[TEST LAUNCH] http://search.boards.ie - now ye're searching

Toto Wolfcastle

I'd like to see the thread title included. That's what the link at the top of the posts should read rather than the first few words of the post.

Ross

Threads merged.

biko wrote: »

The new interface have the options to Reindex Post | Reindex Thread for some reason, I'm not sure what they're supposed to help with. Why ask the user to index?

Mod features - you should read the OP of the equivalent thread about search in the mod forum.

Man there is some bile in one or two of these replies, but a couple of genuine grievances that are eminently solvable.

Would you believe I forgot about vanity searches? We tested this thing pretty extensively in the office, then out amongst the moderators, worked out a bunch of kinks, but nobody ever mentioned being able to search for people quoting them as a killer feature.

Hands up, my bad.

There are also a few bugs, but frankly, if we waited to cover every possible use case, A) we'd never launch, and we'd never find out the real problems.

I'll address this more in depth tomorrow, but please guys, the old search is still available by going directly to the URL for now. Less of the hate and a bit more information from you would be beneficial.

To those of you that have been eloquent (if frustrated) from the start, many thanks.

Tallon

Tallon wrote: »

How do I search for threads started by someone?

*cough*

colly10

Dav wrote: »

If there's one universal constant it's that people are always unhappy with change.

Sure thats always the answer, why request feedback if thats the mentality.
If it lacks functionality that they use, they will be unhappy.
I use the old search for nearly everything I do on boards. The new posts link comes a distant second.
The site itself is far less attractive to me without the old advanced search. I cannot keep track of threads the way I did, it's say many of the people who gave good feedback barely used the old advanced search

Dav wrote: »

It's not perfect (yet), but it's the main focus of the Tech team at the moment.

It's far from it, but was rolled out now to replace a working search despite it lacking the functionality of the old one and all recent posts in the "test launch" saying that they dislike the new one.

Dav wrote: »

New search is a hell of a lot faster, alot less database intensive

Did anyone complain about the old one being slow? It's also FAR slower for the user to find what they're looking for (if they even can anymore). Also end users don't care about calls to the DB and you would hope that managements main focus would be the end user? Just seems like a bit of a carzone move to me.

Ross wrote: »

but frankly, if we waited to cover every possible use case

You can't return results by threads, it's hardly minor, it was the default on the old advanced search

Dav wrote: »

tell us what's wrong and we can do something about it

Havn't exactly done exhaustive testing but a few obvious ones to me would be (I only use the advanced search btw) -

1. It's not possible to return results by threads rather than posts.

2. The search returns a bunch of posts, you cannot actually see the name of the thread that posts relate to so it's much harder to see if that post actually relates to what your actually looking for. This is a big one, say i'm looking for a thread I posted in last week, I have to skim read all the posts it returns to work out which one was in the thread i'm looking for, eg.- not easy if i'm looking for a boxing thread if I posted in a load of them over the last while (because i'm discussing boxing in all them).

3. Because it doesn't return posts by thread, I can't just go straight to the last post in the thread, obviously that doesn't take long to get there but it's more time added to point 2 above

4. I cannot get it to return all threads i've posted in in the order that they were last posted in (related to point 1 above). This is a big loss because I cannot check which ones have had much/any activity since I last posted in them. To do this I have to work out which posts are from which threads, then click each of them to see which threads have or have not been updated.
In perticular if a thread I posted in goes quiet for 2 weeks, then gets a few post in it, it is impossible for me to tell that it's active again because that thread would be buried in a bunch of my posts (down the list) with no signs the thread had been updated. With the old search, that thread would be right up near the top cause someone posted in it recently and I can see the date/time of the last post in the thread

5. I cannot search for where my posts were quoted, just putting your name in the search term (rather than author) and selecting to return by posts would return this in the old search. These results are omitted by the new search.

6. Newest first should be default on new search, best match returns irrelevent stuff (especially if searching by author) although it's handy enough for the user to just select it

7. I cannot decide whether to search by thread titles or titles + content. Although the search by threads would have to be available before this one is.

There's probably a few more but that's all i've spotted, havn't really been checking much though. Don't mean any offence by the way, boards is a great site, it would be the main one I use, it's just I think alot is lost by getting rid of the old advanced search and boards did ask for feedback.

colly10

Tallon wrote: »

*cough*

You cant as far as i'm aware, you can't search for threads full stop, only posts

Tallon

colly10 wrote: »

You cant as far as i'm aware, you can't search for threads full stop, only posts

Why remove a widely used feature like that?

K-9

Tallon wrote: »

Why remove a widely used feature like that?

I don't think it was done on purpose now!

If you read Ross' reply you'll see it was missed.

I blame the mods myself!

Dudess

Ross wrote: »

Would you believe I forgot about vanity searches?

In my opinion, a vanity search is one where a person wants to see if something has been said about them; but a search for your username being quoted is more for debate-engaging purposes - to check whether there were any responses for you to reply to.

Conor

One (brief) point and then I'll go back to lurking:

The old search is killing us slowly. It's not something that can be fixed by throwing more hardware at it. We got away with that (most of the time) for several years but it's not a strategy that works forever. It's not something that can be fixed with a minor software change either. Right now, the site locks up several times a day when a cluster of bad searches coming in. Sometimes it will lock for over 2-3 minutes where no-one can use the site at all. It's not acceptable - either from a usability or security point of view - to have a feature which is capable of disabling the site. It's not a question of volume of search, two or three unfortunately-timed bad searches can slow the site to a crawl. The old search needs to be removed ASAP and it won't be left hanging around forever as a hidden/restricted feature.

Steve

Bobblehead Panda wrote: »

I'd like to see the thread title included. That's what the link at the top of the posts should read rather than the first few words of the post.

+1 to this.

It's probably the only thing I'd have a gripe with - maybe that's because I use the search more as a mod than to find 'interesting stuff' but it's relevant info in a search result that I wouldn't like to lose access to.

Other than that, top class job.

starbelgrade

Ross wrote: »

Threads merged.



Mod features - you should read the OP of the equivalent thread about search in the mod forum.

Man there is some bile in one or two of these replies, but a couple of genuine grievances that are eminently solvable.

Would you believe I forgot about vanity searches? We tested this thing pretty extensively in the office, then out amongst the moderators, worked out a bunch of kinks, but nobody ever mentioned being able to search for people quoting them as a killer feature.

Hands up, my bad.

There are also a few bugs, but frankly, if we waited to cover every possible use case, A) we'd never launch, and we'd never find out the real problems.

I'll address this more in depth tomorrow, but please guys, the old search is still available by going directly to the URL for now. Less of the hate and a bit more information from you would be beneficial.

To those of you that have been eloquent (if frustrated) from the start, many thanks.

In fairness, you're not gonna get a lotta love if you call searching for quoted posts "vanity searches". People use that search function to find posts which other people quoted them in mainly so they can respond to them.

So, if you are posting a thread with a lot of posts in it - say a hot debate topic - you don't have to trawl through every post to see if someone was trying to engage with you in the debate.

Sure, there may be some vanity to it too, but like I said, that's not gonna get you a lotta love.

And if you just wanted love, then why have a thread looking for feedback on the issue? I'd say that's pretty much a Golden Rule for starting any thread on Boards.

And if it's a test launch, you can expect all types of reactions. But I think haters is a bit of strong word for people who aren't as eloquent as you'd like them to be.

K-9

starbelgrade wrote: »

In fairness, you're not gonna get a lotta love if you call searching for quoted posts "vanity searches". People use that search function to find posts which other people quoted them in mainly so they can respond to them.

So, if you are posting a thread with a lot of posts in it - say a hot debate topic - you don't have to trawl through every post to see if someone was trying to engage with you in the debate.

Sure, there may be some vanity to it too, but like I said, that's not gonna get you a lotta love.

And if you just wanted love, then why have a thread looking for feedback on the issue? I'd say that's pretty much a Golden Rule for starting any thread on Boards.

And if it's a test launch, you can expect all types of reactions. But I think haters is a bit of strong word for people who aren't as eloquent as you'd like them to be.

That's what your User CP is for.

Subscribe to threads, pick no email notifications and go to your User CP.

Any unreplied threads are there in dark font.

starbelgrade

K-9 wrote: »

That's what your User CP is for.

Subscribe to threads, pick no email notifications and go to your User CP.

Any unreplied threads are there in dark font.

But I'm not looking for unreplied threads.

K-9

starbelgrade wrote: »

But I'm not looking for unreplied threads.

It subscribes you to threads you've posted in?????

Why otherwise would you be looking?????

Unless people are mentioning you in threads you aren't participating in??????

jd007

K-9 wrote: »

It subscribes you to threads you've posted in?????

Why otherwise would you be looking?????

Unless people are mentioning you in threads you aren't participating in??????

He (and other posters) wants to find out when someone has quoted him without trawling through the thread.

wicklowwonder

Would it be possible to subscribe to an RSS feed for a search similar to the feed you can subscribe to in Google Blog search?

K-9

jd007 wrote: »

He (and other posters) wants to find out when someone has quoted him without trawling through the thread.

Yes, if you use the go to last post button, it'll bring you to where you were at last on the thread.

Still, I can see what you are saying, it should really be in the new search..

seamus

starbelgrade wrote: »

In fairness, you're not gonna get a lotta love if you call searching for quoted posts "vanity searches".

If you're going to start getting offended by industry terms , then you might want to switch off

jd007

seamus wrote: »

If you're going to start getting offended by industry terms , then you might want to switch off

But I don't think anybody is doing it to boost their ego. It's just an easy way to see if you've been quoted so that you can reply back.

Steve

Begs the question, why are people posting in threads if they've no interest in following the discussion afterwards (unless they get quoted)?

That's not discussion, it's hit-and-run soapboxing.

RichyX

I just used the new search for the first time.
It's almost useless.
The old one worked perfectly for me, it had enough advanced features and I generally found exactly what I wanted using the thread search.

With the new search I can't find anything useful.

ejmaztec

Interesting statistics. "800 years" has been mentioned 1527 times,

http://www.boards.ie/search/?q=%22800+years%22

........and was first mentioned in a Quake post on 24th January 1999.:D

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=74756&postcount=7

AckwelFoley

seamus wrote: »

If you're going to start getting offended by industry terms , then you might want to switch off

I believe as i understand it, that a vanity search is looking for where people mention you, as opposed to quoting of you..

I use the "vanity search" so i can keep track of when people quote me so i can reply, without having to subscribe to threads and read them to see if someone quoted me in a response - nothing to do with vanity -simply so i can reply.

Dudess

Steve wrote: »

Begs the question, why are people posting in threads if they've no interest in following the discussion afterwards (unless they get quoted)?

That's not discussion, it's hit-and-run soapboxing.

I know what you're saying Steve, but when a thread gets REALLY long, things shift from reading every post territory to engaging in debates/arguments/whatever with certain posters. It's more of a logistical thing - for me anyway.

Rubecula

Also I find that when a thread gets too long (sometimes after only a couple of replies) The thread goes off at a tangent and loses all comparison with the OP.

pickarooney

Rubecula wrote: »

Also I find that when a thread gets too long (sometimes after only a couple of replies) The thread goes off at a tangent and loses all comparison with the OP.

Yep. This thread was originally about the search engine :pac:

Steve

pickarooney wrote: »

Yep. This thread was originally about the search engine :pac:

My fault for changing tack there - I was just trying to understand the need to use this particular type of search as it seems to be the most contested here.

Dudess, that makes sense and it's probably one of the main reasons I tend not to dive into (potentially) long threads. I was trying to quantify it in a non AH type scenario.

Dav

OK, update based on some of the feedback we've had...

Ross is working on "match title only", "search threads started by user" and "search posts quoting a user" as a matter of priority for the new Search. We've also now included the link to the old search on the bottom of the new Advanced Search page if you're still stuck as to where it's located.

More updates as we have them.

starbelgrade

seamus wrote: »

If you're going to start getting offended by industry terms , then you might want to switch off

I wasn't offended in the slightest. I'm as vain as they come - but I don't see the search feature for quoted posts as a "vanity search". Let's call a spade a spade.

The real "vanity search" would be the "Find all thanked posts by starbelgrade" button, which I use several times on daily basis, because as well as being vain, I am also a major thanks whore. In fact, in terms of Boards thanks, I think I am the biggest whore on the entire site.

I've also noticed that with the new search feature, you can list your own posts by the most to least thanked, so if anything the "vanity search" part of the search function has increased ten fold, which is nice for us egosurfers.

starbelgrade

Dav wrote: »

OK, update based on some of the feedback we've had...

Ross is working on "match title only", "search threads started by user" and "search posts quoting a user" as a matter of priority for the new Search. We've also now included the link to the old search on the bottom of the new Advanced Search page if you're still stuck as to where it's located.

More updates as we have them.

We'll call that a result.

Plebs 1 - Development Team 0.

colly10

Dav wrote: »

OK, update based on some of the feedback we've had...

Ross is working on "match title only"

Thanks, will match title only be working with the user search so if you click match title only, enter a user in posted by user and click newest first then it will return all threads you posted in sorted by the order they were last posted in by any user or will that ever be available?

Mr. Loverman

The old search is better, with the exception of the search box using an OR instead of an AND.

Is it possible to keep a link to the old search option?

testicle

Steve wrote: »

Begs the question, why are people posting in threads if they've no interest in following the discussion afterwards (unless they get quoted)?

That's not discussion, it's hit-and-run soapboxing.

**** off.

(Test post to wait for response to see if poster is a soapboxer)

testicle

Dav wrote: »

OK, update based on some of the feedback we've had...

Ross is working on "match title only", "search threads started by user" and "search posts quoting a user" as a matter of priority for the new Search. We've also now included the link to the old search on the bottom of the new Advanced Search page if you're still stuck as to where it's located.

More updates as we have them.

Can we have the old search back as the default until the new one is finished 100% then?

You don't sell someone half a car...

Sergeant

I like the new search. One issue, it isn't displaying posts people made in the Thunderdome. I realise that doesn't matter to most people, but I post there, and the ability to be able to search through other peoples posts so you can ridicule them mercilessly about a post they made a year ago is quite an important tool to have in the arsenal.

Tahuti

I feel at peace with the new search function.

I can no longer search to find out who's dissing me, or who holds an opinion contrary to mine.

Conflict has been lessened, and I can just merrily breeze my way from thread to thread.

Ignorance is truly bliss.

CrystalLettuce

The new search function is truly awful... sorry. I dislike things that appear "large" like that, unnecessarily Web2.0, the old default search was functional and worked well, you could see all your options clearly. It doesn't aesthetically match the rest of the forum. The results are by far the worst part, I liked when it was newest first by default, and the advert and general layout make it look like one of those "Placeholder" portal sites when you go to a site that's been taken down, etc.

It would have been better to use the form for the old one, but tweak the algorithm. I don't see the need for the new layout. Forms are just forms and can feed into anything.

And that shade of green does not go with those shades of blue.

Having "by thanks" as an option too, urgh. Then again I've never liked any kind of thanks system, it just sticks it to people who are in the minority in discussions most of the time, or just adds redundant clutter to the bottom of posts in proper two sided discussions. People should be able to judge posts on their merits without needing a little popularity contest, "Most thanked" has very little to do with relevancy in searching, unless you're writing an essay on herd mentality.

CrystalLettuce

liah wrote: »

Am I the only one who hated the old one? It was such a pain to search a specific forum, had to scroll for aaaaaaaaaaages and miss it about 10 times til you could select it.

I like this one a hell of a lot better than the old ugly one.

But you could just go "search in this forum". Now, you can't do that, as "search in this forum" brings up the new search.

AckwelFoley

Steve wrote: »

Begs the question, why are people posting in threads if they've no interest in following the discussion afterwards (unless they get quoted)?

That's not discussion, it's hit-and-run soapboxing.

The reason i use it steve is because i might log onto the internet for literally a min or two during the day at work

I quickly check my email to see if there are any emails in and then go quickly log onto boards and do a "vanity search" to see if i was quoted, then if its something i think i can reply to quickly i will then log off.. i can do the same "vanity search" a few hours later to see if that person replied.

Im on boards near 5 years, its just my routine, i am a creature of habit..

Steve

testicle wrote: »

**** off.

(Test post to wait for response to see if poster is a soapboxer)

How thoughtful, bless you.

snyper wrote: »

The reason i use it steve is because i might log onto the internet for literally a min or two during the day at work

I quickly check my email to see if there are any emails in and then go quickly log onto boards and do a "vanity search" to see if i was quoted, then if its something i think i can reply to quickly i will then log off.. i can do the same "vanity search" a few hours later to see if that person replied.

Im on boards near 5 years, its just my routine, i am a creature of habit..

That's good info snyper and hopefully useful for Ross. I wasn't having a pop at anyone there, just trying to understand what the 'need' was if you get me.

If that feature can be accommodated in the new search in a way that it doesn't make the servers groan then maybe it will satisfy a lot of the people in this thread.

electron

ok... obviously no time to read all 17 pages, so will just give my own opinion:

1) i hope the new search will allow for short strings (2-3-4 letters) and wildcard, with instructions readily displayed on how to use the different search operators (""/+/-/AND/OR/*), etc
2) layout = not good. different from the rest of the site. not good at all.

Toto Wolfcastle

In the old search when you clicked on the user's name above the post it brought you to their profile. Now the name is below the post and when you click on it it brings you to the same page that you are already on. It's a bit annoying.

Also I just looked at a spammer's posts because I was going to report all 4 of them but only 2 of them came up in a search so I got annoyed and didn't bother reporting them. They hadn't been deleted either so that wasn't the reason.

Rubecula

Just used the new Search facility for the first time. Great, it worked perfectly.

mike65

I've just tried to find athread about waterfords bin colection service, I had a post on the thread so used my name plus terms like Bin collection waterford/bin service waterford/bin charges waterford. Nothing! Bloody hopeless.

I typed mike65 bin collection into google and it found the thread I was looking for.

pickarooney

Thread title only and threads started by are now in - nice!

On the other hand, I just spend 10 minutes trying to find a post I made in Broadband a couple of weeks ago and couldn't find it at all. I can't remember the exact content of the post but it found none of the words I know were in it. This used to take 5 seconds with the old search. So that really sucks.

colly10

pickarooney wrote: »

Thread title only and threads started by are now in - nice!

On the other hand, I just spend 10 minutes trying to find a post I made in Broadband a couple of weeks ago and couldn't find it at all. I can't remember the exact content of the post but it found none of the words I know were in it. This used to take 5 seconds with the old search. So that really sucks.

Thats a big improvement, currently when I click newest first it's bring them back in the order I posted, would it be possible to put in another option that sorts the results in the order of when the threads returned last received any post?

arybvtcw0eolkf

mike65 wrote: »

I typed mike65 bin collection into google and it found the thread I was looking for.

I've been using google to find boards.ie threads now too - for me the new search engine has been next to useless.

Its really infuriating me at this stage.

colly10

Neither of these will bring up the liverpool superthread on the first page of results (even when I limit results to sports)

1. search for liverpool, thread titles only selected, return best matches
2. search for liverpool, thread titles only not selected, return best matches

My name is URL

Seen as there's already been mention of vanity searches.. would it be possible to have an option to sort posts by 'last thanked'?

pickarooney

Anyone else getting 503s on Advanced Search?