forums out there just in their own way. Soccer, R&R the various religious forums. I wouldnt extend a blanket specialness to PI beyond the inherent differences it has. Like I say like most forums.

IITYWYBMAD wrote: »

My point is, that it would not, and it does not.

And the point I'm making and TC and T are making is that it would make a difference, because we have all seen the difference more visibility makes to the forum and the running of it in concrete terms. You can say all you want that allowing searching is different, but it really isn't.

I see where you are coming from, but to be honest the same could be said about a lot of posts on Soccer (and a lot of other forums), and yet they are searchable? I'm not being factious here but your POV is tinged by your connection to PI.

Eh no, you really couldn't. While someone may feel passion about their particular team losing or winning etc, it's not the same as someone talking about the death of a parent or the breakup of a relationship or an unplanned pregnancy or depression in a loved one. Not even close.

At the end of the day, all posts on PI are data, despite your protestations otherwise. I understand where you are coming from, and I actually think that most of the advice you give is ok, but I still think you have to come to terms with the realisation that, at the end of the day.......'it's the internet'...

I suppose this is where we differ. I see the faces behind the data. And I'm thankful I do.

Where did I say that? Your histrionics are getting silly.....(and I mean that in the scientific definition)

I don't see where she is being dramatic at all. Never mind in the plural. Nor is histrionic a scientific term, unless you're relating it to a specific personality disorder.

The Recliner wrote: »

The fact is though they don't, it is more effort then people are prepared to do

Pretty much.

Experience modding the forum tells us it would, the effect of being removed from the front page was remarkable
Drive-by muppetry came to a halt and became a miniscule part of Modding the place whereas before it would take up a large part of our time
Thread traffic suffered for a while but soon came back up to previous levels and the forum is much better for it imo

Exactly. For all the discussion this is what actually happened.

IITYWYBMAD wrote: »

I actually chuckled at the "treating everything as data" comment. It is data, whether you like it or not.

Everything is "data" if you want to be that reductive, but that's not how things work on a personal or emotional level(unless someone actually suffers from a personality disorder). Just because information is laid down does not nor should not negate the person behind that information. The two are linked. We're not talking about someone looking for advice on the Motors forum about what exhaust they should by. It is fundamentally different.

Overheal

Is there a technical way to Archive the aged posts and threads from Personal Issues? That is, after such a time, the thread expires and the user IDs are scrubbed out: the thread just identifies the participants as Poster #1, Poster #2, etc.

seamus

Wibbs wrote: »

It's a thought, but like I said before and have direct experience of it's a very high overhead forum from the modding side at times. I can certainly say for myself that at one stage two years ago it was actual work to mod it during the 9 to 5 period. This would take a fair bit of work to roll out and then maintain, thereby more mods would be required. Now I'm just taking this from my own experience and that may have changed in the last year plus since I was modding there, but I'd be surprised if the workload had gone down?

Well it would be automatic. The functionality is there to remove/archive any post over a certain age. It can be scheduled so there's no work really needed. Posts can be soft deleted so a mod can resurrect something if it's really ncessary.

As for it being a user facility? I dunno pming a mod is quick enough, plus I don't know how you could set database permissions for an anon poster to allow them to do that. Would that not be a security risk?

Didn't think of anon users. Definitely possible for normal users. Wouldn't be possible for anon users.

Overheal wrote: »

Is there a technical way to Archive the aged posts and threads from Personal Issues? That is, after such a time, the thread expires and the user IDs are scrubbed out: the thread just identifies the participants as Poster #1, Poster #2, etc.

Yes, nice idea. You could anonymise every post in a thread over X days old so that every post is made by "Anonymous poster". Only problem is that quotes would need to be scrubbed too, and it would be impossible to remove references like "As seamus said" from people's posts.
But a smart, solid idea overall.

Small side effect of any such move would be to collapse some post counts. A good thing for some of us.

Silverfish

What about stickies, charters, some people's threads have gone on for 6 months or more...

And from a moderating POV, would it then still be possible to search a poster's history in PI - would make it extremely difficult to indentify trolls, multiple thread starters, and troublemakers in general.

The only alternative I can think of is to make the entire forum unreg, where you must log out to post, and therefore every single post goes into a queue to be approved.

To be honest...... I still think it works how it is currently.

tbh

The problem is that, just as we can't quantify the benefit if we did switch it on, neither can we quantify the requirement if we didn't. Given those facts, and given what the mods have told us, maybe it's better not to push for it just for the sake of consistency

Esel

Surely it is possible to allow Search while masking usernames? If not, it should be!

PI, as a resource, should be searchable. Not for the mean-spirited in-house stalkers, but for the real people with a real-life problem.

Forget Google. If someone comes here with a personal problem, we should help them to find a possible solution. They may not know how to do a Search, but if they do, we should not hinder them.

There must be a hack to allow this!