Search Function is Really Screwed Up!!

Christ! Why do we need to suffer the agony of entering a zillion fields to find something here on ATS? The previous search function had Google and it was pretty easy searching a topic anywhere on ATS just by typing the first word.

And now it takes till sun down figuring out the darn fields to fill up! I don't have the time for all this. So I've given up searching anything on ATS. The pain's too excruciating!

The bottom line is: WHY THE DEVIL CAN'T WE HAVE THE PLAIN SIMPLE 'GOOGLE SEARCH' LIKE THE GOOD OL' TIMES???

Or am I missing something here like a Top Secret simple search function like Google hidden in some spooky recess on ATS? :bnghd:




[edit on 22-12-2006 by mikesingh]

Not just you. I never have found the search helpful. I enter one field with no results...it does seem over complicated to get some info.

Peace

dAlen

Actually, I have used it several times within the last couple of days,

It works a heck of a lot better than it used to.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Of course, it still may not be up to true search engine standards, but overall I think SO did a pretty good job of fixing it up a bit better than it had been.

[edit on 12/22/2006 by Mechanic 32]

The Google search is coming back.

HOW MANY different ways must we say WE ARE STILL WORKING on the Redesign?! This is a HUGE SITE with a HUGE NUMBER of features that must be reworked, one at a time, when a large scale redesign like "Dark Matter" occurs.

Springer...

Originally posted by Springer
The Google search is coming back.

HOW MANY different ways must we say WE ARE STILL WORKING on the Redesign?!

This is a HUGE SITE with a HUGE NUMBER of features that must be reworked, one at a time, when a large scale redesign like "Dark Matter" occurs.

Springer...

...and you guys are doing great with the design...
...totally great job, totally happy here...

My only problem with the search is when I type in a user name to find someones post...and it says that the search does not bring back any results. (it cant find the user name)
I then just used google search in Safari to find the top 250 post by user...(though later found the actual search feature for finding a users post... :-)

Peace

dAlen

[edit on 22-12-2006 by dAlen]

The boolean search is the most accurate way to find complex information in our nearly 2.75 million posts (some of which are not fully indexed by Google).

Once you learn how to use the search, you'll get great results.

Can you provide some examples of searches that didn't work for you?

Yes, I'd love to see some examples too. I really don't understand why people have such a problem with the search.

Yesterday I was looking at the thread An Advanced Civilization on Earth Thousands Of Years Ago?? authored by you mikesingh and I wanted to post a link to an o0lder thread.

I knew I posted in the older thread about how the green glass can be formed so in the search I entered "green glass", in the from member name field I put "zeddicuszulzorander" and since I didn't know how long it had been I selected date range "the beginning."

It found the original thread Ancient Nuclear War and now the search shows yours too since I posted there. I use the search all the time and I rarely ever use more then those 3 fields. Sometimes I have to tweak the words I'm looking for, but it works each time.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
The boolean search is the most accurate way to find complex information in our nearly 2.75 million posts (some of which are not fully indexed by Google).

Once you learn how to use the search, you'll get great results.

Can you provide some examples of searches that didn't work for you?

I just went to the search feature and it has changed...so on my part, it appears I havent used the new one.
Also, it was really user error, as I used the search, in the past, to find user post...when I should have just checked search members (what i get for not scrolling all the way down that page...
But, all is good, and again, good job on the site design...love it
(you can forget my post in this thread, )

Not sure the other peoples issues

Thanks

Peace

dAlen

[edit on 22-12-2006 by dAlen]

Ah, Skep and Zed! Thanx. Got it! But I'm glad you're working on getting Google search back again. I'd probably gotten too used to it to bother working with the boolean search.

As for the rest, this site design is out of this world! Cheers!!

[edit on 22-12-2006 by mikesingh]

Search in forum groupings:

Here it is important to select the forums you want to search in. If you are positive you know where the post you want to find is located, or if you want to narrow down the parameters, you can change this to a number of options.

However, do bear in mind that you may be alienating results that would otherwise be of interest. For example, searching for Aurora in the Science and Advanced Technology Discussion Forum Groups may not bring back the same results as if you had selected Conspiracy Theory Discussion Forum Groups. It may be better to keep it broad and choose ATS-only Forums.

Search for matches in:

Here you can choose to specify which part of a post you want to do a search on your specified keywords or phrase. The POSTS, which would be the content of a post. Or, you can choose SUBJECT LINES... the subject line of this post being Search Function is Really Screwed Up!!.

You will no doubt decrease your returns if you choose the Subject Lines option when the subject itself may be a pun or a phrase not actually containing helpful insight into the post's content.

From member name:

Unless you are looking to quote someone, or back up your claim that some member said he was 32 years old five years ago and now claims to be 33 ( ) I'd advise not to select this option at all.

Search through date range:

This little beauty is great for narrowing down the date range (obviously) of posts you're searching for. Can't remember where you saw a post that cropped up a few days ago, select a week. If you want to search for all posts as far back as possible, use the beginning, which is what I would recommend any general searcher chooses.


As long as you are careful with these, it is hard (and I mean very hard), not to find the most obscure post from the beginning of time on ATS.

Simon, thanx for providing the gen. I think I'll use this for 'deeper' searches.

Originally posted by mikesingh
Or am I missing something here like a simple search function like Google hidden in some spooky recess on ATS?

Originally posted by wecomeinpeace

Eureka!!! Wecomeinpeace, I always knew that Google was hidden in some dark recess on ATS! So 'thar she blows'! Up in the left hand corner! Thanx for pointing it out!

I gotta go and celebrate now. Darn! Where's my beer? Google won't help here! Probably the boolean will!! Cheers!




[edit on 22-12-2006 by mikesingh]

Originally posted by wecomeinpeace

That's cool.

One's good, but two is better

But Wait! There's More!

New Community Project: The Unified Conspiracy Search Engine!

Who says the admins don't listen?

I've always felt the Search function was flawed. But after reading a post or two on little tidbits of information on how to enhance the experience, I feel it is a great tool. I had always searched by the title of the thread, rather than the content.

When I search for the content, I've found exactly what I was looking for. On the first shot, every time.

Originally posted by chissler
I've always felt the Search function was flawed. But after reading a post or two on little tidbits of information on how to enhance the experience, I feel it is a great tool. I had always searched by the title of the thread, rather than the content.

When I search for the content, I've found exactly what I was looking for. On the first shot, every time.

Chissler, I am NOT "picking on you" simply using your words as an example of what we've been "up against" for over two years now.

This is EXACTLY what the "deal" has been with every single person who has complained about our search tool, they didn't take the time to READ THE BLOODY INSTRUCTIONS and LEARN how to use a boolean search protocol!

It's gone from funny (at first) to mildly annoying (a year ago) to down right exasperating (here lately).

I apologize if I came off a little harsh in my earlier response to "Mikesingh" but man I can't tell you how unbelievable it is to see obviously intelligent people complain about a robust, PERFECTLY FUNCTIONING TOOL, and point to the tool being faulty, when the ONLY problem is they don't know how to use it because they haven't DENIED IGNORANCE and read the instructions!

I am going to keep this thread handy!

HAPPY HOLIDAYS ONE AND ALL!

Springer...

The boolean search term and the google search each have their own unique advantages and disadvantages, and being aware of the best one to use for any given search will enhance your searching success enormously.

The boolean method is excellent if you are searching for a very specific parameter(s), such as a specific post, specific terms or terminology, a range of posts by a specific member, etc. However it's very 'binary' in nature - you either get exactly what you are after, or you get nothing. Recall incorrectly which term was used (say 'biology' as opposed to "biological') and you will likely get no result. The results are also limited to a maximum of 75 returns.

The google search is more suited to searches where you have a general or even vague idea of what you are after. It will return results exactly matching your query and also similar to it. However you might have to wade through pages and page of returns, or refine your search many times over to find what you are looking for.

The boolean search is a bolt action sniper rifle, the google search a wide scatter shotgun. Choose the appropriate weapon for the appropriate mission and you'll be a veteran searcher in no time.



[edit on 2006-12-24 by wecomeinpeace]

Originally posted by Springer
Chissler, I am NOT "picking on you" simply using your words as an example of what we've been "up against" for over two years now.

Thanks for the heads up. I would of had to drop the gloves and called you out. Actually, I probably would of done nothing but move onto the next thread cursing you under my breath.

Originally posted by wecomeinpeace
However it's very 'binary' in nature - you either get exactly what you are after, or you get nothing.

Which is probably the crux of the problem. I know I would get discouraged when I would search and search and search, to continuously be fed back the message that it found nothing. But as I have said before, I would always search for the title of a thread rather than the content itself. After reading one of Skeptic's post not too long ago, I had realized I would have a much easier time if I searched for the content.

Search has never failed me since.