litphoria

I found something pretty bad - it essentially means shortened searches are garbage if given category exists for more than one trait. Here is the issue: when you write search like find male profiles it will give you only profiles that have Male set for one trait, I assume the one that was first created. So it will check only Sex trait and be done with it. find profiles who like females does exactly the same - checks preferences for only that trait. This makes searching via short-forms bad, to put it lightly, when we hope for any good outcome . You can check it also on find average profiles but I was unable to figure out which Trait with category of Average was the very first one.

I would say that it needs to do one of the two:

• Search for any occurrence of search term, like find male profiles would give me profiles that have at least one field set to male. Might be okay for broader searches where we want the partner to just sort-of be (or in any sense) the thing we want, while we focus more on interests and such, and less of a hassle when it comes to refinement, since it just cuts the pool while adding new terms.
• Search for all occurrences of search term, like find male profiles would give me profiles whose Mental gender, Secondary sexual characteristics and Sex is equal to Male - so basically a search for 'true male'. This doesn't sacrifice accuracy that much (because it is clear what it searches for) but would probably work worse with additional terms and such
  (find male profiles with sex of female would probably need its very own chunk of code to be handled, unlike previous suggestion), and for sure stays focused on more 'everyday' understanding of word 'male'

Whatever happens - we need some consistent approach selected and used - right now it is impossible to explain search syntax because of this - it just doesn't work as it was supposed to, nor in any logically assumable way (for laics, that is). And it took me a nice bit of digging and crafting theories to figure this out at all.