For anyone searching for SUMO support threads using Google or other search engines *, "unsolved" questions will no longer be indexed as of October 16, 2014. See:
Bug 1081933 - Only show questions with solutions to search engines
This change was apparently made to increase visitor satisfaction, since that bug was blocking bug 1074872. As far as I can tell, you'll still be able to find older unsolved threads using search engines like google but nothing created since Oct 16th.
If I'm not mistaken, a normal SUMO search will still find threads with no solutions, as long as they're not archived (i.e., are less than 180 days old) and have "helpful" votes. To find archived threads, or unsolved threads with no helpful votes, you'll have to use Advanced Search now. Past discussion on this topic: /forums/contributors/709852Has the Search function been changed, poor results
[*] EDIT: Does this only affect Google search? See bug 1081933 #c1
This is only for Google search results. We just need to add a meta noindex tag to all questions without a solution.
For anyone searching for SUMO support threads using Google <s>or other search engines</s> *, "unsolved" questions will no longer be indexed as of October 16, 2014. See:
*[https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1081933 Bug 1081933] - Only show questions with solutions to search engines
This change was apparently made to increase visitor satisfaction, since that bug was blocking [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1074872 bug 1074872]. As far as I can tell, you'll still be able to find older unsolved threads using <s>search engines like</s> google but nothing created since Oct 16th.
If I'm not mistaken, a normal SUMO search will still find threads with no solutions, as long as they're not archived (i.e., are less than 180 days old) and have "helpful" votes. To find archived threads, or unsolved threads with no helpful votes, you'll have to use Advanced Search now. Past discussion on this topic: [/forums/contributors/709852] ''Has the Search function been changed, poor results''
[*] EDIT: Does this only affect Google search? See [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1081933#c1 bug 1081933 #c1]
-----
Ricky Rosario [:rrosario, :r1cky] 2014-10-14 09:52:53 PDT
This is only for Google search results. We just need to add a meta noindex tag to all questions without a solution.
yes, definitely increase visitor satisfaction if exist only "chosen solutions", but the helpful votes is something like "chosen solution" without the mark (of chosen solution), except some answers, i agree.
How about to see questions with "helpful votes" over 10 or 15 in the same question and in the same answer to search engines. ?
If we have an option to vote, i vote positive for that.
Or maybe the moderators must seek ALL the "helpful votes" which is "solution chosen" in replies and marked them, if not marked. (yes i known it is already one of the work for moderators). More difficult that one.
thank you
Hello,
now this is good or bad ?
yes, definitely increase visitor satisfaction if exist only "chosen solutions", but the helpful votes is something like "chosen solution" without the mark (of chosen solution), except some answers, i agree.
How about to see questions with "helpful votes" over 10 or 15 in the same question and in the same answer to search engines. ?
If we have an option to vote, i vote positive for that.
Or maybe the moderators must seek ALL the "helpful votes" which is "solution chosen" in replies and marked them, if not marked. (yes i known it is already one of the work for moderators). More difficult that one.
thank you
Hey ideato, yeah, I agree we'll have to experiment with what we show Google and how that affects the satisfaction levels. We'll monitor that over the next few weeks and adjust that.
Alice, this will affect all search engines, and all questions, not just the new ones.
Hey ideato, yeah, I agree we'll have to experiment with what we show Google and how that affects the satisfaction levels. We'll monitor that over the next few weeks and adjust that.
Alice, this will affect all search engines, and all questions, not just the new ones.
kadir, can we implement AND separators in our advanced search? until now i have often reverted to using google for that purpose, but when it indexes only a fraction of questions from now on that won't work anymore...
kadir, can we implement AND separators in our advanced search? until now i have often reverted to using google for that purpose, but when it indexes only a fraction of questions from now on that won't work anymore...
Alice, this will affect <snip> all questions, not just the new ones.
You said "will" so does that mean the change is coming but just hasn't taken effect yet for old questions? I'm asking because a google search on
black screen site:support.mozilla.org brings up both solved and unsolved threads, but not this unsolved thread posted Oct 16th which I found with a normal SUMO search (it has a "helpful" reply):
''Kadir Topal [[#post-62483|said]]''
<blockquote>
Alice, this will affect <snip> all questions, not just the new ones.
</blockquote>
You said "will" so does that mean the change is coming but just hasn't taken effect yet for old questions? I'm asking because [http://www.google.com/search?&q=black+screen+site%3Asupport.mozilla.org a google search] on
'''black screen site:support.mozilla''.''org''' brings up both solved and unsolved threads, but not this unsolved thread posted Oct 16th which I found with a normal SUMO search (it has a "helpful" reply):
*[/questions/1026088] fire fox opens as a black screen
I assume that a side effect of this will be that Google won't index spam threads that haven't be marked as spam yet, so that would be good.
We could still use a better and more intelligent search behavior as it is impossible to search for a specific phrase by using a quoted string or search for (common) words with a dash or hyphen in it like @-moz-document style rules or CSS property values like word-wrap or white-space.
If quotes would be implemented to allow to search for phrases like "word-wrap" with the hyphen in it then this would help greatly.
I assume that a side effect of this will be that Google won't index spam threads that haven't be marked as spam yet, so that would be good.
We could still use a better and more intelligent search behavior as it is impossible to search for a specific phrase by using a quoted string or search for (common) words with a dash or hyphen in it like @-moz-document style rules or CSS property values like word-wrap or white-space.
If quotes would be implemented to allow to search for phrases like "word-wrap" with the hyphen in it then this would help greatly.
I assume that a side effect of this will be that Google won't index spam threads that haven't be marked as spam yet, so that would be good.
I was thinking that too.
Google search can be useful in trying to find threads on something when Search may not seem to come up with it. It does not help that Search give results as first post instead of the actual post in thread.
''cor-el [[#post-62496|said]]''
<blockquote>
I assume that a side effect of this will be that Google won't index spam threads that haven't be marked as spam yet, so that would be good.</blockquote>
I was thinking that too.
Google search can be useful in trying to find threads on something when Search may not seem to come up with it. It does not help that Search give results as first post instead of the actual post in thread.
I can see that the change helps users in some situations, however it is not a change I like for two reasons
Breaking issues may not be solved and so are harder to find.
Sumo's own search is very bad at mining the forum for information. The advanced search has no boolean options, quoted string search (or search by title); it is none intuitive and not advanced.
Until now contributors could at least use Google to do a search for harder to find information, now we can not.
(My thread on the subject with comparative examples)
I can see that the change helps users in some situations, however it is not a change I like for two reasons
# Breaking issues may not be solved and so are harder to find.
# Sumo's own search is very bad at mining the forum for information. The advanced search has no boolean options, quoted string search (or search by title); it is none intuitive and not advanced.
Until now contributors could at least use Google to do a search for harder to find information, now we can not.
(My thread on the subject with comparative [/forums/contributors/709852?last=56344#post-56717 examples])
Ugh, I use Google many times a day to find threads I posted in during the past month, and now I have a clearer idea of why it's been getting worse and worse. Meanwhile, the forum search hasn't improved much. What am I going to do...
Ugh, I use Google many times a day to find threads I posted in during the past month, and now I have a clearer idea of why it's been getting worse and worse. Meanwhile, the forum search hasn't improved much. What am I going to do...
Yes, the change makes sense from a user/visitor point of view. It also seems to have helped with the spam issue, since this was implemented. Unfortunately it's not such a great change from a contributor point of view. It looks like the immediate next thing to do is to work on improving SUMO search and Advanced Search in order to make up for those who were using Google search to find their old threads or difficult issues.
Forum search is already a priority on the forum improvements list (line 45 in the user stories doc, it is marked as a P2 on the priorities list). The dev team had a rough time estimating how big this is so maybe we should spec it out more. From what I hear use cases are:
find archived articles
search by title
boolean search
finding previously given answers in the support forum (either to find what solved the issue back then, to gather more insight into an issue or to recycle one of my own answers) using searchterm + person who created/participated in a thread + timeframe of a reply/thread.
search using "OR", "AND", "NOT" and quotes for exact string match.
If we make a very clear list of use cases I can push this up on the priority list so that the dev team can give some proper estimates.
Yes, the change makes sense from a user/visitor point of view. It also seems to have helped with the spam issue, since this was implemented. Unfortunately it's not such a great change from a contributor point of view. It looks like the immediate next thing to do is to work on improving SUMO search and Advanced Search in order to make up for those who were using Google search to find their old threads or difficult issues.
Forum search is already a priority on the forum improvements list (line 45 in the [https://docs.google.com/a/mozilla.com/spreadsheets/d/1CRY62Pqthfc3SVBObQ-mJre1Hdx998IX-XMDhqCjkF4/edit#gid=0 user stories doc], it is marked as a P2 on the priorities list). The dev team had a rough time estimating how big this is so maybe we should spec it out more. From what I hear use cases are:
* find archived articles
* search by title
* boolean search
*finding previously given answers in the support forum (either to find what solved the issue back then, to gather more insight into an issue or to recycle one of my own answers) using searchterm + person who created/participated in a thread + timeframe of a reply/thread.
*search using "OR", "AND", "NOT" and quotes for exact string match.
If we make a very clear list of use cases I can push this up on the priority list so that the dev team can give some proper estimates.
It also seems to have helped with the spam issue, since this was implemented.
Like cor-el said above, I assume that a side effect of this will be that Google won't index spam threads that haven't be marked as spam yet, so that would be good.
Any actual decrease in spam since bug 1081933 landed Oct 16th is probably justcould also be a coincidence.
By the way, I'm having a hard time now finding any unsolved threads when I do a google search, although I did find some from before Oct 16, when I googled before. So, Kadir was right when he said, this will affect all search engines, and all questions, not just the new ones.
''Madasan [[#post-62609|said]]''
<blockquote> It also seems to have helped with the spam issue, since this was implemented.
</blockquote>
Like cor-el [/forums/contributors/710806?#post-62496 said above], ''I assume that a side effect of this will be that Google won't index spam threads that haven't be marked as spam yet, so that would be good.''
Any actual decrease in spam since [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1081933 bug 1081933] landed Oct 16th <s>is probably just</s><sub>could also be</sub> a coincidence.
By the way, I'm having a hard time now finding any unsolved threads when I do a google search, although I did find some from before Oct 16, when I googled before. So, Kadir was right when [/forums/contributors/710806?#post-62483 he said], ''this will affect all search engines, and all questions, not just the new ones.''
By the way, I'm having a hard time now finding any unsolved threads when I do a google search
You are not the only one ! :( :(
''AliceWyman [[#post-62613|said]]''
<blockquote>
By the way, I'm having a hard time now finding any unsolved threads when I do a google search
</blockquote>
You are not the only one ! :( :(
Anyone willing to disregard the NOINDEX directive can spider the site and build their own search engine... The trick is making it useful.
When I test Zoom Search from Wrensoft, I am limited because it can't build product categories from page content, and while it's nice to have implicit AND, there's no way to combine AND and OR in one query. The spider also doesn't recognize dates in the content.
I'll PM you the URL to give a flavor. It's also not updating in real time; the indexes are generated locally and then uploaded by FTP (although this can in theory be scheduled to run without my intervention).
Anyone willing to disregard the NOINDEX directive can spider the site and build their own search engine... The trick is making it useful.
When I test Zoom Search from Wrensoft, I am limited because it can't build product categories from page content, and while it's nice to have implicit AND, there's no way to combine AND and OR in one query. The spider also doesn't recognize dates in the content.
I'll PM you the URL to give a flavor. It's also not updating in real time; the indexes are generated locally and then uploaded by FTP (although this can in theory be scheduled to run without my intervention).
Anyone willing to disregard the NOINDEX directive can spider the site and build their own search engine... The trick is making it useful.
When I test Zoom Search from Wrensoft, I am limited because it can't build product categories from page content, and while it's nice to have implicit AND, there's no way to combine AND and OR in one query. The spider also doesn't recognize dates in the content.
I'll PM you the URL to give a flavor. It's also not updating in real time; the indexes are generated locally and then uploaded by FTP (although this can in theory be scheduled to run without my intervention).
Excellent, thank you Jefferson. :-)
''jscher2000 [[#post-62668|said]]''
<blockquote>
Anyone willing to disregard the NOINDEX directive can spider the site and build their own search engine... The trick is making it useful.
When I test Zoom Search from Wrensoft, I am limited because it can't build product categories from page content, and while it's nice to have implicit AND, there's no way to combine AND and OR in one query. The spider also doesn't recognize dates in the content.
I'll PM you the URL to give a flavor. It's also not updating in real time; the indexes are generated locally and then uploaded by FTP (although this can in theory be scheduled to run without my intervention).
</blockquote>
Excellent, thank you Jefferson. :-)
I was hoping that SUMO admin would reverse their decision to limit search engine results to solved threads, if enough top contributors complained that it affected their ability to research questions. Oh, well. I suppose a workaround is also good ... if it works !
I was hoping that SUMO admin would reverse their decision to limit search engine results to solved threads, if enough top contributors complained that it affected their ability to research questions. Oh, well. I suppose a workaround is also good ... if it works !
I was hoping that SUMO admin would reverse their decision to limit search engine results to solved threads, if enough top contributors complained that it affected their ability to research questions. Oh, well. I suppose a workaround is also good ... if it works !
Alice is correct, YES, i want also to reverse the decision, i'm voting positive for that and please, i'm calling all contributors to post here their own comments for this issue. Jefferson workaround is helpful, if you have nothing, it is better to have something.
thank you
''AliceWyman [[#post-62671|said]]''
<blockquote>
I was hoping that SUMO admin would reverse their decision to limit search engine results to solved threads, if enough top contributors complained that it affected their ability to research questions. Oh, well. I suppose a workaround is also good ... if it works !
</blockquote>
Alice is correct, YES, i want also to '''reverse the decision''', i'm voting positive for that and please, i'm '''calling all contributors to post here their own comments for this issue'''. Jefferson workaround is helpful, if you have nothing, it is better to have something.
thank you
I can't replicate Google, and it's wasteful to have yet another spider hitting the database.
One problem I have with using Zoom search is that the forum does not return a Last Modified header. Ideally, it would match the date of the last post or perhaps the last edit to a post. Without that, Zoom cannot index incrementally and would need to check every thread ever posted up to the licensed maximum (currently 50; for $100 it would be 50,000). That's a lot of bandwidth...
I can't replicate Google, and it's wasteful to have yet another spider hitting the database.
One problem I have with using Zoom search is that the forum does not return a Last Modified header. Ideally, it would match the date of the last post or perhaps the last edit to a post. Without that, Zoom cannot index incrementally and would need to check every thread ever posted up to the licensed maximum (currently 50; for $100 it would be 50,000). That's a lot of bandwidth...
I was hoping that SUMO admin would reverse their decision to limit search engine results to solved threads, if enough top contributors complained that it affected their ability to research questions.
I think we need more data. The opinions are right now split, some people think it is a good change, some people disagree. I think the big question that we need to answer during the following few weeks is "did this change make a big impact on visitor satisfaction?". We are talking about hundreds of thousands of people who browse our forums every day. We have 3.5 million visitors on the forums every month. 3.5 million people who, when searching for an answer, find spam threads, unsolved threads etc. Also, all the amazing work that contributors are doing on the forums, brilliant replies that solved problems and made people happy were getting buried by the search engine under a bunch of spam and duplicate threads. That's not right.
If the visitor impact that we see is very low at the expense of contributor not being able to do their research properly then, yes, we should look for other solutions. But we need to experiment first and see what works and what doesn't. Ideato also had some good suggestions on how to adjust the indexing by including helpful votes for example, so these are things that we can look at.
I think the biggest problem right now lies with the advanced search. We should not be dependent on Google search to do our research.
So the question that we should try to answer is What are the things that are not covered by the sumo advanced search at this moment ? and How can we improve advanced search so that we don't depend on Google all the time?. I have started to put some things together in a previous post but I will also need your help.
I'll reach out to you individually in order to bring more people into the discussion as this is important and we should work on this together.
''AliceWyman [[#post-62671|said]]''
<blockquote>
I was hoping that SUMO admin would reverse their decision to limit search engine results to solved threads, if enough top contributors complained that it affected their ability to research questions.
</blockquote>
I think we need more data. The opinions are right now split, some people think it is a good change, some people disagree. I think the big question that we need to answer during the following few weeks is "did this change make a big impact on visitor satisfaction?". We are talking about hundreds of thousands of people who browse our forums every day. We have '''3.5 million visitors on the forums''' every month. 3.5 million people who, when searching for an answer, find spam threads, unsolved threads etc. Also, all the amazing work that contributors are doing on the forums, brilliant replies that solved problems and made people happy were getting buried by the search engine under a bunch of spam and duplicate threads. That's not right.
If the visitor impact that we see is very low at the expense of contributor not being able to do their research properly then, yes, we should look for other solutions. But we need to experiment first and see what works and what doesn't. Ideato also had some good suggestions on how to adjust the indexing by including helpful votes for example, so these are things that we can look at.
I think the biggest problem right now lies with the advanced search. We should not be dependent on Google search to do our research.
So the question that we should try to answer is ''What are the things that are not covered by the sumo advanced search at this moment ?'' and ''How can we improve advanced search so that we don't depend on Google all the time?''. I have started to put some things together in a previous post but I will also need your help.
I'll reach out to you individually in order to bring more people into the discussion as this is important and we should work on this together.
