The search engine on this forum is complete rubbish

[QUOTE=Dave Homewood;2055026]Thanks Martin, that’s the one. Why the heck could I not get that? It’s a piece of carp (or something spelled very similarly).[/QUOTE

Mags ‘on’….fuel ‘on’….”contact”….splutter.splutter.splutt..splutt.zzzzzzz…nothing………..’finger trouble??’……na …too rich..!!!

Since forum 2.0 was launched cant say I have had any issues with it.

How many are clicking advanced search and then doing a more refined trawl – say on thread title?

As with most things, the results are only as good as what you put in!

Jon

I am not sure who you are asking.

As pointed out above the volunteer mods have no input to, and in my case little understanding of, the workings of forum software.

In this case the search functioned perfectly well for D1566 to locate the required thread and I have since duplicated that result successfully

By all means e-mail the Webbie, but it would be best to have an example where it doesn’t work.

Moggy

I find it a minor irritation, too, when trying to locate an old (even fairly recent) thread.

I was under the impression that, when the Forum was changed a short while back to another provider (if that’s the correct term), that problems like this would be a thing of the past.

Surely it’s not rocket science to make an operating system, that otherwise operates very well, which has an effective search facility – or is it?

Anon.

Haven’t we been down this “Search engine is rubbish” road before? And it is certainly nothing over which the mods have any control or say. Complaints to the Webbie I would have thought. It is erratic but if it doesn’t work Google hasn’t failed me yet.

I think you mods should take it back to the manufacturer and get your money back.

Dave,

I very much doubt that the mods have any of ‘their’ money invested in this board to get back. And I also doubt that they had any voice in the original choice of software provider made by Key either.

I agree – it works when it feels like it! I usually use Google if I get stuck.

I agree, it is somewhat erratic. Sometimes it seems to work okay, other times it definitely doesn’t pick up on obvious keywords. Searching on Google does seem to produce more consistent results.

Pete

Well it might just interest you that I used Google first with numerous key word combinations because I knew the search engine here is complete ****, and when that did not bring up the result I tried several alternative searches using the forum’s own hopeless system, and nothing remotely related came up apart from one other shorter thread that was not the one I was looking for. It’s really a ridiculous search engine, it seems to ignore boulian logic, and the results are scattergun with no chronological nor seemingly relevant order. I have tried before to use it to find a thread from a few days before, using five or six keywords, and it still fails. I usually don’t bother using it these days. I won’t be bothering again either. I think you mods should take it back to the manufacturer and get your money back.

Why the heck could I not get that?

Only you can answer that. But if everyone else can turn up the result you are looking for it is fairly obvious ….

Or as Twotter suggests, try the Google alternative.

Moggy

The method outlined here http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?120168-An-alternative-way-to-search-the-forum normally generates superior results!

Thanks Martin, that’s the one. Why the heck could I not get that? It’s a piece of carp (or something spelled very similarly).

Its not great but I typed in ‘stanford tuck’ and got this;
http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?96652-Introduction-(Robert-Stanford-Tuck-Feature-Film)&highlight=stanford+tuck
on the second page of results.