| Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | bb1126827  | | Posted: | May 8, 2019 10:37 | | Subject: | Rigid Hoses on Studio | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | | Status: | Open | | Vote: | [Yes|No] | |
|
| Hi, would it be possible in a near future to make Rigid hoses flexible on studio
?
for now, as far as i can see we can only do on ribbed hoses and chains. thank
you
|
| Author: | JEL129a | | Posted: | May 7, 2019 18:21 | | Subject: | Studio Subheadings | | Viewed: | 55 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | | Status: | Open | | Vote: | [Yes|No] | |
|
| Can the starwars have it's own separate category under the studio gallery.
There is a lot of great starwars creations in their, but at the same time, if
you are looking for other things, it makes it hard to find something else.
Thanks
|
 |
| Author: | titips | | Posted: | May 7, 2019 10:50 | | Subject: | Automatic store selection in Buy mocs | | Viewed: | 58 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | | Status: | Open | | Vote: | [Yes|No] | |
|
| Hi,
I hope this is the right place to post this.
I think it would be a good thing to be able to set the maximum number of stores
used to fulfill a wanted list search of matching stores in order to have a good
compromise between items costs and shipping costs.
Since shipping costs can't be taken in count during stores automatic selection,
you could add a parameter "max N° of stores" so that we can compair a result
with 10 stores and very low pieces costs and 2 stores with more high pieces costs.
Sometime shipping costs from many stores override high pieces costs from 1 or
2 stores.
hope is clear enough
bye
Giovanni
|
|
| Author: | mfav | | Posted: | May 5, 2019 14:41 | | Subject: | That Randy Color | | Viewed: | 207 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | | Status: | Open | | Vote: | [Yes|No] | |
|
| I want to further the discussion at https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1139677
but under an appropriate thread.
In regards to color.
The comments below go to the use of color labeling in the context of being functional
in regards to search. It is not in regards to color accuracy in terms of cataloging.
There is a schism between the two uses because there is only one available field
in the database to handle what are two distinctly different purposes.
At https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1139699 you bring up the color guidelines.
I appreciate as one of the admins, you're attempting to follow the guidelines.
The guidelines however are in conflict with what an average person with no experience
with the guidelines would expect. They're even in conflict with what someone
with greater than average knowledge of the color labeling conventions on BL would
expect. I would reconsider those guidelines.
There are, by my count currently 170 different distinct colors that the system
knows. https://www.bricklink.com/catalogColors.asp
Assuming an ideal world where all of the decorations are accurately color-described
in the database per the guidelines, it's unreasonable to expect any average
person to be able to remember 170 different colors and to accurately identify
every instance of them. Colors shift over time due to aging and formulation.
Color perception changes relative to adjacent colors. Perceived color accuracy
is relative to the available reference photos or renders, the skill of the photographer
to capture the color, the ability of any individual piece of hardware or software
to properly interpret and render the color, lighting conditions, and other factors.
Color is a rainbow hell-hole.
Here is a test situation to illustrate my point. Take the torso in question in
the original thread and show it to 20 random people. Ask them what the colors
are. I'll wager you a cookie that if you ask 20 people who are not jenwick,
that exactly zero describe the blue as "medium azure." I'll wager you another
cookie that less than half describe the purple as "magenta."
With that in mind, somebody comes to the site and attempts to find something.
Somebody will use what they think the color is because that is their perception
of the color, not because they've reviewed the color chart in depth and have
spent time comparing many pieces to one another to grok the nuances and accurately
predict the exact hue necessary to achieve a match in search. What they'll
do is enter the color they think it is (blue) and do a search, and the search
results will be unsatisfactory, and they'll declare they can't find it
and post in the forum "what is this" or they'll search repeatedly and repeatedly
get unsatisfactory results, declare the site too complicated, and go away in
frustration. This frustration ends up being an indelible negative association
with BrickLink in that person's mind.
We've witnessed this scenario time and again here on the forum. We've
witnessed the endless debates over yellowed LBG vs LG, the confusion with pearl
gray and flat silver (two labels for one color), the confusion with pearl gold
(one label for two colors), people can't find pieces they're looking
for when they're looking right at them because the thumbnail color isn't
the same as the color they searched for, and more.
Having people "go away in frustration" is not in the best interest of BL as a
marketplace. Presumably the 10,000 plus shops here have invested some effort
in attempting to sell things. With that in mind, I argue that things which facilitate
sales should have precedent over "historical accuracy" when it comes to searching
the catalog. One needs to be able to find something before one can dig deep into
understanding it and its associated nuances...if one even needs or wants to understand
them.
We know a better solution to the issue would be a more robust database. As we've
been told repeatedly that isn't going to happen, you're left with a choice.
Either you populate the description field with user-friendliness or with historical
accuracy in mind (for user-friendliness, decoration colors in the item/description
would be their most generic counterparts: black, gray, silver, white, gold, red,
orange, yellow, green, blue, purple, brown, tan, chrome, copper, and speckle).
I would suggest the item field be populated with user-friendliness in mind and
that the note/comment field be generously populated with the historical accuracy
and other more esoteric information.
It's not an ideal solution, but it would work within the current operational
parameters of the database and site interface.
On contributions.
I went through a discussion with the Stormchaser about this at length. This isn't
going to improve until all the UI is improved. The forms are too convoluted and
not explained well and the explanations are hidden and it's just too much
work for anybody who isn't more than casually dedicated. All the instructions
for filling a form need to be adjacent to the fields on the form. The instructions
are buried elsewhere. If you start filling a form, then have to leave to find
instructions, the form is then blanked when you return, and that's an issue
and causes frustration. The UI can't improve much without programmer time.
The whole issue gained no traction while I was communicating with the Stormchaser.
I don't expect any improvement any time soon. Refer to second picture attached
after you finish reading this post.
In regards to the Stormchaser.
You'll forgive me if I read your statement about following in his footsteps
probably not the way you intended it. It's pretty clear that being a volunteer
admin at BrickLink is basically like being in the "zone" in Stalker https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0079944/
To really appreciate the statement, you'll have to experience the movie,
if you haven't already.
Stormchaser's footsteps promised much change, then he made like Mrs. Hogwallop.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsAZ0RweVxk So maybe don't follow those footsteps
too closely.
I had a number of communications with the Stormchaser both on- and off-line.
I'll suggest to you the same thing I did with him: read Steve Krug's
"Don't Make Me Think" https://www.amazon.com/Dont-Make-Think-Revisited-Usability/dp/0321965515/
This book has been revised a few times. I'm familiar with the second version,
but would expect the later versions to be effectively the same content probably
with more recent references. It's a quick read, and appropriate for non-technical
types. He said it helped him with how he thought about things he wanted to do.
So. Food for thought. And in closing, because you asked, a portrait of Randy
after reading this post.
|
|
|
| Author: | MidwestBrick | | Posted: | May 2, 2019 18:05 | | Subject: | Change NPB Timeline | | Viewed: | 210 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | | Status: | Open | | Vote: | [Yes|No] | |
|
| I had enough of these in the last few weeks that waiting 2 full weeks is painful
to complete them.
I don't mind the 1 week to pay before it is started. But another full 7 days
to complete the NPB is not necessary.
I would propose 3 additional days and that is it. Let us get our stock back
in our stores to sell to someone else instead of being held at our will for 14
full days when 10 is plenty enough.
I can't be the only one that feels this way and 14 days might have worked
10-15 years ago when access to Smart-Phones wasn't as widespread, but these
days, you can't go far without having the ability to respond. Thanks
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
|
Canada, Quebec
USA, Illinois
Italy, Lombardia
)
)
