# This forum requires that you wait 120 seconds between searches. **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [August 24, 2010, 9:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-forum-requires-that-you-wait-120-seconds-between-searches/551269 "2010-08-24T09:37:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2010, 9:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-forum-requires-that-you-wait-120-seconds-between-searches/551269/1 "2010-08-24T09:37:29Z")
If it’s not hard to program, a 240-second delay every _second_ search would serve your purpose just as well, I think, and be much less annoying. I do an average of, perhaps, two searches per week. But the two searches are often back-to-back, due to the need for a correction or refinement. ---
**Author:** ![sandra\_nz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/eada6e/32.png) [@sandra\_nz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sandra_nz)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2010, 9:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-forum-requires-that-you-wait-120-seconds-between-searches/551269/2 "2010-08-24T09:53:46Z")
If you’re searching, use google search instead. These days you can just put ‘at [boards.straightdope.com](http://boards.straightdope.com)’ at the end of your google search, you don’t even have to go into advanced search options. ---
**Author:** ![Shot\_From\_Guns](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ccd318/32.png) [@Shot\_From\_Guns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shot_From_Guns)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2010, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-forum-requires-that-you-wait-120-seconds-between-searches/551269/3 "2010-08-24T21:07:12Z")
The syntax I’m familiar with is to append **site:boards.straightdope.com** to the end of my search. For example, I could search for **searching the SDMB with Google site:boards.straightdope.com** and it would only return results from this site. ---
**Author:** ![Arnold\_Winkelried](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Arnold\_Winkelried](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arnold_Winkelried)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2010, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-forum-requires-that-you-wait-120-seconds-between-searches/551269/4 "2010-08-26T18:17:56Z")
[How to search the board with google](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=384827) ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2010, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-forum-requires-that-you-wait-120-seconds-between-searches/551269/5 "2010-08-26T18:41:41Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > If it’s not hard to program, a 240-second delay every _second_ search would serve your purpose just as well, I think, and be much less annoying. > > I do an average of, perhaps, two searches per week. But the two searches are often back-to-back, due to the need for a correction or refinement. Wait – you want to make the wait time _longer_? :dubious: Why? ---
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2010, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-forum-requires-that-you-wait-120-seconds-between-searches/551269/6 "2010-08-26T18:44:51Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > Wait – you want to make the wait time _longer_? :dubious: > > Why? No, he wants the average wait time to be the same. “240-second delay every _ **second search** _” ---
**Author:** ![Cheshire\_Human](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/5f8ce5/32.png) [@Cheshire\_Human](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheshire_Human)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2010, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-forum-requires-that-you-wait-120-seconds-between-searches/551269/7 "2010-08-26T19:34:04Z")
I agree this sounds like a good idea. I frequently have to wait to refine my search, because my first search doesn’t turn up what I’m looking for. Although I would vote for 3 searches then a 6 minute wait, if this were a democracy. ---
**Author:** ![janeslogin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/df788c/32.png) [@janeslogin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/janeslogin)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2010, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-forum-requires-that-you-wait-120-seconds-between-searches/551269/8 "2010-08-27T22:03:14Z")
On the few occasions when I have been foiled by the 120 second rule it has been a typing error and the 240 second delay every second search would have served me just fine. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2010, 12:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-forum-requires-that-you-wait-120-seconds-between-searches/551269/9 "2010-09-05T12:49:54Z")
> [@janeslogin](#): > > On the few occasions when I have been foiled by the 120 second rule it has been a typing error and the 240 second delay every second search would have served me just fine. Same here–except sometimes the error was choosing threads instead of posts. ---
**Author:** ![NineToTheSky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/b5a626/32.png) [@NineToTheSky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NineToTheSky)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2010, 7:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-forum-requires-that-you-wait-120-seconds-between-searches/551269/10 "2010-09-06T07:31:51Z")
The problem with using Google is that it doesn’t always return complete results. I’ve just searched for one of my posts, and Google failed. The board’s search never fails to find the truth. ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2010, 11:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-forum-requires-that-you-wait-120-seconds-between-searches/551269/11 "2010-09-06T11:24:50Z")
Oye, its better than the 300 second rule we used to have. ---
**Author:** ![psychonaut](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/psychonaut/32/4655_2.png) [@psychonaut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/psychonaut)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2010, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-forum-requires-that-you-wait-120-seconds-between-searches/551269/12 "2010-09-12T17:03:04Z")
> [@NineToTheSky](#): > > The problem with using Google is that it doesn’t always return complete results. I’ve just searched for one of my posts, and Google failed. The board’s search never fails to find the truth. Also, with Google you can’t restrict the search by username, thread title, posting date, etc. the way you can with the board’s own built-in search. ---
**Author:** ![MsWhatsit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/eb8c5e/32.png) [@MsWhatsit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MsWhatsit)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2010, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-forum-requires-that-you-wait-120-seconds-between-searches/551269/13 "2010-09-12T19:35:01Z")
> [@psychonaut](#): > > > [@NineToTheSky](#): > > > > The problem with using Google is that it doesn’t always return complete results. I’ve just searched for one of my posts, and Google failed. The board’s search never fails to find the truth. > > Also, with Google you can’t restrict the search by username, thread title, posting date, etc. the way you can with the board’s own built-in search. [Yes, you can.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=11650034#post11650034) (This is basically the same link that **Arnold Winkelreid** provided up-thread, but goes to the specific post.)