We should be able to create email lists which include 'and' and 'Or' (not just 'is' or 'is not'. E.g. Members who are in city x AND have the title Dr.

Please enhance the advanced search capability to include compound queries (re (x and (y or z)). Also, add more of the SQL to the query language.

I agree, let us combined Saved Searches. Would allow us to do a Boolean search divided into smaller steps. Could be easier for staff who are not clear on how to set up a single complicated Boolean search

I like Michael's idea of combining Saved Searches. It is a simple and easy to understand approach to enhancing the search capabilities. Another benefit is that it also allows you to leverage existing saved searches to build new ones rather than building new ones from scratch. It also lets you make changes to many saves searches by modifying only one. The one downside I foresee with this approach would be that someone changes one Saved Search not realizing that they will be changing the results of another. However, I still like this approach.

Alternatively, you could provide a way to create a Search based upon a combination of existing saved Searches.

There's a new topic that's similar to this one. It suggests that dropdowns should also allow multiple selected in search, which makes a lot of sense. E.g. If you have a dropdown for states, and you want to find members in set of specific states, you currently have to add a new criteria for every single state. https://forums.wildapricot.com/forums/308932-wishlist/suggestions/15719559-filter-for-multiple-items-within-a-single-advanced

Advanced Search already works this way for multiple choice fields. Might that make it a fast implementation for radio button fields?

Although - what would that do to our existing saved searches? Would WA have to convert them all? Could it be done automatically?

I concur that a partial solution would be to make searches on radio button fields allow multiple selected. Combo AND/OR searches could be added later if that's more complicated to implement.

A UX tweak to the proposal I would suggest would be to collapse nested groups when they are not being edited so that the entire query can more easily be read at a high level. The indentation is a good indicator, but when everything is in an editable state, it is more difficult to read.

Ditto Walt

Good call

One simple and helpful addition to this would be to change the radio button search criteria to multiple choice.

For example, now the Membership Level criterion can be "is" or "is not" but only one level can be selected by the radio buttons.

This should be changed to multiple choice so that we can select any number of membership levels in that one criterion.

And the same for Record Status, Role, Member Status, etc.

Of course, if and when this feature is implemented then it would provide a (more complicated) way to do the same thing. But this would make some searches cleaner.

And if the full implementation isn't coming soon, maybe this could be done in the meantime?

This should be merged with "Add Boolean logic to Advanced Search" - https://forums.wildapricot.com/forums/308932-wishlist/suggestions/8825653-add-boolean-logic-to-advanced-search .

I will copy my radio button search to that thread, for which there is already a design.

I second Walt's ask: "One simple and very helpful fix would be to change the radio button search criteria to multiple choice."

I would add the ability to create criteria groups so that we can mix AND/OR searches. Example:

I want to find contacts where (membership level = individual OR membership level = family) AND (membership status = active OR membership status = lapsed)

Bonus points for nested criteria groups

One simple and very helpful fix would be to change the radio button search criteria to multiple choice.

For example, now the Membership Level criterion can be "is" or "is not" but only one level can be selected by the radio buttons.

This should be changed to multiple choice so that we can select any number of membership levels in that one criterion.

And the same for Record Status, Role, Member Status, etc.

not implemented. we will comment here when it's done

Has this been implemented yet and is it only available on certain plans?

The proposed solution to allow nested criteria would work well for our reporting needs.

I also agree with Walt who posted previously. In advanced search, radio button fields should be treated the same as check boxes. Although the member has to choose only one radio button, admins should be able to specify a single search criterion to select several alternatives (any of selected, all, or none). The proposed solution would allow a workaround by nesting and then listing that criteria multiple times, but is inefficient for this purpose.

That would definitely work much better for us.

This design solution looks good.