I already know how searching with boolean expressions works, it's what I outlined in my post (although in more simplified language), if you had taken the time to read my post, you would've noticed that I was arguing for those features. What I was trying to say in the post above isn't that I disagree or even have a different opinion than you on the things you want to implement, but rather that I felt the way that this post is phrased in terms of the language/terminology used makes it harder for someone who doesn't already know what those terms are to understand what they mean or why adding boolean values to the search functionality would be beneficial. Those terms aren't easily accessible to a broader audience who may have never heard of them, which only really leads to a lack of participation in voting for it.

We have the same ideas in terms of improvements, but the way you've outlined it in this post is my contention, as it doesn't garner as much attention/support (as evident by the fact that your post hadn't received as many upvotes preceding the merge of our topics, and by the fact that there has been little to no votes in the past 3 weeks since I wrote my last reply.)

I don't know, I mean, I think that both Dracowhale and I have pretty similar ideas with regards to improving the search functionality, by allowing for more customizability and ease of use (albeit his ideas being more in-depth/advanced). But, the thing I worry about as far as merging our two posts, is the kind of language/terminology used in his post (ex: "boolean", "parsing", "metadata", etc.), which I think doesn't translate well to a general audience, which is what I was trying to avoid in my post. And I fear that because of that, it won't get as many upvotes/attention.

Also, I worry that because of the amount of features he wishes to add to the search function (all of which I like and would love to see implemented, mind you) that it would be harder for the development team to greenlight it. (To be completely fair though, I'm not aware of how hard it would be to implement those features, but I can't imagine it'd be easier than the suggestions I laid out.)

Anyways, those are just my thoughts on the matter, and I'd be interested to hear a response/feedback. :3

Haha, yeah, I saw your post on being able to block combinations of tags earlier, which I thumbs'd up. And I figured I'd just use a similar way of explaining it since I felt you did a good job on your post. :P