Keep up with the latest hiring trends!
Over the last two days we had a bit of fun with the Boolean Blue Belt Brainteaser Quiz, which saw over 200 of you attempt the quiz (sometimes more than once!) to prove your Boolean skills. We’ve also been inundated with requests to put up the answers to see where you’ve gone wrong, so here they are:
Note, we gave you all a big hint with the quiz at the very beginning, and it’s funny just how many of you still failed to read the introduction (or remember it). There was no time limit to the test. You had to Google some of the answers (or source them, if you will). The hint was:
The answer was the first one – why? Because the phrases (social media marketer | social media * marketer) were missing quotation marks. Some may argue that you mightn’t need quotations for Social Media Marketer, but you certainly do if you’re using it in conjunction with an asterisk to act as a wildcard and find between 1 and 5 missing words between the term Media and Marketer.
That was a relatively easy one, which 52% of you got correct.
The answer was * Asterisk – which, unfortunately, won’t work to find you between 1 and 5 missing words between two words within a phrase when searching in LinkedIn. However, LinkedIn combat this by allowing you to pretty much search with infinite terms, rather than Google’s limitation of 32. I’m sure it’s not actually infinite, but to our knowledge no one has managed to reach the limit and tell the world about it. (If you know different, tell us in the comments!)
This was answered correctly by the vast majority of you, 75%, so well done!
Now, this was a bit of a tricky question, which 73% of you got wrong. Look at the question again, because if your brain tricked you into reading the word “MANAGER” rather than what it actually says, which is “MANGER” (ie, missing the A), then you would have come up with two possible answers in your search – Welch or Renwick. Some of you just did eenie-meenie-miny-mo and picked either Renwick (52%) or Welch (18%). If you had remembered the hint from the beginning, you’d know that there’s only one answer, so it couldn’t possibly be either one (therefore it must be Jones), or possibly you thought that we’re crap at making accurate tests.
Try this search:
First part: a New Zealand company – let’s look at LinkedIn New Zealand:
Second part: Her name is Lindsay:
Third part: She’s a “Sales Manger“
Put it all together:
site:nz.linkedin.com intitle:lindsay “sales manger”
Plug that into Google and you only get one possible result: that is poor Lindsay Jones who hasn’t copped on to the fact that she’s spelled her job title incorrectly 4 times on her profile. Someone go and tell her.
The answer was “The Graduate” – most of you got this correct (70%). For those who didn’t know how to find the answer, or may have just guessed the answer, here’s how:
site:blogger.com/profile “Samantha Morley” (“the graduate” | “10 Things I Hate About You” | “Twilight”)
This brings up our one and only result, so now we just go and quickly view her profile, read where it says what her favourite films are (there’s quite a few) but low and behold, here’s The Graduate.
I’m aware that the chances of one using Bing to search for anything is a stretch, but a good Boolean sourcer would know that it uses slightly different commands than Google. Or else they’d have Google’d how to search Bing properly.
71% of you got this wrong, with 49% of you opting for inurl: (which is of course how to search the URL in Google), 19% of you opting for insitestream:url: but the 29% of you who said instreamset:(url): got it right. Here’s a blog from last year on searching Bing.
So that’s it – to the 6 of you who got everything right, congratulations! You’ve really got some sharp Boolean searching skills! To those of you who fell at the Lindsay question, we did warn you at the beginning!
Feel free to challenge your team to the Quiz but don’t give them the answers until after!