Monster Fish Keepers Book

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
Status
Not open for further replies.
A question for C Chicxulub - how exactly does the "most relevant" feature on the search engine work? Would it be possible to designate certain threads (such as thebiggerthebetter thebiggerthebetter 's proposed journals, a general species profile, my idea of a "plug and chug" database, etc) as "most relevant"?
For example - if I search "payara", there would be a section at the top with a tank size/water quality/compatibility database, journals of people keeping payara, and a page like the already existing payara page. Then below, there would be a section with the most recent threads talking about payara.

On a side note - wonder what happened to OP? I guess we scared him off.. Anyways though we've got some awesome ideas going in here
 
On a side note - wonder what happened to OP? I guess we scared him off..
Per my PMs Miguel understood that he needs to take a few steps back and regroup, reconsider his approaches. His intentions and the earnest tries ring sincere to me. He has sparked a good thing IMHO.

Not exactly, Viktor, but close. I am saying that yes, one cannot change society as a whole, but I am also saying I don't see anything that's seriously broken, that someone who actually gives a hoot (including your example, ZUGS) can't find exactly what they are looking for via the SEARCH function, if they truly want to put in some effort. Those that are too lazy to bother, are not EVER going to be on my priority list, here, or anywhere else in life. Is that clearer?

Like a northern autumn sky. Crystal. Thank you. Agreed. But I propose to cater to those who are not too lazy to bother. What I could reply, I guess, is that we can't separate the two classes and (if we have to) must address this crowd as a whole. Those who care, will bother. Those who don't, let them live as they see fit. Otherwise, we are throwing out baby with the dirty bath water, it would seem.

We have a database that is currently 15 yrs old, and from my single example that I showed above - it works fairly well. At least I think so. If someone wants to improve on that, no problem, good luck. Maybe we could start with a 3 character minimum? :)

Yea, yea, you sarcastic pro! I dug your carpintis search example, although its description was vague (the exact search terms pulled up what exact answer to what exact question with what degree of confidence in the answer from a newby perspective and in how much time spent?). I (we each?) should do our own to highlight what we see right and wrong with the Search function.

IME, narrowing the search greatly misses on too much needed info. Widening it makes studying the hits one's full time job for a day or a few. I can't seem to hit the sweet spot, which, I imagine, would still miss some of the good info buried in otherwise mostly not helpful (to the homework doer) threads. Either I am dense or it is impossible. Or both. Neither would a newbie (like I am with the cichlids) be sure they got the right answer because the answers can often contradict, and usually vary and the posters may be unfamiliar even to me.

I grant it that perhaps we are playing Don Quixote's and fighting the windmills? Can everything be finer than I think... just as it is or made finer with some minor tweaks in the expected reporting culture?

Most newbies refer to them as "texas". lol That was just a fun poke amigo, I could not resist. :)

Oh, no! My eye! My eye! lol

And the topics such as you described that do fall into my search parameters, are easily & quickly ignored as I skim my search titles. At least this is typically my experience.
I see. Thread titles are so often undescriptive or curt or threads are often taken in different direction(s). These are my worries. So I end up reading a lot more filler.
 
Last edited:
Per my PMs Miguel understood that he needs to take a few steps back and regroup, reconsider his approaches. His intentions and the earnest tries ring sincere to me. He has sparked a good thing IMHO
That’s wonderful to hear, I’m rather happy thay he is taking it slow. I wish him many happy years fish keeping.
 
One more after thought, if MFK is having people complain that they don’t want noobies asking the same questions over and over again is there a way for MFK software to include a filter for users to exclude things they don’t want to see....Kind of like how Facebook you can click don’t show me adds for this product

say I don’t want to see any threads with “tank mates, African, or compatibly” in the titles I could just click filters to keep them hidden from me, yet allowing people without the filters to see the threads?
 
say I don’t want to see any threads with “tank mates, African, or compatibly” in the titles I could just click filters to keep them hidden from me, yet allowing people without the filters to see the threads?
I can see a potential problem with that. Lets take “african” for example. Most likely you’re talking about african cichlids which I would understand why you don’t want to get news about threads about them. However if you had all threads ignored that had the word african in them then you could miss threads containing “african arowana”, “african biotype”, “african catfish”, and more.
 
I can see a potential problem with that. Lets take “african” for example. Most likely you’re talking about african cichlids which I would understand why you don’t want to get news about threads about them. However if you had all threads ignored that had the word african in them then you could miss threads containing “african arowana”, “african biotype”, “african catfish”, and more.
I was (I just have no personal interest in them haha)

that’s just part of life though there is no cookie cutter that will fit Everyone and make everyone happy, just impossible. But allowing the user to customize the content they want to see might increase usage and interactions

those were just example words too, maybe you could filter more than one word so any thread with the title “africian cichlids” wouldn’t be shown to the person

or maybe there could be a way to mute/filter posts from specific forums within MFK...day someone is sick of seeing illness questions, maybe the person could mute/filter that section of the forum so it doesn’t show in the new post section for that user?

it was just an idea, might interest someone :-)

Personally I like MFK the way it is (I am or might be part of the older generation as well...as in once I know how something works I don’t want it to change and I resist change lol...maybe just a personality trait there too)
 
I was (I just have no personal interest in them haha)

that’s just part of life though there is no cookie cutter that will fit Everyone and make everyone happy, just impossible. But allowing the user to customize the content they want to see might increase usage and interactions

those were just example words too, maybe you could filter more than one word so any thread with the title “africian cichlids” wouldn’t be shown to the person

or maybe there could be a way to mute/filter posts from specific forums within MFK...day someone is sick of seeing illness questions, maybe the person could mute/filter that section of the forum so it doesn’t show in the new post section for that user?

it was just an idea, might interest someone :)

Personally I like MFK the way it is (I am or might be part of the older generation as well...as in once I know how something works I don’t want it to change and I resist change lol...maybe just a personality trait there too)
I think the simplest way for people to customize what they see is to click on the sections and threads they like and ignore what they don't
 
One more after thought, if MFK is having people complain that they don’t want noobies asking the same questions over and over again

I don't think that is the issue at hand, unless I am missing something? I believe what some folks are wanting, such as Viktor, is a way to avoid the fluff, while the main focus is on hard data. I understand what he is seeking, I just don't know how it is possible. My reference to "lazy", had to do with people complaining that the info is too hard to find. I disagree. It might be time consuming for some, but it is there, and can definitely be found.



Neither would a newbie (like I am with the cichlids) be sure they got the right answer because the answers can often contradict, and usually vary and the posters may be unfamiliar even to me.

Viktor, remember what I said about reputation capitol? How can anyone know anything, about anyone, including those posting in the blogs, or even the curators that would be vetting all this info? For the most part we are all just anon user ID's on a fish forum. That to me is exactly why open discussions on the forums, that are in a constant state of peer review, are vitally important. On the forums BS only goes so far, for so long, until someone is called out. On youtube, FB, etc people tend to make BS up as they go along, because they can! There is no one there to challenge their so called expertise. Myself, I love the transparency or a real time open forum, but I certainly see your points, as well as everyone else's.
 
I don't think that is the issue at hand, unless I am missing something? I believe what some folks are wanting, such as Viktor, is a way to avoid the fluff, while the main focus is on hard data. I understand what he is seeking, I just don't know how it is possible. My reference to "lazy", had to do with people complaining that the info is too hard to find. I disagree. It might be time consuming for some, but it is there, and can definitely be found.
no your most likely not missing the point.

I’m probably combing things I’ve read from other posts about people complaints haha just adding confusion to things...I’m good at that. Especially when I work a lot and just come here to read most days. Then when I respond to one thread it’s just referencing everything in one place

I may have also missed the “lazy” people’s complaints of things being difficult to find as well...I’m with you I have no problems finding what I need on the site with a search...the only thing I find with the search is sometimes there’s not enough info...I can go back and read old threads for days and still not find enough info
 
Just to share my way of searching

Type what I want to search eg. Can datnoids comm with african cichlids

More often then not, if mfk has something it will appear on the same google search.

The crux of the matter currently is not really how user friendly the search but does the threadstarter even bother to search

in other forums, it can be observed that many people would rather post a thread and just wait for replies instead or for someone to link them an answer aka spoonfeed.

this is not something that happen in mfk only.

which bring me back to my original question... what's the final objective of these discussions?

To make the forum more search friendly?
To get more people interested in fish keeping?
To make mfk a better place (i.e forumers)?
To gain more traffic to mfk?

we must also bear in mind that in most cases, the age of a new fish keeper would likely differ greatly with any of the experienced fish keeper here thus how things are handled or conveyed may be an issue
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
MonsterFishKeepers.com