Get Help

Duplicating - Include Searches Words

Duplicating - Include Searches Words

Loads and loads of ideas are duplicated, many of which come from new members proposing the same question, some are posted even after a search.My idea is that whenever an idea is duplicated by a duplicator, they include the words that they searched the community with.


Why is this helpful?:


1) It will show others the kinds of words searched. 


2) It will help the OP to learn how to search (if they are new.)


3) It will show the sort of searches for different ideas.  


For the little effort it takes to implement, it will have a big impact on the ideas section, perhaps reducing the number of duplicates as members will learn to search differently. 


Oh and for the record I searched: Automatic duplication, detection, duplicators include searched words. etc. 


Thanks Smiley Happy


@cim thanks for clearing that up Smiley Wink 



I still dont see how it could be more effort, they will have to write the message telling everyone that its a duplicate so it'll hardly be any more work.


ryaneberry wrote:


Andy0 I also think this but how often do members not search? We all know the classic ideas that come around all the time, they obviously haven't searched for it, in an ideal world they will but you can't make them also it isn't anymore work done by the duplicator because they have to search for the idea so all the extra work is a bit more typing 

I think the problem is more that someone didn't search, rather than they couldfn't think of which words to use.


For instance, how many ideas have you posted which have been marked as duplicates?

That's because the search function is sh1te

It is not faulty. I've lost count of the number of times someone said they searched and didn't find anything, yet if one does the search oneself there are tens of results, or even a hundred or more.

Well I think you've just proven the most important case for this idea then. It allows people to learn

It isn't all that much an idea for giffgaff to consider anyway. The volunteers marking threads as duplicate ideas have their own discretion about any comment they add, and they do already sometimes say please use the search function.

It's true about mentioning the search function but what use is it if you don't know what to search?

ryaneberry wrote:

It's true about mentioning the search function but what use is it if you don't know what to search? 

Sorry, I really don't understand the question. What do you mean, people don't know what to search for? 


The search function finds words, so search for words which are relevant to the subject. You might as well say people can't think of a thread title to describe their idea. But that would be implausible, of course they can, and as a first approximation that mght also be a clue to what to search for, then if it doesn't narrow it down try again by adding a word or two

Yep you're correct, well you'd be surprised the amount of times members search for words used in the title that don't provide any results related to the idea

I think this thread is picking up on a really important point, but i also think (with the greatest of respect) that you're both slightly missing why duplication happens... Language is the important thing here...


 I just searched for 'copied ideas' - a pretty simple way of thinking about what this thread is really all about. It's also a much simpler and more understandable phrase than 'duplicating -include searches words'.  Anyway, on searching for 'copied ideas' there was no link to this thread as these words, despite being highly relevant, haven't been used (of course searching this now will link to this and so close this gap...).


But the point is, unless you correctly second guess the language of other users, new duplicates will continue to occur. 


While the title of this idea might be inclusive of root words used in your own searches,  it didn't include the root words of my search despite the same intention.


Simple language is obviously best, but people get very techy in these environments and your average, well-meaning GiffGaffer might not be the sharpest tool in the information technology box!


Maybe GG should call for all idea and discussion titles to be in plain English? However this may of course lead to a greater number of FALSE positives when searching as titles will be more similar...


However, I think the answer to this is in improving the clarity of original posts, rather than teaching every GG user the finer points of search optimisation (which won't help anyway if their written English and grasp of synonyms ain't great). 


It's not always the 'fault' of the duplicator, the duplicator has to have a good enough grasp of the language used by other GiffGaffers in order to find their posts, andthe original poster needs to use language that subsequent users might search for...


Hope i haven't missed the point of this discussion -epic fail if I have! Smiley Embarassed