I_Like_Bike

Here is the problem, as I see it, every question that is worth asking has already been asked. If everyone just searched for the questions then a vast majority of the threads would be about nonsensical garbage, like "I dropped carbon."

Plus, lots of questions asked today would merit different answers then they did years ago or even months ago.

Also, lots of questions get asked at a bad time when few people are able to answer it so asking it again gives people who were not able to answer the first time a chance to.

Then add the fact that the search function is practically useless, you can remember the exact name of a past thread and it still will not find the thread.

The idea of a forum is to ask and answer questions. Sure you could spend hours searching for the answer to your question but when you can just ask a person who could easily tell you the answer why would you? This is the reason this forum is able to exist.

ok_commuter

^^^

I thought the thread was more about formulating questions thoughtfully than about making sure a given question has never been asked/answered before.

The search function is only useless if you don't go to the trouble to click "Advanced Search" and choose some options, most importantly: under Keywords, choose "Search Titles Only" in the dropdown rather than the default, "Search Entire Thread".

I hereby implore the mods/site admins to change the default to "Search Titles Only" as is appropriate for our posting frequency and volume.

Machka 

1) I agree that the search function isn't good now. We can't have a search function that depends on users searching by titles, we've got to go back to the way it was a couple months ago, where we could search the body of the messages.

2) It's good to step away from the computer ........ and hit the local library, or LBS, or local club members. It's also good to experiment for yourself. Those of us who have been around a while did it that way.

3) If we didn't answer the question the first time ... chances are there was a reason we didn't.

4) "when you can just ask a person who could easily tell you the answer" ... here's the answer: "It depends". OK. Start telling us your nice happy cycling stories now, your questions have all been answered.

Lazyrider

Well, I have no issue with much of your post. However, I find the highlighted part below a little incriminating and an admission of the type of attitude that permeates this forum. You preface the "RULES" for a good post with a statement that basically tries to justify snide and rude comments. My question is, why even bother taking the time to respond to a post that "annoys" you?

[QUOTE=StupidlyBrave;8794384]Don't give me any credit for this. I read this a long time ago and decided that, with careful editing and substitution, it would be a useful resource to the new user on this forum.

If you want to find the original source, google "Foonly Flurbamatic 2600" - Seriously.


Comments are appreciated. I agree with all of it, but I'd be happy to remove something if you can talk me into it.


Introduction


Despite this, the RC community has a reputation for meeting simple questions with what looks like hostility or arrogance. It sometimes looks like we're reflexively rude to newbies and the ignorant. I don't believe this is really true. We are hostile to people who seem to be unwilling to think or to do their own homework before asking questions. This isn't limited to "newbies".

If you find this attitude obnoxious, condescending, or arrogant, check your assumptions. We're not asking you to genuflect to us - in fact, most of us would love nothing more than to deal with you as an equal and welcome you into our culture, if you put in the effort required to make that possible. But it's simply not efficient for us to try to help people who are not willing to help themselves. It's OK to be ignorant; it's not OK to play stupid.
If you decide to come to us for help, you don't want to be one of the losers. You don't want to seem like one, either. The best way to get a rapid and responsive answer is to ask it like a person with smarts, confidence, and clues who just happens to need help on one particular problem.

AEO

well sorry for being sarcastic.

for your info, I did read it, I liked it. except when you look at the board, you have to wonder if ANYONE read the sticky tom posted about asking questions, especially the whole lot of mechanics questions that get asked in road.

khatfull

The page titles on this forum are the thread titles.

All your search woes can be eased at https://www.google.com

- for specific words in the page title: allintitle:your search terms space separated site:bikeforums.net
- for a specific phrase in the page title": allintitle:"your exact phrase" site:bikeforums.net

For instance, I want to find something out about Soul wheels:

allintitle: "soul wheels" site:bikeforums.net

I want to find out about Soul 3.0 wheels specifically:

allintitle: "soul 3.0" site:bikeforums.net

I want to expand the search to beyond just the thread titles:

soul "3.0" site:bikeforums.net (the " around the 3.0 helps zero in on that kind of phrase better I've found)

...or more specifically: "soul 3.0" site:bikeforums.net

Please run those searches and see how specific the returned results can be.

While the forum's search facility is, well, substandard, one can learn a lot using the "advanced search" at Google.

This has been your Google lesson for today.

ok_commuter

Ha, OK, mea culpa. I'm sensitive about my perspicacity, K?

I do agree the S/N ratio asymptotically approaches decrepitude, but the bar is set so low - it is the internet after all.

ok_commuter

This + many, and applicable to every forum/group.

Machka 

Yeah, but who wants to search thread titles???? The thread titles are almost entirely useless. It's the body of the thread where the actual information is.

akansaskid

So RC is a frat house, and all the newbs have to go through Rush Week, right?

kevin0cr1

Nice post. That being said, I started road biking a year ago and had a million questions. I've never asked one on the forum because I quickly saw that each of those million questions (okay, I'm exaggerating the number) had been answered multiple times already. Frankly, I can't imagine that a newbie could have a question that hasn't already been asked and answered multiple times on this forum.

ok_commuter

But if the search keywords are in the title, the likelihood of relevance is far higher.

An example from tonight: search for the following terms

Frame Pump

Using the search box default ("Search Entire Posts").

Then do the same by clicking on "Advanced Search" and then choosing "Search Titles Only" from the dropdown under Keywords.

If you're looking for information about topics involving common terms, you'll usually get better threads searching the titles.

I do agree that people who want to should be able to search message bodies ("entire posts"). I just don't see why we don't leave the default at "titles only" and require those wanting more granular searching to use "Advanced Search".

I'm almost certain that most people would be happier with the results they get from "titles only" searches. If that is true, it should be the default.

Opinions?

(Hijack Apologies, but this is on topic.)

Machka 

I always use Advanced Search .... is there another kind of search? And the stuff I want to search is hardly ever in the titles. It would be the extremely rare thread I could find by searching titles.

ok_commuter

But Machka, you are an advanced lifeform. The defaults should be set for us mortals. There are more of us.

Tulex

JFC, if I followed that set of directions, I wouldn't even need to come here.
Yeah, I know, breaks all your hearts.....
But really do you actually think there is a question that can't be answered anywhere but here?

Machka 

Certainly not a generic cycling-related question.

About the only types of questions that couldn't be answered anywhere but here are questions like .......... for example .......... "Machka, why did you replace the carbon forks on your Marinoni Ciclo with steel?" Unless, of course, you emailed me directly.

tim10025

This is a great post. Thanks for that. I wish I had read it earlier!

botto 

incorrect. again.

Jive Turkey

WOW, that's sounds like a bore.

Jive Turkey

Please explain Grumpy McGrumpster from Grumpsville.

Trsnrtr

I agree. If it's over 5 lines, I usually don't bother, unless it's in paragraphs of no more than 3 lines.

Padster

Tut tut. Poor syntax, highlighting the folly of commenting on such matters.

Machka 

And ... "What bike should I get?" is exciting??

urbanknight

Or a middle school!

Machka 

You know I've just graduated with my Bachelor of Education, right? (as of April 17th) ........ My area is Elementary Education, and I'd have to say that the Grade One kids I've taught often have much more well-thought-out and intelligent questions than what I've heard asked in University ... or likely what you're hearing in a middle school.