# Add "orderdesc" modification to advanced search

**URL:** <https://meta.discourse.org/t/add-orderdesc-modification-to-advanced-search/38545>\
**Category:** Feature\
**Created:** [January 27, 2016, 1:35am UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/add-orderdesc-modification-to-advanced-search/38545 "2016-01-27T01:35:24Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 4

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![meglio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/meta/user_avatar/meta.discourse.org/meglio/32/71444_2.png) [@meglio](https://meta.discourse.org/u/meglio)\
**Post date:** [January 27, 2016, 2:21am UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/add-orderdesc-modification-to-advanced-search/38545/4 "2016-01-27T02:21:19Z")

</div>

We should find a way to allow for opposite ordering for any ordering type (kind of a universal way of doing it), then easier to remember and use.

> [@sam](#):
>
> struggling to think of use cases for orderdesc:likes or orderdesc:views

You never know what one could come up with 🙂

I’d use `orderdesk:likes` to identify which type of material is the worst in terms of people likes and not create similar topics, or not include them in the lists.

`orderdesc:views` might possibly indicate topics that need some more useful information to get more attractions from organic search.

I think there might be more use-cases I can’t think of, why not just make it possible with a single operator.

---

_[View the full topic](https://meta.discourse.org/t/add-orderdesc-modification-to-advanced-search/38545)._