Michelle, I’m very surprised you find the new search functionality to be an improvement. I thought the old search worked quite well, but find the new functionality nearly useless. Unless I know the exact title of a post and search for that, I routinely get results that are tangentially/un-related, old, not-well-upvoted, or all of the above. For example, the top results when searching for “effective altruism” are:
1. Effective Altruism and Religious Faiths: Mutually Exclusive Entities, or an Important Nexus to Explore (9 karma, 4 years old)
3. Effective Altruism subreddit (9 karma, 3 years old)
The comments that are returned are similarly old and low-karma (though I do love that the new search returns both posts and comments). I also tried searching for “bednets”, “artificial intelligence”, and “jobs” all with similar outcomes.
I actually wanted to post screenshots of the search results, but couldn’t figure out how to insert pictures (I figured out a workaround in the past, but I can’t remember what I did, only that it was time-consuming and extremely annoying). More generally, I’ve found the process of posting quite frustrating (which I’m not alone in). I strongly upvoted the OP for these reasons; I hope this isn’t read as a lack of appreciation for the hard and extensive work that people have put in on the new forum.
Can you say more about what you find frustrating about using the editor/posting? Am also interested to know if you find it better/worse than the old site.
My frustration centered around not being able to take a post I’d written in google docs and simply paste it into the forum to post without extra work. I’ve run into two problems trying to do that: pictures and footnotes. It didn’t help matters that I wrote a post with a ton of footnotes before they became supported, but even now that they are it’s a pain to use the markup editor instead of just copy/pasting things. I’d strongly prefer to get this and the search functionality taken care of before adding new functionality (e.g. sequences).
There are also things I like about the new forum. The notifications about replies is a huge plus, and the question and link post types are a clever nudge to engage people. I’m sort of on the fence about the frontpage/community distinction. I sympathize with the intention, but worry that it buries time sensitive news that EAs need to know about (e.g. when a grant application window opens).
Last but definitely not least, thanks Ben for your openness to feedback (even if some is critical) and lack of defensiveness! Strong upvote.
With regards to images, I get flawless behaviour when I copy-paste from googledocs. Somehow, the images automatically get converted, and link to the images hosted with google (in the editor only visible as small cameras). Maybe you can get the same behaviour by making your docs public?
Actually, I’ll test copying an image from a google doc into this comment: (edit: seems to be working!)
Testing a reply with an image copy/pasted from a public google doc (shows up as camera in the editor)
Edit: it worked! Good to know about this workaround (though the direct google doc import Ben mentioned would still be preferable since it’d deal with footnotes too).
Gotcha. Not being able to easily copy-in from G-Docs and fotnotes+pictures being lotsa work.
Chatting with the team, their sense is that copy-pasting footnotes is very unlikely to ever work between editors (e.g. I don’t expect footnotes to be copied functionally into MS word, Dropbox paper, or any other editor you might use). If that’s the case, I would like to build the ability to do a direct import from g-docs, which would solve these problems.
Also agree with the images. The big thing we don’t do right now is host images, which means you have to upload them to the internet yourself then put the URL into our editor.
The current state of the plan is to do a big overhaul of the editor framework either this quarter or next, where I expect us to spend time on these issues and others. In general we found that making small edits to the current editor for things like this were too costly in both the short and long run, and we’d also prefer an editor a bit more like google docs in a bunch of ways.
Just adding something here: I had done all my images and footnotes well and then switched back and forth between editors, which somehow messed it all up and I had to manually insert all footnotes again.
I’m curious about your vision for what better search results would look like. I’m not sure how the current search works, but I expect that it prioritizes title-matching, so that the phrase “Effective Altruism” returns posts whose titles begin with that phrase (which isn’t very common, as most people here abbreviate it “EA”).
Would your preferred results look like any of the following?
The highest-karma posts using the phrase “effective altruism” anywhere (title or text)
The newest posts using the phrase “effective altruism” anywhere (title or text)
The posts using the phrase “effective altruism” most often (between title and text)
Keyword search seems like a pretty good way to find “that one post you’re looking for”, but I could imagine that karma/newness should be factors if people are using Forum search to hunt down “interesting posts about topic X”. I don’t know how common each use case is.
----
Regarding screenshots: Images can’t be added to comments (correction: they can, see here); is that what you were trying to find a workaround for? (If so, it’s useful feedback for us that this is something people want.)
You can add an image to a post by leaving a blank line where you want the image to go. Then, highlight a space in the blank line. You’ll see a bar pop up with options like “bold” and “italic”.
Click the image of a photo on that bar, and you’ll be able to add the URL where your image is hosted. The Forum doesn’t support attachments, but there are a lot of sites where you can upload an image for free. My favorite is imgbb.
Re: pictures, ability to do pictures in comments would be nice. But my frustration was really around this:
Click the image of a photo on that bar, and you’ll be able to add the URL where your image is hosted. The Forum doesn’t support attachments, but there are a lot of sites where you can upload an image for free. My favorite is imgbb.
This is a real pain, and a disincentive to using charts or tables. I write in google docs for a variety of reasons, including because it’s easy to get feedback from people. So once I’ve written a draft, edited, sent it out for feedback, revised it, given it a final edit, and at long last have it looking the way I want in a format that’s used around the world, I don’t want to have to upload a bunch of images to some site I’m unfamiliar with, then insert each of them into the post.
I’d like to do be able to do a simple copy/paste. Inserting attachments would still be frustrating, but a significant improvement on the status quo. In either case, I’d like there to be clear and easily accessible instructions (people shouldn’t have to figure out the imgbb solution on their own). Hope this clarifies where the frustration stems from, let me know if you still have questions.
Re: search, “effective altruism” was probably a bad example but I guess I’d like to see that return something like CEA’s guiding principles (or whatever the old search version did). “Bednet” is probably a better example. You’d expect this to turn up something about bednets and/or AMF. Instead, it returns three results that mention bednets but are in no way about them.
1. Charity Entrepreneurship Research Summary (22 karma, 3 years old)
2. The age distribution of GiveWell’s charities (13 karma, 4 years old)
3. What consequences? (25 karma, 2 years old)
Interestingly, searching for “bednets” instead of “bednet” yields very different results:
1. 8 ways to free up donation money without sacrifice
2. Where should anti-paternalists donate?
3. Kidney donation is a reasonable choice for effective altruists and more should consider it.
I’m not sure exactly what my algorithm would be, I imagine it’d involve keyword matching in the title, in the text, karma, recentness, etc. Let’s say someone wanted to find “After one year of applying for EA jobs: It is really, really hard to get hired by an EA organization”, which I believe is the highest karma post in forum history. And it has a title that you can’t expect people to remember. I’d definitely want that to be the top result if someone searched for “jobs” (it’s the 7th result, requiring an extra click to see) or “ea job market” (doesn’t show up).
Images can’t be added to comments; is that what you were trying to find a workaround for?
It’s possible to add images to comments by selecting and copying them from anywhere public (note that it doesn’t work if you right click and choose ‘copy image’). In this thread, I do it in this comment.
I see how I can’t do it manually, though, by selecting text. I wouldn’t expect it to be too difficult to add that possibility, though, given that it’s already possible in another way?
On LessWrong we intentionally didn’t want to encourage pictures in the comments, since that provides a way to hijack people’s attention in a way that seemed too easy. You can use markdown syntax to add pictures, both in the markdown editor and the WYSIWYG editor.
Michelle, I’m very surprised you find the new search functionality to be an improvement. I thought the old search worked quite well, but find the new functionality nearly useless. Unless I know the exact title of a post and search for that, I routinely get results that are tangentially/un-related, old, not-well-upvoted, or all of the above. For example, the top results when searching for “effective altruism” are:
1. Effective Altruism and Religious Faiths: Mutually Exclusive Entities, or an Important Nexus to Explore (9 karma, 4 years old)
2. Effective Altruism & Slate Star Codex Readership (3 karma, 6 months old)
3. Effective Altruism subreddit (9 karma, 3 years old)
The comments that are returned are similarly old and low-karma (though I do love that the new search returns both posts and comments). I also tried searching for “bednets”, “artificial intelligence”, and “jobs” all with similar outcomes.
I actually wanted to post screenshots of the search results, but couldn’t figure out how to insert pictures (I figured out a workaround in the past, but I can’t remember what I did, only that it was time-consuming and extremely annoying). More generally, I’ve found the process of posting quite frustrating (which I’m not alone in). I strongly upvoted the OP for these reasons; I hope this isn’t read as a lack of appreciation for the hard and extensive work that people have put in on the new forum.
Can you say more about what you find frustrating about using the editor/posting? Am also interested to know if you find it better/worse than the old site.
My frustration centered around not being able to take a post I’d written in google docs and simply paste it into the forum to post without extra work. I’ve run into two problems trying to do that: pictures and footnotes. It didn’t help matters that I wrote a post with a ton of footnotes before they became supported, but even now that they are it’s a pain to use the markup editor instead of just copy/pasting things. I’d strongly prefer to get this and the search functionality taken care of before adding new functionality (e.g. sequences).
There are also things I like about the new forum. The notifications about replies is a huge plus, and the question and link post types are a clever nudge to engage people. I’m sort of on the fence about the frontpage/community distinction. I sympathize with the intention, but worry that it buries time sensitive news that EAs need to know about (e.g. when a grant application window opens).
Last but definitely not least, thanks Ben for your openness to feedback (even if some is critical) and lack of defensiveness! Strong upvote.
With regards to images, I get flawless behaviour when I copy-paste from googledocs. Somehow, the images automatically get converted, and link to the images hosted with google (in the editor only visible as small cameras). Maybe you can get the same behaviour by making your docs public?
Actually, I’ll test copying an image from a google doc into this comment: (edit: seems to be working!)
Testing a reply with an image copy/pasted from a public google doc (shows up as camera in the editor)
Edit: it worked! Good to know about this workaround (though the direct google doc import Ben mentioned would still be preferable since it’d deal with footnotes too).
btw, I had to google what a markdown editor was so perhaps the instructions could be made more accessible to laypeople
A year ago I did write a little editor guide, but many parts of it quickly went out of date. I’ll post to the Forum if I update it.
Edit: I updated it.
Gotcha. Not being able to easily copy-in from G-Docs and fotnotes+pictures being lotsa work.
Chatting with the team, their sense is that copy-pasting footnotes is very unlikely to ever work between editors (e.g. I don’t expect footnotes to be copied functionally into MS word, Dropbox paper, or any other editor you might use). If that’s the case, I would like to build the ability to do a direct import from g-docs, which would solve these problems.
Also agree with the images. The big thing we don’t do right now is host images, which means you have to upload them to the internet yourself then put the URL into our editor.
The current state of the plan is to do a big overhaul of the editor framework either this quarter or next, where I expect us to spend time on these issues and others. In general we found that making small edits to the current editor for things like this were too costly in both the short and long run, and we’d also prefer an editor a bit more like google docs in a bunch of ways.
Just adding something here: I had done all my images and footnotes well and then switched back and forth between editors, which somehow messed it all up and I had to manually insert all footnotes again.
Cool, direct import from g-docs would do the trick from my perspective. Thanks for the update!
I’m curious about your vision for what better search results would look like. I’m not sure how the current search works, but I expect that it prioritizes title-matching, so that the phrase “Effective Altruism” returns posts whose titles begin with that phrase (which isn’t very common, as most people here abbreviate it “EA”).
Would your preferred results look like any of the following?
The highest-karma posts using the phrase “effective altruism” anywhere (title or text)
The newest posts using the phrase “effective altruism” anywhere (title or text)
The posts using the phrase “effective altruism” most often (between title and text)
Keyword search seems like a pretty good way to find “that one post you’re looking for”, but I could imagine that karma/newness should be factors if people are using Forum search to hunt down “interesting posts about topic X”. I don’t know how common each use case is.
----
Regarding screenshots: Images can’t be added to comments (correction: they can, see here); is that what you were trying to find a workaround for? (If so, it’s useful feedback for us that this is something people want.)
You can add an image to a post by leaving a blank line where you want the image to go. Then, highlight a space in the blank line. You’ll see a bar pop up with options like “bold” and “italic”.
Click the image of a photo on that bar, and you’ll be able to add the URL where your image is hosted. The Forum doesn’t support attachments, but there are a lot of sites where you can upload an image for free. My favorite is imgbb.
Re: pictures, ability to do pictures in comments would be nice. But my frustration was really around this:
This is a real pain, and a disincentive to using charts or tables. I write in google docs for a variety of reasons, including because it’s easy to get feedback from people. So once I’ve written a draft, edited, sent it out for feedback, revised it, given it a final edit, and at long last have it looking the way I want in a format that’s used around the world, I don’t want to have to upload a bunch of images to some site I’m unfamiliar with, then insert each of them into the post.
I’d like to do be able to do a simple copy/paste. Inserting attachments would still be frustrating, but a significant improvement on the status quo. In either case, I’d like there to be clear and easily accessible instructions (people shouldn’t have to figure out the imgbb solution on their own). Hope this clarifies where the frustration stems from, let me know if you still have questions.
Re: search, “effective altruism” was probably a bad example but I guess I’d like to see that return something like CEA’s guiding principles (or whatever the old search version did). “Bednet” is probably a better example. You’d expect this to turn up something about bednets and/or AMF. Instead, it returns three results that mention bednets but are in no way about them.
1. Charity Entrepreneurship Research Summary (22 karma, 3 years old)
2. The age distribution of GiveWell’s charities (13 karma, 4 years old)
3. What consequences? (25 karma, 2 years old)
Interestingly, searching for “bednets” instead of “bednet” yields very different results:
1. 8 ways to free up donation money without sacrifice
2. Where should anti-paternalists donate?
3. Kidney donation is a reasonable choice for effective altruists and more should consider it.
I’m not sure exactly what my algorithm would be, I imagine it’d involve keyword matching in the title, in the text, karma, recentness, etc. Let’s say someone wanted to find “After one year of applying for EA jobs: It is really, really hard to get hired by an EA organization”, which I believe is the highest karma post in forum history. And it has a title that you can’t expect people to remember. I’d definitely want that to be the top result if someone searched for “jobs” (it’s the 7th result, requiring an extra click to see) or “ea job market” (doesn’t show up).
It’s possible to add images to comments by selecting and copying them from anywhere public (note that it doesn’t work if you right click and choose ‘copy image’). In this thread, I do it in this comment.
I see how I can’t do it manually, though, by selecting text. I wouldn’t expect it to be too difficult to add that possibility, though, given that it’s already possible in another way?
On LessWrong we intentionally didn’t want to encourage pictures in the comments, since that provides a way to hijack people’s attention in a way that seemed too easy. You can use markdown syntax to add pictures, both in the markdown editor and the WYSIWYG editor.