Could we filter the market boards by school catchment?

[handy_page]

While browsing the Warsaw board, I kept wishing I could narrow property threads by school catchment. It would make local comparisons easier and cut down repeated catchment questions in valuations and market reports.

Would this work best as a required field, an optional tag, or a search filter? My concern with making it compulsory is that casual members may abandon a post if they have to research the catchment first. Posting still needs to be quick, especially on mobile.

 

[OrenBirch]

Optional structured fields seem the best compromise: city first, then district or catchment if known. Search could use those entries without forcing everyone to complete them. Free-form tags would quickly become inconsistent because members may spell, abbreviate, or describe the same area differently.

 

[tidy_window]

How would this handle properties that could be relevant to more than one school, or posters who only know the street or district? Also, would the field be limited to Warsaw? A layout that works there may not map neatly onto boards in other regions.

 

[gardensAndTimber]

I would avoid a catchment-specific field altogether. Catchments can be too uncertain for a permanent label, while members may later treat the label as reliable. A district field plus ordinary text search is less precise, but easier to moderate and less likely to give a false impression.

If a dedicated option is tested, it should allow “unknown” and perhaps multiple entries rather than requiring one answer.

 

[kian_roofs]

A small Warsaw-only trial could settle this without redesigning every market board. Add an optional field hidden behind “more details” on mobile, use a controlled list where practical, and leave “unknown/not listed” available. Then see whether people actually search by it and whether moderators spend much time correcting entries. I would not migrate old threads initially; they can remain searchable by their existing titles and text.