Archives: SIMEGEN-L (Virtual Selyn): FAQ

Archives:

SIMEGEN-L (Virtual Selyn)

A Sime~Gen Email List

Home | View/Download | FAQ | Search Engine | Return to the Secret Pens

Note: This FAQ is for the advanced search engine which is currently unavailable.

Q. How much of the List Archives is actually in the database?

The entire history of the List from August 1996 to present, full-text. It's updated roughly once a month to include the latest complete archive. At this time there are more than 14,000 searchable messages.

Q. What search type and keywords will give me the best results?

As you have probably guessed, the various different types of searches are like tools. Their usefulness overlaps somewhat, just like you can sometimes use a knife instead of a wire strippers or a screwdriver instead of a chisel (shame on you!). However, there are better and worse ways to do anything.

First, consider the precise topic you want to search on. Then, answer the following questions:

Do the same unique words always appear in connection with this topic? (Use an "All of these words" search.)
Are there a number of unique words related to your topic, of which only some appear in each relevent message? (Use an "Any of these words" search.)
Do the words you're looking for always come in the same order, with none missing? (Use a "This exact phrase" search.)
Are you trying to get fewer, more precise results? (Use an "All of these words" search.)
Are you trying to get broader, more inclusive results? (Use an "Any of these words" search.)
Do you want a good deal of control over your results? (Use a "Boolean" search)
Do you find search engines intimidating? (Stick with the "All of these words" and "Any of these words" searches)

If you still aren't sure which one you should use in this particular case, keep reading. The descriptions of each search type may give you some ideas.

Q. What is an "All of these words" search good for?

This type of search is intended to narrow down your results as much as possible based upon what words ARE included in each message. The "All of these words" search is most effective when you are looking for specific topics where certain words are guaranteed to all appear in the same message, although not necessarily together.

Good examples of "All of these words" searches:

Jacqueline Darkover (this produces messages mentioning the Darkover convention, and either written by or mentioning Jacqueline.)
Zhag radio (this recalls a series of messages discussing the development of radio broadcast technology in S~G, specifically those where Jean was talking about Zhag and Tonyo's rise in fame)
disjunct Risa (this produces messages mentioning Risa Tigue's disjunction)

Bad examples of "All of these words" searches:

Farris Zeth (this search will find all messages containing those two words, but some of them will be about Zeth Farris while others will be about the renSime named Zeth that Rimon Farris killed in changeover. Granted, the total number of messages returned will be small, so it should be possible to pick through them hunting for those related to the Zeth you were actually looking for. A more precise search could be done by thinking of better keywords, or by using a "Boolean" or "This exact phrase" search to distinguish between the two Zeths.)
Jacqueline Lichtenberg (this will produce literally hundreds of messages by JL, and mentioning her, and some where the Listserv headers mention her name, etc. It would be impossible to look through them all. The strength of the "Any of these words" search is that the search becomes narrower for each keyword added, so think of some more words that would help define what you're looking for regarding Jacqueline.)
nager selyn need (this is a hopelessly vague search. Its extremely common keywords defeat the strengths of the search engine, producing a selection of messages having nothing to do with one another.)

Q. What is an "Any of these words" search best at?

The strength of this search lays in its ability to turn up as many results as possible. The "Any of these words" search is at its most effective when its keywords are either synonyms or alternate spellings of each other, or else all words that would appear only in the context of the topic you're looking for. The more obscure or narrow the topic, the more it helps to have thought up a whole bunch of really relevent keywords.

Good examples of "Any of these words" searches:

dependency orhuen lortuen torluen (this will probably turn up most of the messages related to transfer dependency)
Joel Digen Im'ran Ilyana (this will turn up a good selection of messages relating to the Unto Zeor Forever! era)
embarassing embarrassing (this searches for the word "embarrassing" along with one of its more common misspellings)

Bad examples of "Any of these words" searches:

Jacqueline Lichtenberg Jean Lorrah (this impossibly broad search produces hundreds of results that are of no use whatsoever. "Any of these words" searches are good for finding messages by/about a more obscure person, but not Jean and Jacqueline.)
disjunction artichokes (these two concepts don't have anything to do with one another. Therefore, picking through the results of this search will be more laborious than it should be. Searches like this are best performed as two searches: one for "disjunction", and one for "artichokes", with the results analysed separately.)

Q. What is the deal with "This exact phrase" searches?

This search is suitable for one thing: finding messages containing certain words in a certain order. You'll have to wait longer for your results than with other search types, because the program has to go through an extra step.

Good examples of "This exact phrase" searches:

I'm sorry (these two words are common enough in other combinations that it it would take forever to find the occurrences if "I'm sorry" if you started out with an "All of these words" search on "I'm" and "sorry". Incidentally this phrase occurs with shocking infrequency in S~G.)
Farris Channel (again, these two words occur with great regularity outside of the context of the book title. Therefore, to find messages about the book with as little work as possible, use a "This exact phrase" search.)
Re List Archives Search Engine (you can use the "This exact phrase" search to pick out messages from certain people, or with certain subject lines. This example works because the colon normally existing after "Re" is ignored by the search engine, as are many other punctuation symbols.)

Bad examples of "This exact phrase" searches:

Klyd Farris (while this will work, it will exclude all messages referring to Klyd by first name only. Chances are that's not what you're looking for and you'd be better off doing a search on "Klyd" alone. In that case one of the other search types would probably be more time-efficient.)
banana Digen impeachment gravel Moonbeam (OK. This is an exaggeration but you know what I mean! Consider your phrasing carefully before hitting the button. There's no point in searching on a phrase that was never written.)
Jacqueline Lichtenberg (if these two words appear in one message, chances are they appear end-to-end. Rather than taking the extra processing time that a "This exact phrase" search takes, use an "All of these words" search.)

Q. I totally don't understand Boolean searches.

The Boolean search is a flexible and powerful combination of the "All of these words" and "Any of these words" search types, allowing you fine control of your results. To use the Boolean search effectively you'll want to understand the basics of Boolean Logic. Here is short lesson if you need one. University at Albany Libraries: Boolean Searching on the Internet. Also if you want to get into complex Boolean searches you probably should understand simple algebra. Here is a pretty good Introduction to Algebra.

Q. How is Boolean searching implemented in this search engine?

This search engine allows the use of parentheses to group search terms logically (as in Algebra). It uses the following symbols to represent the Boolean AND, NOT and OR:

& AND

! NOT

| OR

Working examples of Boolean searches:

good & bad & ugly (this will produce all messages containing the three words. This is the equivalent of a "All of these words" search.)
naztehr | natzehr (this will produce all messages containing the word "naztehr" and one of its misspellings. This is the equivalent of an "Any of these words" search.)
Digen & Farris ! Ercy (this will produce all messages containing the words "Digen" and "Farris" but not mentioning "Ercy". By careful choice of NOTS one could narrow down one's Digen returns to only those messages referring to a certain era of his life or novel of the series.)
(Digen | Ercy) & Farris (this will produce messages that contain the word "Farris", and also contain "Digen" or "Ercy" or both. This is more permissive than the "All of these words" search because it does not eliminate messages with only one of the first-names in it, but more restrictive than an "Any of these words" search because it leaves out messages that have only "Farris" without mentioning Digen or Ercy.)
(a & b & (c | d | (e & f & (g | h)))) (The search engine will permit unlimited parenthetical nesting, so this is a perfectly legal search, if a bit silly. It will find all of the messages containing the letters a, b and c, all of the messages containing the letters a, b and d, all of the messages containing the letters a, b, e, f, and g, and all of the messages containing the letters a, b, e, f and h. Why you'd want to do this I have no idea! :-) )
! eggnog (yes, this is legitimate. It will return all messages that don't mention "eggnog".)
(Muryin & Farris) | (Digen & Farris) | (Klyd & Farris) | (Rimon & Farris) (while this is a perfectly legitimate search, resulting in all messages that contain at least one of those two-name combinations, it could be simplified as follows: (Muryin | Klyd | Rimon | Digen) & Farris. This can dramatically shorten the amount of time the search takes. For help with simplifying, see the section on it in the Introduction to Algebra above.)

Busted examples of Boolean searches:

Digen | Ercy & Farris (AND and OR terms must be separated by parentheses as in the good examples above. In this bad example with no parentheses, the search engine will be unable to figure out what exactly you want. You might want words that have either Digen (by itself) or Ercy-AND-Farris, or you might have been looking for Digen-OR-Ercy, plus Farris. The search engine won't waste your time trying to guess; it'll simply send you an error message.
Digen & | Ercy (while there is "and/or" in the English language, this combination has no place in Boolean logic and will result in an error message. Actually the word OR in Boolean logic encompasses the and/or scenario: the good example above will return messages with either Digen and Ercy or both. Yes, there is such thing as an "or" in Boolean logic that means strictly "or" as in, one-or-the-other-not-both. The word for that is XOR, or Exclusive-OR. It is not supported by this search engine.)
Digen & ! Ercy (It isn't necessary to put an AND in front of a NOT. While it sounds nice in English, the search engine knows NOT by itself means "and not".