It's the classic "one-man's meat is another man's poison."

It's hard to see why some folks think a particular post is "informative" when "everybody should know that!" just as an example. That doesn't mean it's not so, it just means we probably won't agree.

It would be really nice to force everybody to read the documenation on which we should all be able to rely. It would make for a much better discussion. It would be nice to be able to get everyone do to their own homework too, but that's not likely either.

I don't know what can be done, specifically, with the search engine, to make it more likely that people will use it. I surely would like fewer irrelevant hits, though. This probably isn't your particular engine's fault, though, since I have trouble getting relevant hits, or, more specifically, avoiding irrelevant hits, with other search tools as well.

However, if the things that were likely to pop up on searches were extracted from the discussions in which they arose, it might encourage people to use the search feature more. I just don't know who's going to select what's to be extracted.

As I've said, perhaps things will change when we've arrived at a much more complete and comprehensive FAQ: One which answers the questions asked completely and thoroughly, not just touching on the surface.

That's a work already in progress. We'll just have to be patient, I guess.

RE