I see some interesting questions in the GQ section.
However, if I don’t know the answer (or pretend to know), I do a quick Lycos search. Many times, one of the top sites answers exactly what was posted.
Don’t these people know about search engines?
Jesus, AWB. You could have at least shown the courtesy of inserting a few dirty words every now and then.
Ok, Coldfire…
Why can’t these fucking morons pull their tiny heads out of their assholes and learn how to use a goddamn search engine!?
Better? :D:D
Reading some of the Mailbag questions, I ask that exact same question, with the addition of “encyclopedia and/or dictionary” to search engine.
I’m often amazed…
Because people are fucking lazy-ass mo-fos. Just making up for the OP.
Some folks use a little bit more than an on line search engines/dictionaries/encyclopedias in their search for the truth.
And Lynne, doesn’t Satan hog the as!
While we’re on the subject of the basic inability to use a search engine …
I HATE IT when these fuckin’ stupid CNN reporters do a piece on hacking or something, and say something to the
effect of:
“There are so many resources on the web showing anyone how to hack a government web site. When we typed in “hacking government web sites” we got a return of over 1.2 million web pages. etc, etc, etc.”
OF COURSE YOU FUCKING TOOLS!!! The web engine did a search
for hacking OR government OR web OR site, ranking them in order of how many of your stupid words the site had. UGHH!!!
This has always been one of my pet peeves. I have instances of this several times in the media. And with so-called “tech reporters,” too.
CURSE THEE!
While we’re on the subject of the basic inability to use a search engine …
I HATE IT when these fuckin’ stupid CNN reporters do a piece on hacking or something, and say something to the
effect of:
“There are so many resources on the web showing anyone how to hack a government web site. When we typed in “hacking government web sites” we got a return of over 1.2 million web pages. etc, etc, etc.”
OF COURSE YOU FUCKING TOOLS!!! The web engine did a search
for hacking OR government OR web OR site, ranking them in order of how many of your stupid words the site had. UGHH!!!
This has always been one of my pet peeves. I have instances of this several times in the media. And with so-called “tech reporters,” too.
Hmmm…
I just typed “Sesame Street sadomasochistic pornography” into Alta Vista and, MY GOD!! THE SICKOS! There’s 373,777 pages on Big Bird and Oscar doin’ it doggy-style with whips and chains and dog collars. This internet is full of degeneracy!
The SD one has no way to ask the key questions:
-What has X posted lately/. Instead you get “What threads was X on where people have posted after him?” Who cares, besides X?
-Hit the “Search Posts by This Person” button and you often get zilch, not even the post you’re reading. The search can’t handle blanks or _ in names.
-Short words. Nope.
-A person’s first post? Nope. You get them all, sorted by when some loser last boosted it. This is a real problem when looking up Cecil or Ed.
.
AWB
I’ll assume you’re discussing my “Masonic Presidents” question since you posted to it four minutes before you dicided to post here.
Actually, with a little more effort, I could have found the answer, but the reason for the question was twofold.
I had been bragging up the SDMB to my boss and when the Mason thing came up he ask me why I didn’t ask the “Smartasses who know everything on that board”.
I was hoping for a few intelligent replies with some interesting side bars like you usually get around here so I could show him tonight just what an interesting group this is, which is why I specifically ask for responses from Masons or history buffs.
Thank you for the link, and yes I could have looked it up.
I’m SO sorry to have caused you so much stress before your morning coffee.
asshole
No need to rub it in, Herm.
–Tim
Sorry about posting three times. Computer fuck-up. I’ve ask Lynn to remove two of them.
Then what’s the point of having a GQ forum? I thought the purpose of GQ was that, like Radio Shack, people have questions and we’ve got answers. Is GQ intended as the option of last resort, to be accessed only when all other information sources have come up dry? Surely there is no piece of information so obscure, so isolated from public knowledge that only a privileged member of the Teeming Millions holds the answer. I mean, by your logic, no one should ever have to ask for information in GQ, because afterall, whatever it is that you are seeking can surely be found somewhere else online.
Let’s just get rid of GQ altogether and leave the SDMB to the 1000th-post-pat-on-the-back-parties of MPSIMS, the my-God-is-bigger-than-your-God debates of GD, and the you’re-all-a-bunch-of-morons bitching and moaning of the Pit.
Sorry, AWB, if I’ve ever wasted your time asking a question in GQ that I could have found the answer to somewhere else. I realize that you have much more important work to do here, and I didn’t mean to intrude.
Thanks.
And I did, so you owe me half a pound of chocolate. GOOD chocolate, not that grocery store stuff.
I know I’m pretty new here , but I only ask a question on GQ as a last resort, if numerous searches (internet and real-world) fail to give me the answer I seek. I usually consider a question that I can answer in 30 seconds by searching Google to be pretty damn pathetic, since it takes longer than that to post it here.
Here are the kinds of questions that, IMO, should not be asked in GQ.
- Obvious homework questions.
- Anything that can be answered by a dictionary.
- Specific medical questions. (My 2-year-old is currently choking on his own vomit. What should I do?)
- Specific veterinary questions (My cat has diarrhea. Why?)
- Questions that can be found within one minute using a search engine. (What ever happened to Sir-Mix-A-Lot?)
- And, of course, questions geared towards other forums.
Trust me, Kepi. If you stick around long enough, you’ll get a good sense of which questions are inappropriate.
Personally, I didn’t see a problem at all with VH’s Masonic Presidents question. It asked something that isn’t immediately available and implied a question about the issue of Masonic influences in politics.
I guess I don’t like being called an idiot for not using my computer “correctly”. I generally use Yahoo to run quick searches, however there are times when the answer just isn’t there even after several tries to rephrase the question/key words or I go back and get new entries that weren’t there before. I also use AskJeeves.com which reinterpretes questions and searches other search engines. Lycos was also mentioned earlier in this thread.I will post a GQ here after I have tried just about all the possibilities.
So how about throwing some of your burning spears in answer to the question: what are the better search engines?
Dogpile fires off the 18 most popular of the older engines, six at a time. You can select the order in which they fire, based on your experience with/knowledge of what they bring back.
Dictionary:
http://www.m-w.com/ Merriam-Webster 10th Collegiate.
Provides etymologies. Allows wild cards. Is oriented to U.S. (rather than Brit) usage. (That is obviously not a plus for all users.)
Encyclopedia:
http://www.britannica.com/ Encyclopædia Britannica, 'nuff said.
Lynn
Thanks, hon. Drop me an e-mail and let me know where to send the chocolate.