The new search system- problems, observations, issues

[jfulcer]

Hi Dan
The answer is as follows..

Google search does not search the posts but rather pages.
This means a lot of things:

BT - I offered the Google search as an addition - not as a 'final answer'. Your board search does not cover everything, and would NOT find this topic. Google MAY. There is a 99% chance yours will not - only if it's the original post.

I have to say, I was pleased with the results the google search came up with. Yes, they are not as 'relevant' but I would propose that your search is not relevant either as it is missing things.

1. Search google for : 'Random acts of kindness' in Disboards.. and what do you get? over 8000 results.
http://www.google.com/search?q=site...ient=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official
How come? Because this text appears in your signiture. Is that what you want to find when you search for threads? Usually not. You are looking for discussion. Not signitures and surrounding text.
Another example is - if you were looking for something like: first prize
The word "first" appears on every page in Disboards, because it is there in the link of "view first unread post". But when you want to find 'first prize' you want to find threads about that issue, not because the word happened to be on the page outside the discussion
BoardTracker on the other hand searches in the post only. Granted, at the moment only the first post, but most times it will be more accurate than the entire page anyway.

2. BoardTracker covers all the threads on a board.

Ahh, but it's not. While it covers the threads, it doesn't cover all the content on all the threads.

Indeed, missing content in the replies at the moment (which will be resolved in the future) but this is compared to google which covers about 25% of the threads (at most). This means that 3 out of 4 threads can not be found in google at all.

Yeah, but minus the ability to not find it via the built in search, isn't it a good idea to attempt to help someone?

If you search for magic kingdom chef, you might get results in google when someone asks about magic kingdom (with no relation to chef)

I suppose you could always search like this: +"Magic Kingdom" +chef
(http://www.google.com/search?source...&rlz=1B2GGGL_enUS176&q=+"Magic+Kingdom"++chef)

Oops!

Most times, not all, what people are looking for can be judged by the fiirst post. In that, BoardTracker is currently very effective.

It's 100% effective at searching the first post. But what if someone posted a message like this:

Hiya, I'm looking for pictures of the stuff and explosions in the sky in disneyworld at night, where can I find them?

Now, someone else comes along a month later and thinks to themselves, hey - I wish I could find pictures of Wishes at night at the Magic Kingdom. Even though dozens of DISers may have replied with a correct and lots of links to pictures, that post will never come up.

I know, my example is stupid. But in fact, I would venture to guess people come to this board looking for things about Disney they 'may have heard of' and not know how to spell/request what they are looking for right away. At least a reply search would give them other choices...

With the ability to search within a forum and search within a date range, BoardTracker is an effective tool, more than other search alternatives such as google and others.
As we acknowledged already, there is a value in including replies, and we will add this. Hopefully sooner than later. It requires planning and safe execution, and it will take some time, but we will get there.

I really want to see what kind of search you can come up with that is not going to drag your servers down like they did for the DISboards.

DISboards is one of MANY that you support. I'm not sure how you can provide that kind of ability for all of them. You server cost go up, your bandwidth costs go up, and I dunno if the boards will be willing to pay the extra $$$ it will cost.

I'm not even sure that a Google search appliance word work for something like this....

I actually think that everyone is hoping that the current fervor will die down and people will just 'live' with the current search. I think that may actually happen. But that's at the cost of people going to other Disney boards that they can search and that's sad.

 

[dpuck1998]

I actually think that everyone is hoping that the current fervor will die down and people will just 'live' with the current search. I think that may actually happen. But that's at the cost of people going to other Disney boards that they can search and that's sad.

Great Post

 

[travelbug]

When I click on "Advanced Search" and type in my own user name, sometimes it will show my past threads that I started. Other times (about 50% of the time), it will do nothing except go back to the original blank little search screen. Why is that??

While I'm really glad that the current search function does not bog down the server, I'm disappointed in the unreliability of the new search (see above paragraph) and how inefficient it is to use, regardless of speed.

Unless I'm missing a huge short cut somewhere, when I want to revisit old threads I posted to but did not start, I have to do all these steps:

1. Select Search Forums
2. Click on Advanced Search
3. Type in my own user name, and hope I get something (see above)
4. Click on one of the threads I started
5. Click on my user name when it shows up, and select "show additional posts"

The old search, while slower, took 2 steps:
1. Select Search Forums
2. Type in my user name to see ALL threads, whether I started them or just posted to them. No subscribing necessary.

Same difference when I want to view threads another user has posted to but not started.

Is this the end of the world? No. Am I impressed with the new search? No. Am I glad to have more speed but less useability? No. Useability means more to me than speed.

 

[mill4023]

The new search system is terrible.
What exactly was the problem with the old search?
I know it timed out if you did a regular search, but 99% of the time, people only want to search thread titles anyway, so why not bring back the old search and default it to titles only instead of titles and body.

 

[BoardTracker]

When I click on "Advanced Search" and type in my own user name, sometimes it will show my past threads that I started. Other times (about 50% of the time), it will do nothing except go back to the original blank little search screen. Why is that??

Can you send me the URL (via PM or here in this thread) of such a page they you say comes up empty 50% of the time?

 

[BoardTracker]

The new search system is terrible.
What exactly was the problem with the old search?
I know it timed out if you did a regular search, but 99% of the time, people only want to search thread titles anyway, so why not bring back the old search and default it to titles only instead of titles and body.

If all you need to do is search the titles of the threads, I fail to see how the new search is not perfect for you. Can you tell me what doesn't it do well for that need which you say is 99% of what searches are about?

 

[travelbug]

Can you send me the URL (via PM or here in this thread) of such a page they you say comes up empty 50% of the time?

Sure, let me see if I can explain this more clearly. When I click on "Advanced Search",
http://www.disboards.com/searchbt.php
and enter my user name in the user name box, sometimes it will successfully show my past threads. But other times, all it does is shrink back down to the very first search screen (without the search by user or search by forums section). I try that procedure repeatedly and it just repeatedly shrinks back to the original search screen. Then I may go back an hour later or whenever, and it will suddenly work, when I'm doing everything exactly the same.

I just tried the advanced search a minute ago, and it worked. But when I tried it repeatedly earlier today, it did the non-response thing.

Does that explain the problem more clearly? I hope you can help!

 

[BoardTracker]

Sure, let me see if I can explain this more clearly. When I click on "Advanced Search",
http://www.disboards.com/searchbt.php
and enter my user name in the user name box, sometimes it will successfully show my past threads. But other times, all it does is shrink back down to the very first search screen (without the search by user or search by forums section). I try that procedure repeatedly and it just repeatedly shrinks back to the original search screen. Then I may go back an hour later or whenever, and it will suddenly work, when I'm doing everything exactly the same.

I just tried the advanced search a minute ago, and it worked. But when I tried it repeatedly earlier today, it did the non-response thing.

Does that explain the problem more clearly? I hope you can help!

When you do that you should see the following URL at the top:http://www.disboards.com/searchbt.php?search=&order=1&user=travelbug&scope=4&cat=1&frm=-1

Do you always see that?

If so, do you then see a page without the dog showing in the result area filling in with color like an hourglass? (indicating the results are being loaded)?

It would help to know if you see the above URL in your browser's adress bar and if so, if you see the dog progress indicator or see just an empty page.

I tried the above URL several times and it worked consistently.
We would like to see why you have a problem and fix it.

 

[mill4023]

If all you need to do is search the titles of the threads, I fail to see how the new search is not perfect for you.

Ummmmm, maybe because it doesn't allow you to do that.
And because it doesn't allow you to search only for the exact word you typed in.

Do a search for the word "business".
What you get are threads with titles like:
"driving from resorts"
"ohanas for breakfast"
because one of the posts in the thread has the word "busy" in it.

 

[BoardTracker]

Ummmmm, maybe because it doesn't allow you to do that.
And because it doesn't allow you to search only for the exact word you typed in.

Do a search for the word "business".
What you get are threads with titles like:
"driving from resorts"
"ohanas for breakfast"
because one of the posts in the thread has the word "busy" in it.

The system uses word stemming to also find matches on all variations of the words in the search term which is (usually ) a very handy feature which most search engines use. For example with stemming if you search for 'park' the system will also search for parks, parking, parked etc.

In the case of 'business' it was also matching busy which was not too useful and we have updated the stemming db to fix that as you will see if you search for it now.

Also you can enclose search terms in quotes to search for more exact matches which in the case of "business" would have returned those threads specifically about business rather than busy or other variations.

 

[mill4023]

The system uses word stemming to also find matches on all variations of the words in the search term which is (usually ) a very handy feature which most search engines use. For example with stemming if you search for 'park' the system will also search for parks, parking, parked etc.

In the case of 'business' it was also matching busy which was not too useful and we have updated the stemming db to fix that as you will see if you search for it now.

Also you can enclose search terms in quotes to search for more exact matches which in the case of "business" would have returned those threads specifically about business rather than busy or other variations.

And now if I search for busy, I get results about business. Yes, you can fix that as well, but unless you are going to fix the db for EVERY single possible word, you are only fixing it for one particular search and not the millions of possible searches that could occur.

IMO, the search should default to only looking for the actual word entered and should give the option to search for related words. I shouldn't have to use quotes to tell it that I only want to search for what I said I wanted to search for.

And you still haven't addressed the issue of not being able to limit the search only to thread titles. The default should be to only look for the words in the thread title, then there should be an option to include entire posts.

The rest of my complaints are here:
http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=1234498

One more complaint: The person addressing our complaints has a vested interest in blowing off our complaints and convincing the board admins to continue to use this poorly designed product.

 

[BoardTracker]

And now if I search for busy, I get results about business. Yes, you can fix that as well, but unless you are going to fix the db for EVERY single possible word, you are only fixing it for one particular search and not the millions of possible searches that could occur.

Fixed that one as well.
Whatever needs fixing and we can fix, we will. I don't think it's a bad thing.

IMO, the search should default to only looking for the actual word entered and should give the option to search for related words. I shouldn't have to use quotes to tell it that I only want to search for what I said I wanted to search for.

Stemming exists allow people to find something they are looking for even if the exact use of the words are not what you typed. If you are looking for a - waterworld tours - it might be of great value to show results for -waterworld tour - as well.
If you want to use an exact word, you can use quotes around it.

And you still haven't addressed the issue of not being able to limit the search only to thread titles. The default should be to only look for the words in the thread title, then there should be an option to include entire posts.

I think we actually said it once or twice, Try to search for something and the first things you will see matches in the title.If you are looking for "Disneyland report" the first results you will get are those with such words in the title. It pretty much negates the need to allow title limit, since the relevancy of the search negates the need for such seperate function.

The rest of my complaints are here:
http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=1234498

One more complaint: The person addressing our complaints has a vested interest in blowing off our complaints and convincing the board admins to continue to use this poorly designed product.

Was your complaint about "Business" dealt with or blowen off? It wasn't blowen off, was it?
The people replying to your complaints are here to either explain things or correct things when it is possible.
It is not polite or encouraging to attack someone who is trying to help and make things better.

 

[Dan Murphy]

......Stemming exists allow people to find something they are looking for even if the exact use of the words are not what you typed. If you are looking for a - waterworld tours - it might be of great value to show results for -waterworld tour - as well.
If you want to use an exact word, you can use quotes around it......

Hi again, BT.

Can you address 'stemming' as it would apply to board users here. Under the old search, if I was looking for you, BoardTracker, but only knew you had the name Board and T something or other, I could put in boardt and check off that it was not a complete name. It would find ALL posts (not just OP's) of yours, plus any other board member whose name started with boardt. A nice, VERY useful feature, since the Members List has been unavailable for ages.

Also, any ETA for being able to search beyond OP's, on into replies also.


jfulcer, excellent observations and input, as always.

 

[WebmasterAlex]

One more complaint: The person addressing our complaints has a vested interest in blowing off our complaints and convincing the board admins to continue to use this poorly designed product.

Ok first off nobody is going to convince me of anything. The new search has certain advantages and disadvantages. Overall the complaint level has been fairly low to be honest.
A lot of the problems turned out to be people using search in ways it was never intended, for example people searching on their own posts instead of subscribing to threads, thats abusing our servers.
It has helped load problems quite a bit and the problems are getting sorted out slowly but surely.

 

[BoardTracker]

Hi again, BT.

Can you address 'stemming' as it would apply to board users here. Under the old search, if I was looking for you, BoardTracker, but only knew you had the name Board and T something or other, I could put in boardt and check off that it was not a complete name. It would find ALL posts (not just OP's) of yours, plus any other board member whose name started with boardt. A nice, VERY useful feature, since the Members List has been unavailable for ages.

Also, any ETA for being able to search beyond OP's, on into replies also.


jfulcer, excellent observations and input, as always.

Actually what stemming is has nothing to do with usernames. What you refer to is partial username match. We will look into adding it in the next search release. No ETA on that yet.

No ETA on the search in replies as well. It is being adressed and the solution requires very careful implementation.

 

[mill4023]

Was your complaint about "Business" dealt with or blowen off? It wasn't blowen off, was it?
The people replying to your complaints are here to either explain things or correct things when it is possible.
It is not polite or encouraging to attack someone who is trying to help and make things better.

First off, I'm sorry if I came across as attacking you. I didn't mean to. I was only pointing out the bias. Second, yes, in a way, my complaint about "Business" was blown off. Sure, you made changes for one search word, but my complaint was about the search technique in general. And to that, you just responded with the fact that I could quote the word. I already explained why I thought that was a poor solution.

I'll have to read my other thread and see if you addressed the other issues.

Like I said, I'm sorry if I came across as attacking you. I didn't mean to. As a professional software developer, I am just very sensitive to poor, unintuitive design. Things like typing a search term, clicking go, then having to type the search term again. Things like clicking search when you are in a specific forum and having to take the extra step of selecting the forum you want to search in. Things like clicking "Advanced Search" and having to click "Advanced Search" again on the next page.

I haven't spent enough time with it to evaluate the "relevancy" sorting, but I will say that I've never seen a relevancy ordering scheme that worked well.

 

[travelbug]

When you do that you should see the following URL at the top:http://www.disboards.com/searchbt.php?search=&order=1&user=travelbug&scope=4&cat=1&frm=-1

Do you always see that?

If so, do you then see a page without the dog showing in the result area filling in with color like an hourglass? (indicating the results are being loaded)?

It would help to know if you see the above URL in your browser's adress bar and if so, if you see the dog progress indicator or see just an empty page.

I tried the above URL several times and it worked consistently.
We would like to see why you have a problem and fix it.

If the search is working, I do see the URL you posted, as well as the dog and the expected list of threads. If it "decides" not to work, the only URL I ever see is the one I posted. There is no dog. When I type my user name in the box under "search by user", the only thing that happens is that the "search by user" and "search by forum" sections get hidden. I'm left with only the first basic search starting point.

There is no pattern or predictability to when the search works for me and when it doesn't. So far it's been about half and half. Thanks, Board Tracker, for trying to help me get this figured out.

 

[BoardTracker]

If the search is working, I do see the URL you posted, as well as the dog and the expected list of threads. If it "decides" not to work, the only URL I ever see is the one I posted. There is no dog. When I type my user name in the box under "search by user", the only thing that happens is that the "search by user" and "search by forum" sections get hidden. I'm left with only the first basic search starting point.

There is no pattern or predictability to when the search works for me and when it doesn't. So far it's been about half and half. Thanks, Board Tracker, for trying to help me get this figured out.

If the URL you get to is http://www.disboards.com/searchbt.php it means that there was no search requested yet. If you get there after you typed in some details in the search page and clicked "search" it is very strange. It might be a bug with the browser or something else, but it is not related to BoardTracker since up to this point as you describe, BoardTracker system is not yet involved. BoardTracker is only 'involved' where there are extra parameters after the searchbt.php.
If on the other hand you do get to the URL I described and don't see results (which is not the case as I understand from you), then it might indicate a problem.
To better identify the problem you are having we will have to trace back what you do to get to that "empty" URL, so we can try to recreate it in a test environment.

 

[BoardTracker]

First off, I'm sorry if I came across as attacking you. I didn't mean to. I was only pointing out the bias. Second, yes, in a way, my complaint about "Business" was blown off. Sure, you made changes for one search word, but my complaint was about the search technique in general. And to that, you just responded with the fact that I could quote the word. I already explained why I thought that was a poor solution.

I'll have to read my other thread and see if you addressed the other issues.

Like I said, I'm sorry if I came across as attacking you. I didn't mean to. As a professional software developer, I am just very sensitive to poor, unintuitive design. Things like typing a search term, clicking go, then having to type the search term again. Things like clicking search when you are in a specific forum and having to take the extra step of selecting the forum you want to search in. Things like clicking "Advanced Search" and having to click "Advanced Search" again on the next page.

I haven't spent enough time with it to evaluate the "relevancy" sorting, but I will say that I've never seen a relevancy ordering scheme that worked well.

The stemming is a common feature on the good search engines. A smart search engine uses stemming. Search engines that don't use stemming are considered "basic". Google uses stemming. Yahoo does, Ask does etc..
So it's not a design flaw but an advanced and needed feature in our opinion. It makes sense to show you a thread titled "Going to waterwold" when you searched for "go to waterworld" for example. So.. disabling stemming will degrade the value of BoardTracker, in our opinion. The idea of quotes to get a specific word is quite an easy one to use IF you don't get relevant results for your search with stemming. Indeed 'business' should have not forked to 'busy' etc.. and now it is fixed. IF now you still get irrelevant results, let us know and we will look into it.

As for the bias you referred to. It is not a bias when a representative of BoardTracker is trying to help or explain how things are with regards to BoardTracker. Is it?
When something is not right, BoardTracker representative does acknowledge that. When something needs fixing we say so and even more than say... do so.

 

[mill4023]

The stemming is a common feature on the good search engines. A smart search engine uses stemming. Search engines that don't use stemming are considered "basic". Google uses stemming. Yahoo does, Ask does etc..
So it's not a design flaw but an advanced and needed feature in our opinion. It makes sense to show you a thread titled "Going to waterwold" when you searched for "go to waterworld" for example. So.. disabling stemming will degrade the value of BoardTracker, in our opinion. The idea of quotes to get a specific word is quite an easy one to use IF you don't get relevant results for your search with stemming. Indeed 'business' should have not forked to 'busy' etc.. and now it is fixed. IF now you still get irrelevant results, let us know and we will look into it.

As for the bias you referred to. It is not a bias when a representative of BoardTracker is trying to help or explain how things are with regards to BoardTracker. Is it?
When something is not right, BoardTracker representative does acknowledge that. When something needs fixing we say so and even more than say... do so.

I appreciate your explanation. I am not disagreeing that stemming can be useful. But I do think that searching a forum is inherently different from searching the web. Even though using quotes to specify exact matches only is common in other search engines, I think having a radio button option to choose between "exact" and "similar" would be more user friendly.

I also still think that if you click the "search this forum" link while looking at a particular forum (Theme Parks and Attractions, for example), then the default behavior of the search should be to ONLY look in the Theme Parks and Attractions forum.

The process of clicking "search this forum", entering a word, and clicking "Go" is still not working correctly. It did finally work for me one time this morning, but every other time I try it, it just takes me to the default search page with nothing entered and no search results: http://www.disboards.com/searchbt.php

EDIT: OK, let me clarify. While looking at a specific forum area, there are two search links. One at the top that just says "search" and one right above the list of threads that says "search this forum". The "search" link does appear to work correctly and go to the search page with the search term already filled in and results displayed. But the "search this forum" is doing what I described above. It's just going to the generic search page without displaying results or having the search term entered already.

IMO, the "search" link should default to searching all forums, while the "search this forum" should default to searching only the specific forum you are looking at.