hhoope01

A lot of times I will post links to answers where I searched. And sometimes if I really think the OP should have searched, I'll post my search strings. Usually, it doesn't take a board over someone's head to get them to realize that searching could have found the answer. They just need a little help with figuring out what search strings to use. Most members will take the hint and start searching more, but for the few that don't? They probably aren't going to change even if you do berate them about searching. So the end result is condescending "search" posts usually don't help anyone, and are perceived as an attack quite often.

BTW, my one concern with the thread "consolidation" effort is that we end up with threads that have huge numbers of posts in them. Finding info in those can sometimes be very challenging as well. Sometimes, I like seeing a very specific question thread with an answer post as it is easier for others in the future to find/see that answer. I can see where someone may have a "Perkology" question and even if they see the almost 300 post thread, may be tempted to start another thread to ask a specific question. (Not saying that is the right thing to do, just saying I can understand the temptation.)

ed1

It can make for a lot of reading, but there's also more likelihood of finding your answer in with more posts. There's also search within a thread option which can pin down the specific posts that have your question/answer.

baccarat_king

I often feel the same way w/ search. Now, I do an advanced search limited to titles. If I can't find what I want with a title search (after a few searches), I then post the question in a new thread. Unfortunately, this requires posters to use proper titles for their posts (which, I think is quite important anyway). One drawback, IMO, is that you can't search on less than 4 characters --- so, when I try to do a title restrict search for LGW, I'm told that it is NOT enough characters. Of course, in FlyerTalk land, a title with LGW (or any 3 letter airport code) can be very relevant.

james318

I think the NWA forum is one of the nicest here... Visit the AA forum for some snarky, rude people.

There really is only one person in the NWA forum that is rude... I guess living in the land of 10,000 upgrades might do that to a person though...

NWA_5479

Thank you RC. This is one thing that bothers me about FT. I have been here for a while, and while I may not have the highest post count, I feel as though I spend a lot of time here. I am embarrassed when other members treat eachother disrespectfully because of an old topic. I consider myself pretty knowledgable, but I still learn things on here all the time. Just because one person knows something doesn't mean everyone does.

By the way, can anyone tell me if my MSP-SFO upgrade will clear for this Silver Elite?

avidflyer

Not a prayer...

davetravels

I'd like to say, again, IMO that the problem isn't necessarily that people aren't searching first, but that some members seem to be self-appointed forum policemen and have treated non-searchers worse than some people who have committed murder!

Randy Petersen

A couple things:
- Thank you all for a very civil and I think helpful discussion on this topic. It does give me great hope that FlyerTalk can and does help people with their travel information.
- Tonight we are shutting down FT for a few hours as we transition to our newest server setup. It's a very expensive move (and if anyone knows what top end F5 load balancers cost, then you know what i mean) and designed to be just one of several additional changes to make search work better for our members. As noted, we are somewhat limited because of the popularity of terms such as BIS, etc. but there is hope as newer technology becomes available for speeding up but yet not limiting the types of searches we make available on FT. We've always limited the 4-digit search because we wanted the best possible speed for members to use FT. With the upcoming changes we think there will be a chance to have everything you have asked for. But as noted, even the best search may well overwhelm some users and thus, questions will be asked, again and again.

Thanks for understanding and most of all, thanks for at least having these discussions in an open and civil manner.

Cheers,
Randy

mdb

If it makes you feel any better - you'll probably be sitting next to a bunch of PEs that didn't get the upgrade too....

jimc_usa

This is great news (or as we say in the NW forum) exciting news.

peachfront

I aboslutely agree with this. These huge consolidated threads are usually close to useless, unless you have hours to spend skimming through all of the irrelevant debate, back chat, and out-dated information in the thread. Short, punchy threads that have been posted on topics arising in the last 2 to 3 weeks are by far superior. Unfortunately, the flyertalk culture is biased toward these lengthy, impossible to read consolidated threads. And then people wonder why people don't or can't search! A thread with 100 posts is as bad as no thread -- especially if 70 of the posts were created in the last century. If we must consolidate threads, why not do as other boards do and "archive" older threads (say older than a year or older than 2 years) so that people can't keep reviving and extending ancient and already unwieldy threads.

Yes, an unpopular view here. And yet it seems to work on almost every other board I participate in. On some of those boards, I can actually do a search, locate a thread that is not out-dated, and glory be, read that entire thread.

Consolidation may make "house-keeping" easier for the mods. But the point of flyertalk is not "house-keeping." It's to share information.

It isn't a feature, it really is a bug -- and it has stuck in my craw for one for a long, long time.

I know it won't happen, but honestly I wish the powers that be would re-think this policy of consolidation. It's absolutely terrible for anyone actually seeking a specific piece of information. I've read some very long "stickies" that are absolutely packed with out-dated information and missing links. If the "stickies" aren't going to be maintained, they shouldn't be "sticky" or at least they should be short so that the hapless victim can get to the punchline sooner.

mdb

You mean Exciting Enhancement

mdb

I agree.

ed1

See my post #13 for two ways around the four character minimum.

Proper titles are a huge help when searching for threads instead of posts. This one has a lot of search related stuff that nobody just reading the thread title could know.

baccarat_king

^ Thanks!