BrickLink Discussion Forum

In General, BLUSER13161 writes:

I can't help myself from returning to this topic.

It is not right to erase people who have contributed to the catalog and turn
them into a meaningless number (and a username that rhymes with "loser.").

snip

BrickLink wants contributions. BrickLink wants an involved community. But when
BrickLink treats former contributors so dismissively, by erasing them into meaninglessness,
it makes me think they have no respect for contributors.

BrickLink contributors deserve better treatment than this. Anonymizing people
who have contributed to the catalog was a poor decision. It was a careless and
heartless decision.

I urge the site to reconsider the decision to anonymize any former catalog and
inventory contributors.

This is what happens when regulators (read government flunkies) pull their snouts
from the trough of public money long enough to do something. It becomes an unmitigated
RFU. The privacy and scrubbing laws exist for a reason, what some might view
as a good reason, but a reason none the less. It is easier to place the burden
on a few companies than to make all individuals behave like responsible citizens.

But I will say for this process - at the same time as scrubbing members, existing
members who have contributed should be contacted and requested to agree that,
as part of the process of contributing to the catalogue, such contributions are
acknowledged. Furthermore, members contributing, must sign a waiver allowing
BL Corp to keep using the contribution and BL's acknowledgement thereof,
for as long as the site persists. When a member closes his/her account, they
must be reminded of the waiver again and agree again as part of the process of
closing an account. Members who choose not to outlive the site, must make sure
that their wills make provision for the contributions to be acknowledged as long
as the site persists. BL must just learn to manage properly, is all. Members
must just learn to be responsible, is all.

The heartbreaking thing is that sans BL managing this, all catalogue contributions
will eventually be made by BLUSERs. So why bother at all? Just acknowledge all
contributions as by BLUSERs already or, alternatively, manage the process of
contributing and membership a bit better. You cannot do anything about the lot
who never thought to give BL their permission to outlive their usefulness, but
you can deal with the existing membership in a better manner.

Author:

bje

Posted:

Jan 24, 2020 12:58

Subject:

Re: 2FA or some other additional login security

Viewed:

36 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Yo_Yo_Flamingo writes:

In Suggestions, patpendlego writes:

Admin,

Please implement 2FA or some other additional login security to BrickLink account.

2FA = 2-Factor-Authentication

It could help prevent hacking or stealing of accounts and account & inventory
information.

Of course this could be set as optional on the account.

Thank you.

I could not be any more opposed to this.

+1^google*1^google
Enough said

Author:

bje

Posted:

Jan 23, 2020 12:09

Subject:

Re: multiple shipping addresses ?

Viewed:

30 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Rarah writes:

Is it possible to create 2 addresses that I can always choose from when completing
an order? I have one address in Slovakia for most orders and one in Czech Republic
for CZ orders. Now the only way around is to simply edit my address and after
order placed change it back. because some stores have automated payment for shipping
and if I don´t change the country i don´t get the right options. I know people
in US will probably not understand why I need something but specifically for
people in SK/CZ many people have address in both countries to optimize shipping
cost etc. It´s from the past but that country difference makes me save 7 EUR
on shipping when I instead of 9€ pay just 2€.

Not possible, despite it making complete sense. In fact on every webstore I've
used I get a billing and delivery address, even the certified store has that
here so it is nothing strange.

You will have to continue changing the address here every time
https://www.bricklink.com/pref_address.asp

I do not think sellers can see your history any longer so it is just inconvenient.
I've had 21 of them since September last year

Author:

bje

Posted:

Jan 7, 2020 10:29

Subject:

Re: New Payment Method

Viewed:

68 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, LaygoAdelaide writes:

Would it be possible to add another payment method.
Afterpay
Zip Pay
or at least have a blank one so that we can input our own custom method.

+1^google
Actually add a few blank ones, make it country specific with country specific
shipping methods and allow for direct QR codes and links. Or better yet - just
allow sellers in countries other than the USA to also use payment methods that
are relevant to their own circumstances even if it is miles ahead of what is
avaialable in the USA. If we can have onsite payments for paypal and stripe,
there should be no earthly reason for other methods not to be enabled as well.

Author:

bje

Posted:

Jan 6, 2020 16:11

Subject:

Re: Instructions Dimensions -- way off?

Viewed:

42 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Give.Me.A.Brick writes:

On My Inventory the dimensions for set

7965-1 (Inv) Millennium Falcon
1229 Parts, 6 Minifigures, 2011
Sets: Star Wars: Star Wars Episode 4/5/6

are 582mm x 378mm. Which is
the size of the Box itself (!)

How were these dimensions populated and what can I do to remove them altogether
(not just one by one)?

(Or better yet to mass-set the dimensions correctly.)

Thanhk you again.

LOL me again, and thank you for alerting me to this as well as I went back and
checked mine saw some of them had a base thickness of 1cm - this is wrong. Research
cap on and lo behold - I think there are still a few of these floating about:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1063022

So that gets to the how it is populated. How to mass change it is another matter
altogether. Would you just want to change the thickness or do you want actual
dimensions? For actual dimensions you are going to have to measure each and every
one which still has the z dimension set to 10mm or 0mm. There is no way to simply
check this you have to check your entire inventory manually as there is no tool
to search the packing dimensions of items in your inventory. I'm not quite
sure if you can mass change the dimensions for your inventory - are they not
all different? Setting them all to manual for the time being, would be the same
method as in that other thread, except now you go M for Manual.

To mass change the dimensions:
For an item which you want to change the dimensions to say dim X, dim Y, dim
Z to 180 x 38 x 28 mm
Use the find and replace method in this message:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1166531
You make the file as you would upload it and add the lines as follows: (put angle
brackets where I have now got square brackets)

[INVDIMX]180[/INVDIMX]
[INVDIMY]38[/INVDIMY]
[INVDIMZ]28[/INVDIMZ]

As I noted - you anyway have to punch in values for each one. It might be easier
to set them all to manual, have some unfortunae soul sit with a caliper for a
day and ask for mass update on this topic:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1059042
then reset your invetory again. It normally takes about a day for these to be
fixed, but since Russell is the only doing all of this now, I would suggest giving
a bit of extra time.

I'm also going to apologise here, I've never thought of checking those
dmension when I submit items for the catalogue. My bad. I will make a big fat
note to fix this oversight on my part, thank you again for pointing me in the
right direction.

HTH

Author:

bje

Posted:

Jan 6, 2020 11:23

Subject:

Re: Analysts Ruin Everything

Viewed:

48 times

Topic:

In Problem, calsbricks writes:
snip

BTW did you see the article 62bricks published the other day about the use of
My Pictures in your terms page. It works and I will be improving mine shortly.

https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1173080

Thanks for that link Bill, we had national electricity and data issues again
over the weekend, so I am still playing catch-up. I took a very quick look at
that now and it looks like I will be able to make this work for my terms pages
and get rid of hosted images. I will try it for invoices as well.

Author:

bje

Posted:

Jan 6, 2020 10:42

Subject:

Re: Analysts Ruin Everything

Viewed:

85 times

Topic:

In Problem, StormChaser writes:

In Problem, calsbricks writes:

The catalogue is a different animal and needs a huge amount of thought.

Lets get behind hiring some senior analysts

I refuse to get behind, in front of, beside, over, or under this in any way until
someone can demonstrate that we, as a community, are incapable of catalog construction
and maintenance.

I really hope you are not offended by this, but with the greatest of respect,
you yourself walked away from this very idea that it should be a community thing.
I think every project you had in place to start, has been on hold for all of
the time you've not been here. And those were to a large extent also cosmetic
as it cannot change the true nature of the catalogue or inventory on here as
the one is maintained with a view to manage a library and the other is done with
a view to manage auction lots.

Analysts are paid to do a job, they have measurable outcomes against a set of
pre-defined goals and they can be held to account. Community based jobbing, on
the other hand, comes to a screeching halt everytime something happens which
somebody somewhere has got some or other issue with. I will not get behind a
community based improvement again until such time as as we can be sure that the
involvement of members do not lead to the improvements being derailed because
of issues beyond the control of the very members who are trying to make the changes.

For 20 years the community has managed the catalog without the help of senior
or junior or any other kinds of analysts. We haven't done things perfectly,
but we have the potential to do much better with member involvement and the support
of management.

I agree that members should be involved, but the process of how to manage that
involvement is what is important. The idea that the catalogue is the be all and
end all, is one side of the coin only. Sellers sell lots, and no inventory management
can be efficiently done on site for as long as the disconnect between the catalogue
and stores exist. For that to happen, it will require community involvement,
but more importantly, it would require a major rethink of how things are done
from the ground up - which is precisely why measurable and responsible management
of input is required, thus analysts.

Author:

bje

Posted:

Dec 27, 2019 16:00

Subject:

Re: Please approve

Viewed:

66 times

Topic:

In Catalog, axaday writes:

Would it be possible to get a mid-level catalog stage where things that had not
been officially released were not bought and sold, but catalog work could be
done in a sandbox?

How would you do that, since new parts in the set are also not be released, and
neither the minifigures? Maybe I've got the idea wrong, but I fail to see
how it would policy to only approve new sets once released and then allow minifigures
which is not part of any set to be bought and sold. I know the policy prior to
the new ToS was for sets not yet officially released to be dealt with in this
manner, but since the new ToS also prohibts the sale of anything not officially
releaaed by TLG, I still have to wonder about the contents of a set, and what
purpose it would serve to actually add anything prior to the set in which it
appears, being approved.

I will anyway do a few and see how this works. Besides, from what I can gather,
Russell is now the only one actually doing anything on the catalogue, so there
is probably a time issue as well.

Author:

bje

Posted:

Dec 27, 2019 13:06

Subject:

Re: Please approve

Viewed:

76 times

Topic:

In Catalog, randyf writes:

In Catalog, Leftoverbricks writes:

Just to be clear, all admins are inactive until the new Community Experts Program
is put in place. This does NOT mean they will be inactive in the near future.

Meaning that we have to wait until TLG takes action to do what?
This sounds a bit unclear for me. Can you provide a bit more detail on this?

Us admins know about as much as you do. We have been told for about a month now
that paperwork would be forthcoming that we would need to sign. Some kind of
legal agreements, I assume. We have not seen anything yet. Then, all of us were
asked to stop all work as of December 17 with no warning or explanation why we
couldn’t do anything. We don’t know when we will be able to do anything again.

Cheers,
Randy

P.S. I am on vacation anyways right now, but I was hoping to do things when I
returned.

You mean you went from being admin to

31219pb02 Duplo, Plant Mushroom, 2 x 2 Base with Yellow Geometric Pattern
Parts: DUPLO, Plant

Author:

bje

Posted:

Dec 27, 2019 10:24

Subject:

Re: Please approve

Viewed:

69 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:

In Catalog, bje writes:

In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:

Yesterday were offcialy released some new 2020 sets. They are available to buy
from offcial LEGO web shop in Europe.
https://brickset.com/article/47982/[uk-eu]-sale-now-on-at-lego-com

Snip

Do you not approve these yourself, or are you not expert enough? They've
been on sale at certified LEGO stores since yesterday here as well.

I'm not allow to do it anymore.

When I did not see these approved yesterday, I thought you were on holiday

Sorry to hear that you are not allowed for this any longer, you were quite on
the ball as it were. Hopefully we do not all have to wait for US releases, that
would be quite painful.

Are we sure that inventories can be loaded up for these new sets as TLG have
not released the inventories or the instructions for any of those I've
got? Or do we not have to wait for official release of inventries, unlike the
sets?

By the way - what is the position with parts - when is it confirmed that TLG
has officially released it?

P.S.
I would like to submit new inventories for SW sets

ditto for some friendsm, city, technic....

Author:

bje

Posted:

Dec 27, 2019 10:12

Subject:

Re: Please approve

Viewed:

93 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:

Yesterday were offcialy released some new 2020 sets. They are available to buy
from offcial LEGO web shop in Europe.
https://brickset.com/article/47982/[uk-eu]-sale-now-on-at-lego-com

Snip

Do you not approve these yourself, or are you not expert enough? They've
been on sale at certified LEGO stores since yesterday here as well.

P.S.
I would like to submit new inventories for SW sets

ditto for some friendsm, city, technic....

Author:

bje

Posted:

Dec 21, 2019 01:48

Subject:

Re: Another Test

Viewed:

45 times

Topic:

Inventories

In Inventories, bje writes:

In Inventories, StormChaser writes:

I enjoyed the first test so much that I've made another.

I inventoried this set just over a year ago:

4199-1 (Inv) FreeStyle Bucket #2
402 Parts, 1996
Sets: FreeStyle

There is an uncorrected error in the inventory. The error stems from unwritten
(but rather commonsense) policy related to either the catalog or inventories.
What is the error and what is the unwritten policy?

First person to correctly reply wins. As usual, there will be no prize.

The flowers? [p=3742c01] since presumably the build and the instructions only
show the use of 3 of the 4 on the sprue, the remainder being an extra? I don't
think I have ever seen a set use all 4 of those on the sprue.

Grin, too early in the morning here, should have read properly. Nice photo by
the way, the scenery is the prize

Author:

bje

Posted:

Dec 21, 2019 01:45

Subject:

Re: Another Test

Viewed:

35 times

Topic:

Inventories

In Inventories, StormChaser writes:

I enjoyed the first test so much that I've made another.

I inventoried this set just over a year ago:

4199-1 (Inv) FreeStyle Bucket #2
402 Parts, 1996
Sets: FreeStyle

Author:

bje

Posted:

Dec 16, 2019 09:05

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Minifig sw1030

Viewed:

27 times

Topic:

Inventories Requests

In Inventories Requests, StormChaser writes:

In Inventories Requests, yorbrick writes:

So if he was a figure, would that all be the accessory?

Thanks, I believe I catch your drift.

Bad idea on my part. Like I said in a different reply, either someone comes
up with a better idea or we carry on the way we're going now. I guess things
aren't all bad - just frustrating, confusing, and inconsistent at times.
I'm certain there must be a better way of doing things.

Ideas are just that - ideas, the more we have of them the better because it can
lead to improvements. What if nobody ever had the idea of a marketplace for LEGO
parts?

You might want to take a look at fishbase.org
Not only for the structure but also for definitions and the search page.

Author:

bje

Posted:

Dec 16, 2019 08:53

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Minifig sw1030

Viewed:

36 times

Topic:

Inventories Requests

In Inventories Requests, StormChaser writes:

In Inventories Requests, bje writes:

You have still not defined what a minifigure is.

We have to get away from that. But no, I haven't defined what a figure is.
I'm only concerned at the moment with inventories because that's what
we're discussing. Yes, I absolutely agree that the definition of a figure
must be created - currently there is none.

You cannot get away from it because it is the very definition which will tell
you what must be inventoried and what not. How would you inventory a set if you
do not know what to include as minifigures? This is not a chicken and egg situation.
The inventory can only come into existence if the item to be inventoried exists.
See all inventory change requests for sets with Zobo the Robot.

I get you just want to create a standard for how to inventory the thing that
is on the list right now. I'm sure when zoologists started with taxanomy
the idea was to just say everything is an animal. Had they done that, it would
have made it very difficult to find smaller subsets of data or to add new discoveries.
These are not random parts - an assembly has to be precise in order for it to
be listed and sold. The assembly, definition, image, inventory, parts and weight
must all tie together in one complete whole, else some listings will be incomplete
and some not. And while we want inventories to be correct, they must be correct
to be sold, viewed, searched, listed and bought, not be inventoried for the sake
of having an inventory.

I would not like to break minifigures now listed in my store because I cannot find all of the accessories required to now suddenly supply them as they are in the instructions or in set images with all hand accessories etc.

Ah, but my clever mind has already solved that problem. Read my solution here:

https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1170351

I did read that solution. If you think that the average buyer is going to look
at a minifigure and decide that it is complete based on its year of release -
I wish you good luck. If a buyer comes to this site with the specific intention
of buying x number of complete minifigures, the date might be a lost on him.
Also, some minifugures are re-released, so you might end up with a situation
where you have minifigures tied to a specific set because of a release date.

Also what do you with the rest of the stickersheet
once you have now taken the one off to sell your minifigure as complete?

As was pointed out, the standard way that has been done for years is to include
a plain figure in the inventory and a stickered figure as a counterpart. Won't
cause any problems.

Granted, but my reading was not that couterparts will be allowed for stickered
torso assemblies.

Also as regards full assemblies, you
might want to revisit the MBA figures as a startting point for some of the difficulties
to be encountered.

I was referring to torso/leg assemblies as shown in the current policies. If
you have an example of where the proposed policy would break down, please post
a macro tag.

And to answer a couple of people who asked: yes, this would include handheld
accessories. All accessories. But only going forward. Again, see my latest
message above.

So a battle droid with all of its accessories would include ammunition, because
the battle idea might not really come to fruition without ammunition? Meaning
this part:

20105c01 (Inv) Minifigure, Weapon Crossbow with Mini Blaster / Shooter with Dark Bluish Gray Trigger (20105 / 15392)
Parts: Minifigure, Weapon

must in future also be included for minifigures with the tiles or
round plates required to make up the full minifigure, and of course you will
need more parts - one for the crossbow assembly which takes 1x1 plates and one
for the assembly which take tiles. I do not think that new parts should be added
in this manner to fix a date issue. Other members might disagree, but I do not
think that catalogues should be structured in a manner where you create inconsistent
approaches based on an arbitrary date.

Author:

bje

Posted:

Dec 16, 2019 07:29

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Minifig sw1030

Viewed:

31 times

Topic:

Inventories Requests

Wow, you manged to do this in less than 30 minutes! Man I can't even type
that fast

You have still not defined what a minifigure is. It is not good enough to say
it must consist of a bunch of parts put together from an instruction manual.
In that manner a wheel assembly can also be a minifigure. I am not very keen
on droids and robots as minifigures, but I understand the reason for including
those as such.

What you are trying to do is to say that if a thing has two eyes and a mouth
it is a fish, so everything with two eyes and a mouth must now have all of the
parts of a fish. Then all fishes will be correctly inventoried. Not. A mammal
is not a fish, even though some mammals can have two eyes and a mouth (and fins),
you therefor cannot inventory a mammal as a fish and vice versa. So a droid might
have different catalogue needs as opposed to a mini-doll. A droid might have
different accessories etc. I still do not think that hair accessories are any
different to hand accessories. Does something with a head and a bow or a tiara
represent a minifigure? Could well be since the current definition of mini-dolls
says the bow forms part of a figure and must be inventoried as such. So when
the bow is attached to a dog, does the dog not now become a figure in those terms
and must it be inventoried, especially since TLG gave it a name and made it a
character as opposed to a part?

There are other examples - tea pots spring to mind. I would not like to break
minifigures now listed in my store because I cannot find all of the accessories
required to now suddenly supply them as they are in the instructions or in set
images with all hand accessories etc. Also what do you with the rest of the stickersheet
once you have now taken the one off to sell your minifigure as complete? I think
also you will be hard pressed to find stickered assembleis as new parts. So will
a stickered torso now be part of a used minifigure or is it new? Or better yet,
would you now part out stickersheets into individual stickers as well? Again,
just because it has two eyes and a mouth, don't make it a fish.

This needs some thinking before tinkering. My store will not be able to cope
with some of the changes mentioned here. Also as regards full assemblies, you
might want to revisit the MBA figures as a startting point for some of the difficulties
to be encountered.

In Inventories Requests, StormChaser writes:

In Inventories Requests, StormChaser writes:

If it were me, I think at this point I'd choose the everything-shown-in-set-instructions
approach

I decided to give writing such a policy a shot, just to see what it would look
like. Here is current policy for anyone unfamiliar with it. It consists of
404 words:

•No Hand-Held Accessories - The inventory should only include minifigures
as they came in an official LEGO set without any hand-held accessories. If the
picture of a minifigure in the catalog does include hand-held accessories, please
consider Adding an Image without hand-held accessories.

•No Extra Items - The inventory should only include those items that are needed
to build the minifigure according to the building instructions. Any extra minifigure
parts, such as visors, should be included in the Extra Items section of the set
inventory.

•No Alternate Items - Minifigure inventories do not allow for alternate items
such as the variations in the head stud type. If the variation is significant,
consider adding a new minifigure to the catalog, but it is at the discretion
of the Catalog Administrators whether it is accepted. If the variation occurs
a significant amount of the time, then consider submitting a change request to
the minifigure inventory; acceptance of any inventory change request is at the
discretion of the Inventory Administrators.

•Headgear - Always include Headgear and any removable Headgear Accessories as
shown in the appropriate assembly instructions for the minifigure.

•Torsos, Arms and Hands - Minifigure inventories should contain the complete
torso, arms and hands assembly. Use only torsos from the Minifig, Torso Assembly
category. If an entry is not found, then please go to the Add Item to Catalog
page and add it under that category. Then, if possible, Add an Image. Only torso
assemblies as they came in an official LEGO set should be added to the catalog.
A minifigure with a stickered torso should have a stickered torso (not a plain
torso) in its inventory.

•Legs and Hips - Minifigure inventories should contain the complete hips and
legs assembly, not one entry for the hips and 2 entries for each leg. Use only
the legs from the Minifig, Legs Assembly category. If an entry is not found,
then please go to the Add Item to Catalog page and add it under that category.
Then, if possible, Add an Image. When the hips and both legs are all the same
color, use the 970c00 Hips and Legs assembly

•Neck/Body Wear and Footgear - Always include any Neck/Body Wear/Footgear as
shown in the appropriate assembly instructions for the minifigure. Skis and surfboards
are not considered footgear and should not be included. Items that come on sprues
are to be listed as individual parts in minifigure inventories.

Here is my revision that consists of 161 words, or less than half of the current
wording:

•Figure inventories should include all items shown in the complete figure
assembly in the set instructions, including any accessories. In the absence
of instructions, other sources such as set packaging may be used to determine
the inventory.

•Extra Items - Extra parts, such as visors, should be included as extras in the
set inventory.

•Alternate Items - Figure inventories cannot include alternate items such as
variations in the head stud type. If the variation is significant, submit a new
figure to the catalog. If the variation occurs a significant amount of the time,
submit a change request for the figure inventory.

•Assemblies - Include all assemblies as originally assembled in a new set unless
assembled for display purposes.

•Stickered Parts - A figure with a sticker applied should have the stickered
part in its inventory.

•Sprues and Multipacks - Items on sprues or in multipacks are included as individual
parts in figure inventories, with the remaining parts in the set inventory.

Author:

bje

Posted:

Dec 12, 2019 09:16

Subject:

Re: Red eyebrows for cty0164

Viewed:

32 times

Topic:

In Catalog, normann1974 writes:

I have found

Minifig No: cty0164 Name: Fire - Reflective Stripes, Black Legs, White Fire Helmet, Glasses and Brown Thin Eyebrows

cty0164 (Inv) Fire - Reflective Stripes, Black Legs, White Fire Helmet, Glasses and Brown Thin Eyebrows
Minifigures: Town: City: Fire

from

7206-1 (Inv) Fire Helicopter
326 Parts, 3 Minifigures, 2010
Sets: Town: City: Fire

with red eyebrows. Should I change the
minifig or create a new minifigure with red eyebrows? It's possible that
this set and minifig never came with brown eyebrows. The set was inventoried
before the red eyebrow version was identified (by me) a couple of years ago.
Please advise.

/Jan

Red eyebrows on mine. My set, hoever, not sealed any longer as it has partly
been parted out. Minifigure is complete and very definitely red eyebrows.

Add a new minifigure and make it an alternate perhaps. The head on mine is

3626bpb0122b Minifigure, Head Glasses Rectangular, Red Thin Eyebrows, Smile Pattern - Blocked Open Stud
Parts: Minifigure, Head {Yellow}

Author:

bje

Posted:

Dec 11, 2019 05:10

Subject:

Re: Parts Category Tree

Viewed:

39 times

Topic:

In Catalog, mfav writes:

There seems to be some conflation or confusion regarding the data and the database
structure and how those things relate.

The structure is how it's built and the data is what's within the structure.

Rebuilding the data from the ground up is not necessary. Some of the data is
fine as is and simply would need to be migrated or an existing field related
to a new table and field.

There's no other way to increase functionality or make operations more efficient
without some fundamental change to the underlying structure.

There is no way to create substantive efficiencies within the existing framework.
You have 256 deck chairs and a 900 x 900 foot deck. You can rearrange the chairs
all you want, but it's never going to be more than 256 deck chairs. The arrangement
that makes chair #125 easier to find may make chair #93 harder to find. Everything
is a trade-off.

There is no quick and there is no easy.

If you want to undertake "reorganizing" or "cleaning" the data...for example,
examine all the minifig heads. Rewrite all the descriptions in a uniform manner...start
from top to bottom...hair, eyebrows, eyes, nose, mouth, whiskers, scars, blemishes,
wrinkles, and so on...then that will lead to an incremental improvement in the
data. Functionality isn't going to be improved without a change in the available
tools. I often state that you can cut down a tree with a spoon, but it's
not the best tool for the job. It will get done, but with great effort and it
will take a long time. Invest in an appropriate tool, like a chainsaw, and the
effort decreases, the time decreases, and the satisfaction increases.

Your argument seems to be for changing one spoon for another.

Additional categories won't solve anything. At this point, this is the difference
between sorting mixed pieces of lego in 230 boxes or 240 boxes. You're just
rearranging the deck chairs. Again. When the supermarket redesigns the floor
plan and product location within the store you've been shopping in for 10
years, does that help you find the chicken soup?

Not that I expect you to go through the exercise, but here http://v4ei.com/mini-fig-ure-outer/index.php
is the custom search instruction thing I wrote. It will take about 2 or 3 hours
to complete if you want to do it. Anyway, going through the source information
(skip creating the html if you want) will kind of lay bare the inconsistencies
within the current data. You'll find obvious typos. You'll find similar
items described similarly, but with differing sequences...like items described
dissimilarly...dissimilar items described similarly...nothing you wouldn't
expect when the data is crowd sourced over a long period of time. Some swaths
of data are really good. There has been effort put into the data, but not always
of consistent quality or consistent methodology.

Looking at a dataset as a whole, and not piecemeal, can be quite enlightening.

Do we need any listing that contains the phrase "without such-and-such"? Is it
helpful to list what something doesn't contain? Fish without bicycle spokes.
Butterfly without steel beams.

So, to answer your question, yes and no. I'm making the argument for additional
data. I'm making the argument for additional database structure. I'm
making the argument for thinking things through thoroughly before starting to
build something.

Right now there's no way to add deck chairs to our deck. We need another
deck. And a way to get chairs from one deck to another. And ways to get users
from deck to deck and chair to chair.

If you decide to do the custom search creation, all of it, I think by the end
of that exercise it should provide enlightenment as to the limitations of what
can be done within the current structure and the quality of the current dataset.
Those things should be able to inform your thinking on how to better conceive
a plan for improvement within the current limitations.

Read what Bill says in the light of Bill actually knows what the f--- he's
talking about instead of Bill's a cranky old man. Bill is a cranky old man
because he actually does know what the f--- he's talking about. When
you fully understand what Bill is saying, at that point you'll understand
the complexity of the issue. You seem to think the problem is lack of simple
programming. It's not. It's waaaaaay deeper than that.

Discussion at this point isn't leading to any solutions. I currently find
no value in the obsessive hand-wringing, worry-warting, prognostication of doom,
hopes, wishes, unfulfilled dreams, and ideas of improvement around here. Be patient
and wait for Superplasticorp to take over the Titanic and see where we are in
a month or two.

If you need to do something because you need to do something, I'd suggest
creating a wish list to present to Superplasticorp. They say they want to engage
with the AFOLs. Well, here's your opportunity. What's most important?
Is it more data that's definitive and easily accessible? Is it greater selection
of trans-neon-green elements? History? Factory tours? Let Superplasticorp know
what they can do to facilitate their selling you more stuff...they'll listen
to that.

Improvements of the type often discussed here on the board will take years
to implement, if that's even an option. It could be that Superplasticorp
leaves the current BL management in place and things carry on in the lopsided
manner they have been for the last several years. Or Superplasticorp could actually
value the AFOL community, engage with the community, cooperate with the community,
respect the community, find value in the knowledge the community has to offer,
and not expect those with the knowledge and who actually provide the content
to work for free versus working for mutual benefit. Time will tell. Maybe.

I'm going to shut up now.

No need to shut up. This goes the way it always goes as we are always trying
to find WHAT must be done with the data, as opposed to WHERE the data must be.
As someone who has worked in an actual library and made a top to bottom study
of the Dewey, AL and Coleridge's systems, I can only say +1 000 to everything
both you and Bill wrote. And I'll add a tail piece - if you do not document
a la Dewey how you are supposed to classify, then nothing will come of it. You
can tag, describe, redesign all you want but if there is no consistent documented
method of adding a minifigure head with its correct description, then mistakes
will appear again, meaning all of the work preceding that single mistake is factually
useless.

There is a reason some very clever people spent many years designing library
catalogue systems such as Dewey. There is also a reason the best accounting systems,
whether an open source ERP or a shelf package, all start with the design of the
chart of accounts - it is the basic start as to WHERE the data must go, not what
must be done with it. I have consistently designed charts of accounts to be useful
across the board - whether it is a micro business or a group of companies, the
basic chart design comes down to knowing upfront where that data must go. Even
in the old days of HAPAS, it only took for 1 first year clerk with an allocation
error as a result of bad documentation to screw up an entire chart in use for
3 years and from there the P&L and the Balance sheet. All of the discussions
on here, including Bill's discussion some time ago about the catalogue, end
up with what must be done with the data. In a well designed system, the data
is available anywhere for anything because it is known how it is classified.

Thus, a user can extract his sales data for individual colours of individual
parts only when the data is consistently available across the entire platform.
At present you have to search for cushions in order to find the chairs and do
not ask for different colours of chairs

The catalogue does not IMO need another band aid over the festering and pus filled
wound of its poorly designed descriptors and poorly documented and inconsistent
application of catalogue entries. It needs corrective surgery, much like everything
else. Time will tell if the investment required will be made. At present though,
there is still not enough information to make that call. All I see is that searching
the catalogue, even with the best of tools, remains for many users a difficulty.
IF the present systems is deemed to be the way forward, then by all means bring
in the tags (which was supposed to have been done sometime this year if I remember
correctly) and resort categories. It will be fun, but not productive. TLG might
want suggestions and make improvements, then again they might look at the scope
of what needs to be done and decide that plasters is maybe a bit cheaper and
more readily available. After all - adding tags and reclassifying will be done
with volunteers, redesign has to be done with (paid) employees. Some things require
money and that is the measure of the commitment. TLG's commitment remains
to be measured - we know the level of commitment of volunteers already.

Author:

bje

Posted:

Nov 28, 2019 10:09

Subject:

Re: Toy's R Us build day sets?

Viewed:

66 times

Topic:

https://www.bricklink.com/catalogListOld.asp?pg=1&q=Toy%26%2339%3Br%26%2339%3Bus&catLike=W&catString=745&sortBy=N&sortAsc=A&itemBrand=1000&catType=G&v=1

In Catalog, rikitikitaviguy writes:

Dead link....

Change to:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogListOld.asp?pg=1&q=Toys&catLike=W&catString=745&sortBy=N&sortAsc=A&itemBrand=1000&catType=G&v=1

In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:

In Catalog, AZbrickGUY writes:

Hello. Anyway we can get the Toy's R Us build sets added in the set list?
Or am I not looking in the right spot? Thanks.

Author:

bje

Posted:

Nov 26, 2019 07:20

Subject:

Re: "Fast Shipper" badge for Sellers

Viewed:

45 times

Topic: