NationStates Jolt Archive

Finally! A search engine you can rely upon! Still ran by people ... real people ... real people with MLS degrees who actually look at and verify the content of each and every website in their database for scholarly content.

http://www.lii.org/

From now on, I strongly suggest that everyone who engages in open debate within this forum use that search engine and not Google for finding sources of information.

All Hail Librarians!! w00t!

Interesting, thanks.

Thank you for the link...Google and Yahoo have been driving me NUTS!

It's kinda nice, actually. For a tester, search a controversial topic.

I chose "homosexuality".

Lii Results (http://www.lii.org/pub/htdocs/search?action=show;search=homosexuality;searchtype=keywords) - 35 hits

Google Results (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=homosexuality&btnG=Google+Search) - 22,500,000 hits

You'll have to see them for yourself to get a feel for the difference.

It's kinda nice, actually. For a tester, search a controversial topic.

I chose "homosexuality".

Lii Results (http://www.lii.org/pub/htdocs/search?action=show;search=homosexuality;searchtype=keywords) - 35 hits

Google Results (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=homosexuality&btnG=Google+Search) - 22,500,000 hits

You'll have to see them for yourself to get a feel for the difference.

Try "Porn" ;)


(Yes, I know that probably says something about me :rolleyes: )

Try "Porn" ;)

rofl!

3 hits at the LII.

146,000,000 hits on Google. :D

Another phase in the evil librarian conspiracy, by allowing them to censor our searches based on things like "accuracy" and "verifiable fact" you betray the very purpose of the Interweb.
If you want proof, try looking for one of the most important topics one can pursue on the Interweb, "hot lesbians":

Google: 20,100,000
Yahoo: 13,500,000
AskJeeves: 1,951,000
Librarian Conspiracy: 0

How can you trust such an obviously biased and flawed system with anything?

This search engine sucks.
Google badger: 9,150,000 results, many of which are the badger song(badger badger badger..........MUSHROOM MUSHROOM!)
Lii: 3 results no badger song.

Interesting...

It's kinda nice, actually. For a tester, search a controversial topic.

I chose "homosexuality".

Lii Results (http://www.lii.org/pub/htdocs/search?action=show;search=homosexuality;searchtype=keywords) - 35 hits

Google Results (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=homosexuality&btnG=Google+Search) - 22,500,000 hits

You'll have to see them for yourself to get a feel for the difference.
I think one of the bigger differences - and maybe one of the best feautures) include its onomasiological structure that'll allow you to start out with one big topic and break it down into subordinate topics. Which will give you more and more links as you get more specific.

E.g., looking unter People -> Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, & Transgendered People will get you a more detailed list with a lot more than 35 hits and many of these sites, as far as I recognized them, being main portals where you get eve more links. (Oh, and that is completely omitting the nifty little feature of your knowing to group homosexuals under "people". Can help on here in General, too).

LII had no results for:

Second Amendment

-----------------------

2nd and Amendment was not found. Did you mean: nd (7 references)
Or try these words: Nd Ind end ind (Google hits 9.3+ million)


31 hits for First (1st) Amendment but Nothing listed for the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution! WTF Over?

-----------------------

Search results for:
Gun and Control Viewing 1 to 10 of 10 (4 anti gun including The Brady Bunch, 2 pro gun including the NRA, 2 legal and the rest ambiguous.)


Oh yeah. Like I'm going to trust the intellectual honesty of THIS Search Engine. Maybe it's run by Google.cn :rolleyes:

Oh yeah. Like I'm going to trust the intellectual honesty of THIS Search Engine. Maybe it's run by Google.cn :rolleyes:

Why don't you try suggesting a site?

http://www.lii.org/cs/lii/create/todo

Why don't you try suggesting a site?

http://www.lii.org/cs/lii/create/todo

So, it only postspages that are suggested? Another good reason to discount it.

But come on. 31 hits for "First Amendment" and NONE for "Second Amendment"? That's not just simple oversight.

So, it only postspages that are suggested? Another good reason to discount it.

Why?

It means they aren't suggesting that they are the only one that know about decent site on the internet.

But come on. 31 hits for "First Amendment" and NONE for "Second Amendment"? That's not just simple oversight.

Surely if there was anything malicious going on then a "Second Amendment" search would return site chock full of anti-gun literature?

It means they aren't suggesting that they are the only one that know about decent site on the internet.
I think he his complaint was that, without automated searching, lii.org is going to expand slowly and, until it has been up for quite a while, be a rather limited source of information. As opposed to google, which has over 20 million pages for hot lesbians without anyone so much as whispering something in its ear.

And it is only to be expected that librarians will be most interested in the First Amedment. They aren't keeping hundreds of different submachineguns on stock for loan (well, not blatantly. The Librarian Conspiracy is keeping thousands of miniguns hidden for their inevitable assault on the forces of justice and illiteracy).

I think he his complaint was that, without automated searching, lii.org is going to expand slowly and, until it has been up for quite a while, be a rather limited source of information.

Ahh right, my mistake. Sorry. My reading comprehension really has been shot to shit recently.

But yeah, that is valid arguement.

(well, not blatantly. The Librarian Conspiracy is keeping thousands of miniguns hidden for their inevitable assault on the forces of justice and illiteracy).

Why else do you think I becoming a librarian :D

i'll try it. but i'll tell you right up front i don't trust anything that tells you first off you can trust it.

not to condem anything i haven't tried yet, the noted aspect might just be an unfortunate consiquence of someone's well intended misguidence,
but isn't it obvious as hell that the last thing in hell that can be trusted is anything that considers itself above question?

=^^=
.../\...

I think he his complaint was that, without automated searching, lii.org is going to expand slowly and, until it has been up for quite a while, be a rather limited source of information. As opposed to google, which has over 20 million pages for hot lesbians without anyone so much as whispering something in its ear.
Dammit. Stop presenting things more clearly than I! ;)

And it is only to be expected that librarians will be most interested in the First Amedment. They aren't keeping hundreds of different submachineguns on stock for loan (well, not blatantly. The Librarian Conspiracy is keeping thousands of miniguns hidden for their inevitable assault on the forces of justice and illiteracy).Well, the better libraries DO stock Phil Luty's book on how to build an SMG from metal tubing with simple hand tools... (except in the UK where it is on the Banned Book list)

i'll try it. but i'll tell you right up front i don't trust anything that tells you first off you can trust it.

No it promises to give you websites you can trust.

Though yeah, I get the implication there.

but isn't it obvious as hell that the last thing in hell that can be trusted is anything that considers itself above question?


Not at all. It's ran by people, not by machines. So if you find a site within its search that does not contain scholarly information, then you can actually tell them to review it .... and they actually will!