Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

[Feedback] You can't search this forum.

Options
  • 11-02-2010 2:05pm
    #1
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭


    Moderators can decide where they want to put this, but as it's a specific forum issue relating specifically to posters here, I decided to start the thread here.

    Normal users cannot search this forum. It seems to be a throw back to the days when this was the men's health forum. If you're a moderator or a subscriber you probably never noticed, but the average user is blocked. So the question is, should search continue to be disabled on this forum?

    My view: No, there seems to be little discussion of sensitive issues on this forum and it's purpose has shifted completely since it's foundation. Similar forums just as the ladies lounge are open.

    discuss:


«1

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Dr Galen
    Registered Users Posts: 7,373 ✭✭✭Dr Galen


    your right Boston, I hadn't noticed this before.

    I'm in agreement with you. I can think of no reason why search should be disabled either


  • Options
    #3
    smashey
    Registered Users Posts: 21,676 ✭✭✭✭smashey


    Thanks for pointing this out Boston. I'll find out if there is a reason for it.


  • Options
    #4
    Fajitas!
    Registered Users Posts: 16,624 ✭✭✭✭Fajitas!


    I think it's similar enough to PI being unsearchable - It means if someone goes into your user history, they can't go searching any problems or health queries you have, or any answers to queries other folk have.

    Personally, I like the fact that what's posted in here won't turn up in a search, not that I'd be planning on posting anything I wouldn't like searched.


  • Options
    #5
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    Is that because the majority of postings seem to be lowbrow?


  • Options
    #6
    Dr Galen
    Registered Users Posts: 7,373 ✭✭✭Dr Galen


    Boston wrote: »
    Is that because the majority of postings seem to be lowbrow?

    are you talking about in general or specifically with reference to Fajitas :D


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Nevyn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 43,045 ✭✭✭✭Nevyn


    This forum started out as a mens health forum and to respect that and to make posters feel more comfortable posting searching was turned off the same way as it is in PI/RI.


  • Options
    #8
    Fajitas!
    Registered Users Posts: 16,624 ✭✭✭✭Fajitas!


    Boston wrote: »
    Is that because the majority of postings seem to be lowbrow?

    Do you actually think the majority of the postings on the forum are lowbrow, or are you trying to prove a point?

    Either ways, I'd disagree.


  • Options
    #9
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    Thaedydal wrote: »
    This forum started out as a mens health forum and to respect that and to make posters feel more comfortable posting searching was turned off the same way as it is in PI/RI.
    Boston wrote: »
    It seems to be a throw back to the days when this was the men's health forum.

    I acknowledge that point. However, the role of this forum has complete changed since it was created. At the time of posting the is only (perhaps two depending on definition) threads in the most recent 40 dealing with a health issue, and that thread was locked. There is an inconsistency here between this forum and other boards forum.

    That is perfectly fine, I've argued for a long time that homogeneity is not a requirement. But the lack of search is a feature/bug of this forum, and a discussion of it's merits is appropriate. Perhaps more users would post about health issue if they knew they had this protection.
    Fajitas! wrote: »
    Do you actually think the majority of the postings on the forum are lowbrow, or are you trying to prove a point?

    Either ways, I'd disagree.

    What point might I be trying to prove? There is nothing inherently wrong with lowbrow. It would be hypocritical of me to chastise people for posting in such a manor while admitting I passively lurk on their forum. In my extremely subjective view, I've found the majority of posting I've read on this forum to be lowbrow when seen in light of my overall boards.ie user experience. Maybe your time is spent on After hours and TCN and as such you feel the postings here represent the height of intellectual discourse.


  • Options
    #10
    trout
    Registered Users Posts: 9,925 ✭✭✭trout


    Leaving the highbrow / lowbrow comments aside ... it would be nice if this thread could stay on topic ... the topic being should search be enabled or not.

    My own view is to leave it off & update the charter to remind interested parties that search is disabled here & anonymous posting is supported.


  • Options
    #11
    star-pants
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,429 ✭✭✭✭star-pants


    My 2c - I think not being able to search it is a good thing, it provides a safe area for guys to post about problems/dilemmas etc, looking for male responses (usually) and don't want a song and dance about it. They might not want to post in PI because they would prefer a male POV and they might feel more comfortable in the male community here.

    So for those reasons I think it's good it's left as unsearchable.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    star-pants wrote: »
    My 2c - I think not being able to search it is a good thing, it provides a safe area for guys to post about problems/dilemmas etc, looking for male responses (usually) and don't want a song and dance about it. They might not want to post in PI because they would prefer a male POV and they might feel more comfortable in the male community here.

    Fair enough. Now the issue is why arn't men availing of this feature. It is due to a lack of awareness?

    I'd suggest that it is. A solution might be for the moderators of this forum to add a note to the availability of anonymous and search free posting to their signatures. Stickies do not work.


  • Options
    #13
    trout
    Registered Users Posts: 9,925 ✭✭✭trout


    Anonymous posting is mentioned in the charter, and gets aired occasionally through relevant threads.

    Not everyone views or reads sigs ... I don't think they show up on mobile either.

    I'm happy to amend the charter, as suggested.


  • Options
    #14
    star-pants
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,429 ✭✭✭✭star-pants


    Boston wrote: »
    Fair enough. Now the issue is why arn't men availing of this feature. It is due to a lack of awareness?

    I'd suggest that it is. A solution might be for the moderators of this forum to add a note to the availability of anonymous and search free posting to their signatures. Stickies do not work.

    Well I don't know about you, but I've seen a few threads where it would be male specific looking for advice, there's one on the front page right now about a gentlemans ... manhood.
    Or I've seen the guys asking each other about what they think of a relationship situation etc. They want a male perspective, not a PI/RI one.

    As regarding adding that to their sigs, it's up to them really. And, if people don't read stickies, or announcements in big shiny letters, why would the read sigs? A lot of people have sigs turned off, especially new posters (I can't recall if the default is off, but I've seen people posting in feedback/newbies etc asking why can't they see sigs)
    edit - darn you trouty you got there before me :P


  • Options
    #15
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    trout wrote: »
    Anonymous posting is mentioned in the charter, and gets aired occasionally through relevant threads.

    Not everyone views or reads sigs ... I don't think they show up on mobile either.

    I'm happy to amend the charter, as suggested.


    The charter thread has 1,845 since the creation of the forum, how many people will read you change? Changing the charter will have no appreciable effect. It seems you want to keep the feature but have no real interest in informing people about it.
    star-pants wrote: »
    Well I don't know about you, but I've seen a few threads where it would be male specific looking for advice, there's one on the front page right now about a gentlemans ... manhood.
    Or I've seen the guys asking each other about what they think of a relationship situation etc. They want a male perspective, not a PI/RI one.

    How does disable search and annoymous posting equate to "a male perspective". The two arn't linked.


  • Options
    #16
    star-pants
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,429 ✭✭✭✭star-pants


    Boston wrote: »
    The charter thread has 1,845 since the creation of the forum, how many people will read you change? Changing the charter will have no appreciable effect. It seems you want to keep the feature but have no real interest in informing people about it.

    How does disable search and annoymous posting equate to "a male perspective". The two arn't linked.

    To be fair Boston what do you want them to do? Reply to every new poster and say 'just FYI we have anon posting and no searching in here' ?
    You said yourself no one reads stickies, we know very few read announcements, and the same could be said for sigs.

    I didn't say it equated to a 'male perspective' - what I said was, PI/RI has anon posting etc, people are aware of that, but some chose not to avail of it because they didn't want the generic PI/RI responses, which would be of mixed gender responses. They wanted a more male perspective, so post in tGC, knowing it's safe to do so. So knowing that they can have essentially their own PI in tGC is what might make them post here instead of there.


  • Options
    #17
    trout
    Registered Users Posts: 9,925 ✭✭✭trout


    Boston wrote: »
    The charter thread has 1,845 since the creation of the forum, how many people will read you change? Changing the charter will have no appreciable effect. It seems you want to keep the feature but have no real interest in informing people about it.

    Other than signatures, what would you suggest?


  • Options
    #18
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    trout wrote: »
    Other than signatures, what would you suggest?

    When a topic of a sensitive nature arises, reply to it reminding people the anonymous posting is allowed and that any post on this forum will not show up when a users post history is searched. Couple that with an announcement and charter update. Shouldn't take long for the message to get across. Some of this forum's moderators where not aware of these features and I'm sure of a large number of your regulars weren't either.
    star-pants wrote: »
    To be fair Boston what do you want them to do? Reply to every new poster and say 'just FYI we have anon posting and no searching in here' ?
    You said yourself no one reads stickies, we know very few read announcements, and the same could be said for sigs.

    Use it or loose it would be my argument. If nobody is availing of these features, then the default option should be not to restrict other users.
    star-pants wrote: »
    I didn't say it equated to a 'male perspective' - what I said was, PI/RI has anon posting etc, people are aware of that, but some chose not to avail of it because they didn't want the generic PI/RI responses, which would be of mixed gender responses. They wanted a more male perspective, so post in tGC, knowing it's safe to do so. So knowing that they can have essentially their own PI in tGC is what might make them post here instead of there.

    But they don't post here. So obviously there's a failing somewhere.


  • Options
    #19
    star-pants
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,429 ✭✭✭✭star-pants


    Boston wrote: »

    But they don't post here. So obviously there's a failing somewhere.

    They do... they might not post unreg as they might feel a bit more secure here.


  • Options
    #20
    trout
    Registered Users Posts: 9,925 ✭✭✭trout


    Boston wrote: »
    Use it or loose it would be my argument. If nobody is availing of these features, then the default option should be not to restrict other users.

    Anonymous posting is not widely used, but it has been used in the past.

    How does search / no search in this forum restrict other users?

    To put the question another way, if search was enabled ... what would that do for you?


  • Options
    #21
    Keano
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 12,803 Mod ✭✭✭✭Keano


    Only a small complaint from me...

    "What do you wear on a night out?" threads shouldn't be kicked out to the fashion forum since most guys wouldn't typically go there.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    star-pants wrote: »
    They do... they might not post unreg as they might feel a bit more secure here.

    Find 4 recent threads with anonymous posting.
    trout wrote: »
    Anonymous posting is not widely used, but it has been used in the past.

    Exactly, in the past.
    trout wrote: »
    How does search / no search in this forum restrict other users?

    To put the question another way, if search was enabled ... what would that do for you?

    What do you use search for? The default option is to have it enabled, ergo, a good reason is needed for having it disabled. For what reason would you disable it and not inform people?


  • Options
    #23
    trout
    Registered Users Posts: 9,925 ✭✭✭trout


    Boston wrote: »
    What do you use search for? The default option is to have it enabled, ergo, a good reason is needed for having it disabled. For what reason would you disable it and not inform people?

    The default option in other forums may be to have search enabled ... not the the case here. I accept this is a legacy of the initial forum/stance ... and maybe it should be reviewed.

    Can you expand on why you want search turned on? Is "you can search other forums" a compelling argument?


  • Options
    #24
    star-pants
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,429 ✭✭✭✭star-pants


    Boston wrote: »
    Find 4 recent threads with anonymous posting.

    I don't think you read my post - I said people do post in tGC instead of PI because they want a male perspective and they want safety, they might feel safe enough posting in tGC unreg (I believe my words were, they might not post unreg as they might feel a bit more secure here).


  • Options
    #25
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    trout wrote: »
    Can you expand on why you want search turned on? Is "you can search other forums" a compelling argument?

    Compelling or not, can you offer a counter one. I didn't say I wanted it enabled merely that it should only be disabled for a good reason.


  • Options
    #26
    star-pants
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,429 ✭✭✭✭star-pants


    Boston wrote: »
    Find 4 recent threads with anonymous posting.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055808746

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055825263

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055818262

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055825329


  • Options
    #27
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    Ok, so one in the last month. Do you feel that is a lot?


  • Options
    #28
    star-pants
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,429 ✭✭✭✭star-pants


    Boston wrote: »
    Ok, so one in the last month. Do you feel that is a lot?

    ... are you not reading the dates on these?
    3 are from February


  • Options
    #29
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    Apparently it isn't march. So, do you feel there is sufficent use of these features to merit their contining existance.


  • Options
    #30
    star-pants
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,429 ✭✭✭✭star-pants


    Boston wrote: »
    Apparently it isn't march. So, do you feel there is sufficent use of these features to merit their contining existance.

    Even if it was March now they would have been from 'last month'.
    Anyway, well 3 in the space of 9 days says to me people are using it. tGC doesn't have a huge level of traffic so there's not going to be a lot a day.
    It also shows that people are obviously aware of unreg posting if they're using it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    Obviously, orly? Were you aware of the search restriction.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement