I am not sure how to name this post, don't want to use "bad" or "mayhem" to describe those URLs.

phpBB

This first one is from phpBB, here is an example:
http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-916424-start-0-postdays-0-postorder-asc-highlight-.html
The query part is mingled with path. I don't agree with this at all. Resource and query are different types of things, they should never be categorized as the same. One reason I can think of doing so is to make referrer with query part useful when the web statistics analysis software requires more attention.

The only part can be and should be in path is the topic ID and others should only be in query part.

In RFC 3986:

The path component contains data, usually organized in hierarchical
form, that, along with data in the non-hierarchical query component
Although it is not said definitively, but I think judgment is same from everyone who read that URL, i.e. don't mix them.

Google Search

Second one is Google Search URL, the example:
https://www.google.com/#hl=en&sugexp=frgbld&gs_nf=1&tok=c_IuAQcErQcXjyGAd8zW_Q&cp=2&gs_id=60&xhr=t&q=google&pf=p&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&oq=go&aq=&aqi=&aql=&gs_l=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=e2019294b4afe1bc&biw=920&bih=986
249 characters in total and I have replaced some characters because I don't know if it will reveal my privacy or being used maliciously if I posted it unedited. Here is a breakdown version:
https://www.google.com/
 #hl=en&
  sugexp=frgbld&
  gs_nf=1&
  tok=c_IuAQcErQcXjyGAd8zW_Q&
  cp=2&gs_id=60&
  xhr=t&
  q=google&
  pf=p&
  output=search&
  sclient=psy-ab&
  oq=go&
  aq=&
  aqi=&
  aql=&
  gs_l=&
  pbx=1&
  bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.,cf.osb&
  fp=e2019294b4afe1bc&
  biw=920&
  bih=986
20 pairs of key-value. If you are interested, go check out Yahoo and Bing, they are as simple as you search in 90s. Google probably came from 24th century.

I have a problem when I wanted to get a video search query for posting. It took me a while to find out beside the q is the tbm=vid I need.

Of course, you can just grab the entire URL but you never really can understand each parameter is for. You can assume Google does not put sensitive information in the URL, but you are just risking yourself. And, posting that super long URL is not always welcome.

I think Google Search URL become mayhem after they started integrating with different type of searches and adding the sidebar with seamless switching.

Every time when I need to post a search URL, I have to manually edit or create one. I wish there is a option on top-left corner saying "Link to this query" as you have a similar thing in Google Maps.

Final thought

Not everyone has ever paid much attention to URL (except people only care about so-called SEO), but I do and sometimes I didn't like how developers use and design URL.

I would even say
http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=916424
is better and fine, it's history. They didn't have the need to put descriptive text in URL in that era and web server may not be supporting at the time.

As technology evolves, URL rewriting or dispatcher is created and supports such use. We may start to take advantage of it, (some) people do read the URLs. But never mis-use it as phpBB does.

Google used to keep things simple, not complicate. But I don't feel it's still been that way nowadays. People change, so do companies. I am sure some people like the nostalgic Google Search. I don't have preference of how results should look like, but I don't think Google needs to be so complicated on URL, either.

They, the URLs, should be simple and clean, sharp and direct, straight-forward to the point, no fuss, no BS. At least, not too much, so it won't get too stinky.