super_kev

iTrader: (4)

Is there any way you can have the search engine format the results the same as the old one? It's highly distracting to have a big black bar between search results. It looks like the google results... each result takes up too much space and can't be browsed quickly and efficiently. I don't know how long the new style has been around, but the one I'm talking about was there about 4 months ago (haven't been around using the search for the past 2-3 months, so I'm guessing).

Also, the search engine is worthless. It used to work pretty well, and now it will individually pick up each word I enter instead of looking for all the words in a thread. For example, a search for "trans am bud" gives me over 300,000 results on 12K pages. I'm dead positive there are not 300K threads with trans am bud. Not only that, but it gives the results by relevance, and not posting date.

Please fix the results formatting to the old style, fix the search, and allow us to choose how we want the search results to be displayed in our profile (by relevance or posting date).

Thanks.

82 Iron Duke

iTrader: (21)

I totally agree, the new search function is terrible. If I do a search it is irrelevant to my specific search and I find myself going through many useless threads just because the function picked up on "ONE OR TWO WORDS" in my original search

JT

iTrader: (1)

Are you using a + sign in your keywords as the "hint" text suggests?

Using the + sign in front of keywords indicates that the word is required.
+trans +am +bud results in roughly 30 hits and the top results do in fact have bud and trans am in them.

There's a lot more "tips" that I would like to get posted, but I've not been given much official documents on such tips. It also is still in development.

Understand that the old search will not be coming back. Largely, it was inefficient causing problems on the hardware. That' aside the fact it had more limitations. It also had no "intelligence".

I understand there is probably negative impressions on the search engine, which largely may be due to it not working the way you were used to.

The best thing you can do is provide some constructive feedback so that it can be reviewed and possibly be implemented in the new search engine releases. This new search engine isn't simply being used on TGO, but is also being used on other vB based forums. There's a good chance this will be implemented in the future on other vB based forums. The search engine is still in "beta" and development.

PS, having the search sorting default to a preference based in your profile is an interesting idea - in my opinion.

Kevin91Z

iTrader: (1)

When I do a search there is a box in the upper left that you can switch between date and relevance.

super_kev

iTrader: (4)

What do you mean has no intelligence? Why should I have to put a + in front of every word? That's last decade, old-school internet search engine style. The old TGO search engine didn't require +'s. Just type it in and go. It knew that what you typed in was what you wanted. I didn't bother looking for a hint text, as I didn't think I needed to.

And if someone were searching for something, I would think that you'd want newest posts first, as you'd get the latest information, and not some 2001 thread when there are newer and better ways to do it located in a 2006 thread. Leave the popups there, but have the default sort to post date, not relevance.

I guess this can be viewed as ranting and raving, but why fix something when it wasn't completely broken? The new beta engine has a lot to be ironed out on in order to get it close to what the old one had to offer. I'd rather donate some money for some faster server hardware that can handle the old search engine vs. this new beta engine that needs some more work.

Also, can you change the colors to the old skin as well? The normal (home page) site is red while the forum part is mostly blue. The search box is a nasty bright blue, and is almost too much on the eyes for extended viewing. The old red was easier on the eyes.

Here's a start: change the ".thead" class background to something like #841010, font-size to 10px, the "td.thead, div.thead" padding to 2px, and ".vbmenu_option" background to #FFFFFF. That's all I had time to play with for now, and you'll have to tweak some other classes that I didn't chase down, but it's a start.

JT

iTrader: (1)

Just that, it did not have any intelligence. It did not attempt to rank the results based on several factors, like this new search engine does. There are many things calculated, such things as post length. What do you believe Google does? It has it's own intelligence and sorting system.

Search engines function differently. UBB has it's own tips/hints. Google has theirs, etc. They don't all work the same. For example, you see that Google does have their own tips system:
http://www.google.com/intl/en/help/refinesearch.html

I actually understand this concern. My concern is that there appears to be a whole host of tips/tricks that really haven't been distributed. It would be nice if I could get the information, and then create a page like Google's above.

Why is new information considered "better"? Old information can be just as good, and perhaps even more detailed. Again, Google does not default to dates, but it's own relevance system.

It was highly inefficient, especially when you have a big board. TGO is considered a big board, but obviously there are much bigger forums. The stock vB search engine is actually well known to be inefficient, and have it's own limitations. Upgrading hardware is normal, but isn't that sort of a bandaid here? The information is only going to continue to grow. You need to better manage it.

When we was using the prior search engine, you remember all the complaints like:

Or the complaints that the search engine was not showing old posts (some do want old posts). Those aren't as a much of an issue now, but was an issue with the stock vB system. The complaints about the search timeout/flood feature was particularly common. If that wasn't in place, it could bring the board down to it's knees. This search engine doesn't have that much of an impact as the stock vB based search engine did.

I'll look into that. Thanks for the suggestion. Sorry, I thought you was only talking about the search results. I'll look into the search result colors. Changing the css thead class will change numerous parts of the forum from black to red. Sorry, but I believe that isn't going to happen.

Understand that "we" (TGO) aren't exactly developing/writing this search engine. We don't exactly have direct control, only some influence through members who provide constructive criticism to improve the search engine. It's being written/maintained by a team of developers. It's also being used on other vB based websites besides TGO. Therefore, we can't just exactly make any changes that we me want, because the software is managed by a team and implemented on other vB based websites. I've been told they don't want a ton of variations out there, making it more difficult for them to support. Unfortunately, that's how it is.

Please understand it's still considered "beta" and only constructive criticism provided by members is the only way the search engine can improve.

So please, provide constructive criticism, and probably to the point with examples as necessary. I believe that will be the most effective way.

Thanks.

deadbird

I may look stupid here but, it's not the first time.

I personally do not care much for the results showing as individual posts within a thread. If the same work is used multiple times within a thread, it displays each posters reply as a search result.
Searching by topic limits your results as sometimes topics don't relate to the information posted within.

I liked how the old search showed only the thread topic as a result. But, maybe I'm just too blind to find that option ?
I know how to use boolen terms and such but, it seems to make the search more tedious to find the topic one is looking for. Even I have trouble finding some old posts I've made due to the way the search results post.
I'm going to stop here before I start making even less sense... lol

JT

iTrader: (1)

If the same word is found in multiple posts belonging to the same thread, it is returned. It becomes a question of how does the search know which post of that thread to return if multiple posts in that thread match your search criteria? You probably would want it to return all results and not censor for you. But I understand it becomes cluttered, too.

This isn't official, but I think the added display results might be coming (thread/post/intelligent). I believe intelligent is similar to what we have now - where the results show multiple posts in a thread (if there is multiple posts), with a small snapshot of the content for each post. So hopefully the next release will address and resolve this issue here.

82 Iron Duke

iTrader: (21)

You make total sense, trying to implement a new search feature to a bunch of old guys make no sense. Like stated before "IF IT ISN"T BROKE, DON'T FIX IT" I totally understand how search features work and I know I can add the +, " etc, but why should I have to do that The old search feature worked very well, so please bring it back or make the new one work the same way
JT we are all not up to date with computer knowledge as this is a third gen board 82-92

JT

iTrader: (1)

82 Iron Duke, the fact is, the old search was in fact broke. It will not be coming back. As well, as mentioned, the prior search engine was highly inefficient, it had no intelligence and was it restricted in numerous ways. This new search engine directly addresses and resolves many of those issues.

An example of the prior search engine's "inefficient" and "restricted" issues in the past, do you remember how often the comments below would be posted by members:

That was a common issue in the past that isn't really an issue at this time. The prior search engine had a search flood/timeout to prevent the search queries from bringing the forum down too badly, and thus affecting all other members who may be browsing and posting on the forums. I think that's an excellent example of of how the prior search engine was inefficient and restricted.

Next, another example of the prior search engine's inefficient and restricted issues was the minimum searchable character. You remember these types of "errors" that members would post:

Again, this new search engine address that. You can search for T5 today, when you couldn't before. You can also search more for code 34s, when it was difficult prior.

I'd say that is progress. The old search was truly broken, and was known to be inefficient, restricted, and unintelligent.

This is still in beta, and is just going to take some time to iron out all the details, bugs and improvements. Just stating you (not you specifically) don't like it, or it "sucks", doesn't really help anyone. Those comments in general are easy to be overlooked because they aren't helpful.

It will help the team by giving constructive feedback. But understand that the prior search was in fact broke, and overall, it was in need of being overhauled to not only help the forums run smoother, but to help members with their search inquiries.

TraviZ

iTrader: (2)

You keep telling us this is a beta search engine and still in production, then why, do you bring it to a public website when it is not yet ready for use?

JT

iTrader: (1)

I fully admit the new search engine has some tweaks and issues to work on, and that it's not 100% developed (not something new to software) but I think "not yet ready for usage" is a bit of a stretch.

A few complaints here doesn't necessarily represent the majority. I think it's common knowledge that people will readily complain more than praise.

Beta can only improve with user feedback, which would require some type of usage. Since when is beta never made public? Gmail anyone?

Not that it really matters, but it wasn't I that brought this search engine to TGO. IB, our parent owners, are running this search engine on this and their other forums.

Finally, just a reminder. This thread, or any thread, is not going to be used to simply criticize decisions made or simply flame the search engine. Simply put, it does not help. If you want to help, provide constructive input on the existing search in order to allow the team to improve the search engine. Such examples would be stating how you wish the search engine should function, any specific issues, ideas/tips to be implemented, etc.

Thanks.

super_kev

iTrader: (4)

You keep saying to give the team constructive input/criticism. But then you say that a thread is not going to be used to criticize the website. Which is it? Where are we supposed to put this input? Is there some contact information that we don't know about? This is a Problem/Help/Suggestions/Comments board... this is the place to post a thread like this. The new owners should read this board, just like the old ones.

And as for a few complaints, I suggest you take a closer look at the first two pages of this forum. As of now:

-This thread.

-Problems Using the Search Forum Engine-Search Feature Default Setting - Addresses an issue that I've brought up in this thread.

-Searching the classifieds-Search Not Working Correctly?-Is Anyone Working on the Search Function?-Search by Title Doesn't Work AnymoreSo, for a real complaint, how many people have to be on the list?

Just search for anything with more than one word, and you'll see that the search engine is WORTHLESS. Maybe I should buy this board and get a PHP nerd who can work on the search full-time. A beta search engine shouldn't be on a large board for more than a few months without some progress being made. There are guys out there who make a living out of code, and can code like nobody's business, so it isn't a matter of "Help, we don't know where to go next".

A good web designer also tests his designs on an internal server (with duplicate data if needed) before releasing to the public. They could easily dump the MySQL database onto a test server, and then mess around with the beta search on there until the bugs and features are added. You don't have to release it to the public when there are clearly some problems (multiple word search is worthless, relevance needs work, etc.).

A finally, I don't mean to flame you, but you also just seem to be dancing around saying that nothing we do will help, but yet this thread (and others) are exactly what a designer/programmer needs to read. If I were to read these threads, I'd definitely know something is wrong, and since most of us post clearly, know how to fix it. If it's a problem with the team not knowing what's going on, help boards are meant to be read and responded too. The new owners need to post so we know they are around. Boards like this can't function as well when you get to having corporate hierarchy and the company has to respond with PR releases. Look at NineBall (LS1Tech), Xoxide crew, and other board owners. I haven't seen anyone from IB post here.

JT

iTrader: (1)

I think it's pretty clear. "Bring back the old search", or "the search is useless" is not really constructive criticism. It doesn't help because it doesn't provide examples and input that can be used to address whatever issue may have sparked that comment. We need to know. The above statements have been posted more than once, which is why I keep having to repeat myself about the "constructive criticism".

Simply ranting about website policy and/or staff and their actions has never been allowed. I think it's covered in the guidelines.

By the way, the actual owners will likely not being posting. IB is a big corporation. You will hear from some of the staff in IB, as they do have some accounts and monitor the forum. However, overall, we are still to operate the way we did before. You have problems or concerns, you need to voice them to myself, or if appropriate, on the forum. We handle them from there. "We" still manage this community. "We" know what is best. IB, at present, does not want to change that. I report directly to the staff at IB on a regular basis.

That thread was responded to. Informing us that "irrelevant" items were brought to the top is odd, and incomplete. The search finds the exact words you had inputted. If there was an "irrelevant" post in the top, somewhere, that post had to contain a keyword that the member supplied in their search. If that isn't the case, we need to see an example. I have not seen such.

That thread also mentioned missing options, which was also noted. To date, it appears to me that some of those missing options (the person specifically stated the option to search by title), will be implemented. The ability to search by title is already there, by adding the prefix title: before the keyword. However, it appears to me that a recent release restores the simple selectable form field to simply select "search by title" - making it an easier to use option as it once had been.

That thread was also addressed. It's likely due to the "relevancy" system. Again, just because data is old, does that make it any less valuable or less useful? New information doesn't necessarily mean it's better, or more complete. The "relevancy" system takes several factors to build rank.

That thread seems to have been addressed. One issue was a reindex issue, which is why some threads weren't being returned in the search. That's not an abnormal issue. It also was fixed, as indicated.

Chris Holland is one of the developers with IB that is working on this search engine, FYI. You can see he responded in that thread.

That was an issue that taken place in between our transition and is not directly involved with this new search engine. So it's sort of relevant to this discussion as it doesn't currently apply here.

That's an old thread that isn't relevant to this search engine. That thread was *before* this new search engine was implemented. So it doesn't apply to this discussion, again.

That's another old thread that taken place with the prior search engine. So it's not really relevant to this discussion.

The search by title does work, but it's currently not advertised or easily selectable. I believe that will be changed in a future release.

Understand that many of your examples were taken from the prior search engine, or during our transition period. So they aren't exactly relevant to this discussion because they no longer apply, or have changed.

If your issue with those threads above (which date back to the summer) was that it appeared nothing was being done, or as if it wasn't know about, you would be incorrect. We were well aware of the issues and IB was in the process of getting a usable search engine back online after transferring TGO.

Yes, it took a long time. None of us deny that. Unfortunately, it (and a few other things) did happen. Trust me when I say I was in contact with IB regularly, and pressing the issues. They were aware that it was causing problems. They also had a few other websites in a similar position.

Since IB (our parent company) acquired TGO, and the vBulletin software, they inherited quite a bit of coders that do this for a living. There's actually a team working on this search engine.

This decision was made by the higher ups. I admit that the first release was premature, and it was full of bugs and issues. It wasn't exactly what we wanted to do, but didn't have much of a choice. TGO did not have a working search engine when IB acquired them. The search index was deleted. So the forum had to be reindexed. Not exactly a trivial matter on a large forum with as many posts as TGO has. And because the stock vB search engine is well known to be inefficient, with restrictions that I've gone over multiple times now, the team felt this was the best time and option to implement the beta search engine. You see ls1tech.com did the same thing.

I have not danced around the issue. Understand that we've had complaints about the search engine for years now. Ranging from timeout/flood protection being too long, minimum character limit being too long, not being intelligent, not finding any results, etc. The search engine has never been perfect.

IB, and the developers working on this search engine, have been addressing and resolving many of those things listed above. Is that not progress and improvement?! Have you not noticed the search flood/timeout issue is gone? That the minimum character limit is better? That you can search further back than the prior search engine allowed? That it's more efficient on the server, which in turn helps all members browsing and posting on the forum?

But when people simply post to request to bring back the old search engine, really, how does that help? How does saying the search engine is "worthless" without further details help? You noticed we got a few comments about members getting results that were "irrelevant", but did not elaborate. How do we address that without more information? That's where my comments about constructive criticism come to play, as there has been a few of those comments. They don't help the team further develop and improve the search engine that we have.

I admit you took the time to provide details and information, which was helpful and useful, which was something that wasn't happening. However, you dug up posts from the summer, which was either issues with the previous (proof of concept) search engine, or the search engine that Xoxide was using. Those issues are not really relevant or valid in this discussion.

Again, you're making it into a bigger deal than it really is because you dragged up posts from the summer, which was related to the past search engine, and one that was briefly used (proof of concept).

TGO's former owners (Xoxide crew) did not stay onboard when IB purchased TGO, unlike the former owners of Ls1tech. Probably because Xoxide is a business, and NineBall is part of the community. Big difference.

Chris Holland has responded in some of these search engine threads. He is with IB and manages the development team, with staff such as Brian (Brains) who is one of the main people developing this search engine software. Brains has also posted a few times here. So yes, they are present and have posted. They have been making releases as needed. You will also find that we are running the same search engine that ls1tech is using. We're just a few releases behind, I believe.

You will also notice there is a thread on ls1tech discussing the search engine and any issues. That thread is also being monitored and addressed. Issues presented there, because we're running the same search engine, will likely be implemented here. So there is multiple avenues at addressing problems and issues with this new search engine. Again, TGO is not the only forum running this beta search engine.

You don't need the "owners" present, and the "owners" likely won't be present. The "owners", to be blunt, have a corporation to manage. They have us, and IB staff, that see after parts of their business.

Understand that your concerns are being viewed, and if possible, will be resolved and addressed. If you have concerns/input/questions, they need to be addressed to me, and/or posted in the proper forum so that I can address them and take them from there. This is not much different than when Xoxide or Dirk owned TGO. They rarely were publicly involved. They relied on me, and the rest of the staff, to take care of issues, concerns and problems that were within our control, and anything beyond that would be distributed as needed to the proper department.

IB has informed us that they don't really want things to change, in regard to how TGO operates, just like the other forums they currently have. They want "us" to continue to manage the community as we have been.

I report to IB's staff on a regular basis. I've actually consumed a lot of my time doing so. We attempt to take care of the things that we can, and "manage" the community just as we did before. But if there is legitimate issues and concerns that we can't address, they are distributed to the proper department and staff.

Thanks.

PS: I think it's best that we do what ls1tech did and create an official Search Engine thread, with facts and issues, so that it's clearly easy to address and resolve. This thread is turning more into a "dispute", which is only going to distract from the search engine. I'm going to lock this thread, and any other new thread on the search engine, and combine them into the official search engine thread.