Topics

moderated "Find or Create a Group" page does not do what it looks like it was designed to do #bug


Marv Waschke
 

On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 04:15 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
I've revamped the groups search page a bit
It now works as I would expect it to. Excellent. Appreciate it.

However, I think you could improve the interaction with the row of letters across the bottom. That was a nice feature when the group count was in the 100s but not so useful when result sets are in the thousands.

I suggest treating selecting a letter as an additional filter on the initial letter of the group name "anded" with whatever filters have been applied to the display result set. Also retain the sort order of the set prior to "anding" in the initial letter filter. You could also add 0-9 buttons for group names that start with a numeral.
Best, Marv


 

It’s not a matter of negating terms (which would be more complicated than what I’m suggesting anyway). Sometimes the search term is included in the group description to say “ we do not discuss [search term] in this group.” I gave several examples in those prior threads. And sometimes it’s thrown in at the end of a long laundry list of possible but rarely discussed topics (I gave examples of those, too). Sometimes, you just want to see groups about golf. Or whatever. There’s no problem with this feature as long as it’s just an option at the time of the search.

On Nov 25, 2020, at 6:20 AM, J_Catlady via groups.io <j.olivia.catlady=gmail.com@groups.io> wrote:

I’m suggesting it as an option at the time of the search. That’s all. Because in some cases, including the description is much too wide a tent.
On Nov 25, 2020, at 5:23 AM, Drew <pubx1@af2z.net> wrote:

I think a group name search is too discriminatory. Many groups have names that don't describe topics vital to their interest but who would otherwise be fully relevant to the search.

Filtering of non-wanted words can be handled now with negated search terms. Compare the search results for:

cars american

and

cars -american

Of course, this would negatively (no pun) impact those groups who use the "we do not discuss X" type of language. They could be the victim of the double negative (i.e., "no american" in the description and "-american" in the search). But that has to be a pretty tiny subset of groups.



Drew



On 11/24/20 22:44, J_Catlady wrote:
It remains to be seen how and whether, within the filter, to prioritize or only include groups with the search term in the group name as opposed to just the group description. I suggest a checkbox option along the lines of "include only groups with the search term in the group name" for people who only want that. Otherwise you also get groups whose descriptions say things like "we do NOT discuss [search term] here so if you're interested in that, go elsewhere" and groups who deal only very tangentially with the term.
--
J
/Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones./
/My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu
//
/





--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu




--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


 

I’m suggesting it as an option at the time of the search. That’s all. Because in some cases, including the description is much too wide a tent.

On Nov 25, 2020, at 5:23 AM, Drew <pubx1@af2z.net> wrote:

I think a group name search is too discriminatory. Many groups have names that don't describe topics vital to their interest but who would otherwise be fully relevant to the search.

Filtering of non-wanted words can be handled now with negated search terms. Compare the search results for:

cars american

and

cars -american

Of course, this would negatively (no pun) impact those groups who use the "we do not discuss X" type of language. They could be the victim of the double negative (i.e., "no american" in the description and "-american" in the search). But that has to be a pretty tiny subset of groups.



Drew



On 11/24/20 22:44, J_Catlady wrote:
It remains to be seen how and whether, within the filter, to prioritize or only include groups with the search term in the group name as opposed to just the group description. I suggest a checkbox option along the lines of "include only groups with the search term in the group name" for people who only want that. Otherwise you also get groups whose descriptions say things like "we do NOT discuss [search term] here so if you're interested in that, go elsewhere" and groups who deal only very tangentially with the term.
--
J
/Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones./
/My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu
//
/




--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


Drew
 

I think a group name search is too discriminatory. Many groups have names that don't describe topics vital to their interest but who would otherwise be fully relevant to the search.

Filtering of non-wanted words can be handled now with negated search terms. Compare the search results for:

cars american

and

cars -american

Of course, this would negatively (no pun) impact those groups who use the "we do not discuss X" type of language. They could be the victim of the double negative (i.e., "no american" in the description and "-american" in the search). But that has to be a pretty tiny subset of groups.



Drew

On 11/24/20 22:44, J_Catlady wrote:
It remains to be seen how and whether, within the filter, to prioritize or only include groups with the search term in the group name as opposed to just the group description. I suggest a checkbox option along the lines of "include only groups with the search term in the group name" for people who only want that. Otherwise you also get groups whose descriptions say things like "we do NOT discuss [search term] here so if you're interested in that, go elsewhere" and groups who deal only very tangentially with the term.
--
J
/Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones./
/My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu
//
/


 

It remains to be seen how and whether, within the filter, to prioritize or only include groups with the search term in the group name as opposed to just the group description. I suggest a checkbox option along the lines of "include only groups with the search term in the group name" for people who only want that. Otherwise you also get groups whose descriptions say things like "we do NOT discuss [search term] here so if you're interested in that, go elsewhere" and groups who deal only very tangentially with the term.
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


Glenn Glazer
 

On Tue, 11/24 16:15, Mark Fletcher wrote:
Hello,

I've revamped the groups search page a bit (it was one of the first pages I created when developing the site almost 7 years ago...). I am now properly propagating any search term when you change filtering. Please let me know what you think.

Thanks,
Mark

Looks good to me.

Best,

Glenn

--
PG&E Delenda Est


Bob Bellizzi
 

I think there's a similar issue on the Database search, Duane.  I noticed it some time ago but I get engrossed in self inflicted errors on my data, website, quickbooks and on and on.
--

Bob Bellizzi


Duane
 

On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 06:15 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
Please let me know what you think.
One thing I noticed is that the only way to get back to the "main" page is to click on Find or Create a Group at the top.  Clearing the search box won't do it.

Otherwise, it looks dandy after a quick look.

Thanks,
Duane


 

Yay!

On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 04:15 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
it was one of the first pages I created when developing the site almost 7 years ago
That's what I was kind of suspecting. :)
 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


 

Hello,

I've revamped the groups search page a bit (it was one of the first pages I created when developing the site almost 7 years ago...). I am now properly propagating any search term when you change filtering. Please let me know what you think.

Thanks,
Mark


 

That would be nice as well.


On Nov 22, 2020, at 10:07 AM, Duane <txpigeon@...> wrote:

On Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 11:56 AM, Duane wrote:
Works fine on the other pages.
I'd also change the hard-coded size="20" parameter to size="0" so the results display (mostly) uses the members setting for items per page (infinite scroll only shows 100 per page.)

Duane

--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


Duane
 

On Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 11:56 AM, Duane wrote:
Works fine on the other pages.
I'd also change the hard-coded size="20" parameter to size="0" so the results display (mostly) uses the members setting for items per page (infinite scroll only shows 100 per page.)

Duane


 

Right! It’s as you posted before, with those clever URLs. That’s all Mark would have to do. My guess is he may just have forgotten to plug that part in. 

As for the reverse alpha sort, since he sorts by forward alpha in “by name” when the object is the set of all groups (I.e. no search term entered), it should be cake to do the same on the subset of groups returned by the search.


On Nov 22, 2020, at 9:56 AM, Duane <txpigeon@...> wrote:

On Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 09:35 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
It looks like the intention of this page was to allow *filtering* by a search term and *display* the results by one of the four criteria. But it in fact allows the sort only by name.
I did a little digging.  It looks like everything could be made to almost work as you suggest by including the p=xxxxx parameter for the page that you're on (Popular, Active, Newest, By Name) as part of the Search box script.  The only glitch is that the By Name page still returns things as reverse ASCII sort.  Works fine on the other pages.

Duane

--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


Duane
 

On Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 09:35 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
It looks like the intention of this page was to allow *filtering* by a search term and *display* the results by one of the four criteria. But it in fact allows the sort only by name.
I did a little digging.  It looks like everything could be made to almost work as you suggest by including the p=xxxxx parameter for the page that you're on (Popular, Active, Newest, By Name) as part of the Search box script.  The only glitch is that the By Name page still returns things as reverse ASCII sort.  Works fine on the other pages.

Duane


 

After all the discussion in two other threads about the problems with the "by name" search, I have come to conclusion that the intention of the search page was good, and consisted of precisely what I'd been asking for in the other threads, namely: seach on a term and display the results via one of the criteria on the left ("most popular," "most active," "newest," "by name"). However, it simply contains a major bug. The bug is that you can only search on a term if you display by name. If you try to enter a search term and use either of the other three sort orders, your choice jumps back down to "by name."

It looks like the intention of this page was to allow *filtering* by a search term and *display* the results by one of the four criteria. But it in fact allows the sort only by name.

Within the "by name" sort, the smaller bug is that the display is isorted by reverse alpha on the name instead of alpha and distinguishes between lowercase vs. capitalized names. It should sort by alpha (as it does when no search term is entered) and ignore upper vs lowercase.

If these bugs (the big one and the smaller one) are fixed, all the discussion the other two threads about about the search problems
https://beta.groups.io/g/main/topic/what_is_the_algorithm_for_the/78334723?p=,,,100,0,0,0::recentpostdate%2Fsticky,,,100,2,0,78334723 and
https://beta.groups.io/g/main/topic/how_to_make_your_group/78422972?p=,,,100,0,0,0::recentpostdate%2Fsticky,,,100,2,0,78422972
goes away except for the suggestion to prioritize groups with the search term in the actual name rather than just the description. That part would be a #suggestion.
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu