>>It's not only the AND approach. You do not allow it at all unless contained already in a phrase.
>
>The AND approach is the default mode. The only one is the exact match.
>
>>What about the 2nd half of my post where I asked why this is? Performance? Arbitrary? Seems like changing a 3 to a 2 wouldn't be too tough. I understand why you might not want a search on 1 character as you would get almost 100% of the messages, but 2 seems reasonable.
>
>There's no specific reason. As I said, it is not supported because it's not implemented.

Okaaaaay...

You said before that it was not supported presently; you gave no reason why.

So, after going through all this do you now see that it might be something useful. Is there something more formal than this thread that you need to consider it for implementation?