Topic

[Rick Palechuk]

Ian brings up a good point in his fluted topic. When subject entries are not a searchable name or word, a good idea or fix gets left out of the search. So when entering your topic in the subject box don't put in "it don't work".

[DanEpps]

I haven’t quite got it figured out just yet Rick, but I think I’m getting close. My best guess is that it is one of these two explanations:

1. This applies to everyone else but not to me.

2. If things are hard for me to find then they should be hard for everyone else to find.

[Damon Nabors]

Dan, well said!

[Rick Palechuk]

Sorry Dan, I was having a brain fart. I was thinking the search engine was for subject entry, not for keyword. The old age must be setting in. Or the fumes. Sorry folks.

[DanEpps]

Sorry Dan, I was having a brain fart. I was thinking the search engine was for subject entry, not for keyword. The old age must be setting in. Or the fumes. Sorry folks.

No you weren't...topics should ALWAYS be descriptive of the contents of the post. When you do a search it shows some of the matching text and the thread topic. Sometimes the text is not long enough to see whether it really pertains to your question. If the topic is descriptive it would help rule in/rule out particular threads returned by the search.

Many folks just don't bother to do a search at all and some don't even read current threads before posting. For these folks, having descriptive topics "don't apply to me". For the others, the "if it was hard for me to find..." rule applies so they won't use descriptive topics to help other forum members.

Maybe forum posts should be moderated and rejected if the topic is something like "Help", "It don't work", "Question" or anything not descriptive of the contents of the thread.

A computer forum I frequent has a current thread where the manufacturer of a circuit board has been patiently trying to get a poster to tell them what is wrong with the board. All the poster will say is "it don't work." They have told the poster several times that without a description of the problem, they can't fix it but the poster just keeps saying "it don't work."

It is the same here--if the problem is not accurately described, then no one can't help to resolve it and the description starts with the subject of the post.

[Iain Hall]

My problem with the search is really quite simple I will give you an example I searched flutes it came up with what looked like a promising link "Hey Gary, here's a link to some previous discussions on the topic .
viewtopic.php?t=2887"
Clicked on the link only to be directed to what I will refer to as the deadend page if you follow the link you will see what I mean. I am not computer iliterate but I am along ways from most of you here. I do agree that anyone who doesen't even try to search is not keeping with the spirit of this site yet searching should not feel like an afternoon in the corn maze.




I do now understand what my father felt like when he opened the new VCR.

[Rick Palechuk]

Hey Iain, I see what you mean. If you go to the right of the page and click on the topic, that should lead you through the thread.

[DanEpps]

Hey Iain, I see what you mean. If you go to the right of the page and click on the topic, that should lead you through the thread.

Even better, right-click on it and choose "Open in new tab." That way your original search list stays open and you can open as many topics as you want then check them to see if they're relevant.

But if folks would use descriptive subject lines it would be far easier to see in the search results list whether a particular thread were relevant without having to open "dead-end" threads.

[DanEpps]

One other problem I just ran into while searching for threads about flutes...links in threads that existed before Dean moved the forum to the new server are now dead. To find those threads you will have to search deeper. If the post notes who posted the linked article, do an advanced search and add the poster's name to the search terms to narrow the results list.