Re: Admin's Notes Re List Conduct, Please Read #adminnotice


You yourself said in an earlier message that you have trouble searching. It may be because you are making searches far too complicated. You can disagree and perhaps you are disaggreeing because searching may have been more complicated in the nineties. But I'm telling you from years of experience with searching well, that your ideas of search are completely wrong. I don't know what you mean about quotation marks being a default in Google. they aren't. Searches are not case sensative by default. You may be able to make a search case sensative, I've never checked but as I said they aren't by default. and it usually doesn't matter. Search engines these days, the sophisticated ones are smart enough to find something without customizing searches with such things as quotation marks and boolean operators. There are rare times when I do a search and I get lots of poor matches when I may use quotation marks. But most of the time, I can search for the name of a book, for example no quotes no anything other than the name and if I want to see reviews, I add the word review or reviews and I almost always get good results. Try it and see. Just write what you want to search for and see what happens.


-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Grossoehme
Sent: Monday, January 11, 2021 3:05 PM
Subject: Re: [nvda] Admin's Notes Re List Conduct, Please Read

Good Afternoon;: I will disagree with you 100% here on your search
skills. The quotation mark is an automatic with a lot of search
engines. You must like Googgle following you to use that search
engine. The next thing is the question of what are you going to do it
your information is case sensitive and you don't use upper and lower
case to find the information. There are times that you could be
searching for hours if you don't use all the search tools.


On 1/4/2021 6:34 PM, Gene wrote:
I don't know if this message is getting too detailed and most of it should be on the chat list but it may help some or many people.

Regarding well crafted searches, I'm not sure how much of this applied years ago such as in about 2000, but Google is a consumer product and is now smart enough to give good results even if ;people don't know what used to be taught for defining a search in detail. I never use boolean operators and I almost never use quotation marks. I just type in a few words what I want to know but people can use full sentences if they wish. I might search for something like Happiness IS a Warm Gun lyrics or Happiness Is a Warm Gun Youtube. I might search for something like list of keyboard commands for Word or Microsoft Word. My point is that defining a search most of the time is a matter of typing what you want to know, being aware that if you don't define something enough, you might have to try again with another word or two added or changed to get good results. For example, if I type a name of a song and it’s a common phrase I might see used elsewhere, I might have to do another search such as name of song then type the name of the group.

It might be easier to get people who have the Internet skills to search to do so if it were made clear that searching usually doesn't involve the more complex methods they may have heard discussed.

As far as the discussion of people doing searches, one approach might be to distinguish between the two kinds of people who don't search. there are people who ask lots of
questions over time who have good computer skills and whom I would have no objection to being expected to do searches. They either already can or could do good searches generally with a little instruction.

Then there are those who ask questions off and on and who don't have good computer skills. Those people I would probably let ask questions and not make an issue of searching.

-----Original Message----- From: Gene
Sent: Monday, January 04, 2021 6:52 PM
Subject: Re: [nvda] Admin's Notes Re List Conduct, Please Read

I'm not sure why you didn't find the message. I tried searching for its
beginning one or two ways but then I thought of moving by separator and I
found the start of it immediately below the separator. . I tried other
ways and I got close to the message as well or right to the message text
when I repeated the skip blocs of links command three times.

I wonder if there is something about your browser configuration that is
perhaps interfering with you seeing it?

-----Original Message----- From: Orlando Enrique Fiol via
Sent: Monday, January 04, 2021 6:32 PM
Subject: Re: [nvda] Admin's Notes Re List Conduct, Please Read

At 06:31 PM 1/4/2021, Brian Vogel wrote:
First, direct link to the opening message:
Activating that link takes me to a page telling me everything I do
and don't want to know about the original message except the message
itself, with no keyboard-friendly way of navigating to subsequent
messages in the thread. Most email clients have key commands for
previous and next message; if they don't, and have no way to
configure them, you can guess where I chuck them.


Join to automatically receive all group messages.