Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | SylvainLS  | | Posted: | May 25, 2020 11:32 | | Subject: | Re: Why are these Hinges? | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | I say “Off with purpose-defined categories!”
|
How would you define those and what categories do you consider to be purpose-defined?
I think these probably are, but beyond that I'm not sure which specific
ones you'd consider purpose-defined.
Bracket
|
Bracket is a shape.
Hinge is a function.
Shape.
Function.
Function.
If I encounter a part whose function “obviously” is to launch things (and there’s
no “projectile launcher” category and I know there’s no such category because
that would be a function category), I’ll search in a category matching its shape,
or try to search for the term “launcher” or “cannon” in its description.
It isn’t obvious to me that
is a projectile launcher. It’s a 1 x 4 brick with some sort of slot.
Obviously,
is NOT a projectile launcher. It’s not even obvious it’s a projectile.
But all the shapes aren’t equal. Hook is a shape but when you need to add parts
that are obviously not hook-shaped and barely manage 20 parts, then the category’s
existence is debatable.
(You’re looking for a hook? Search “hook” in the description.)
Isn’t a hook, it’s a slope with struts to attach a hook.
But then, there’s all the minifig utensils, weapons, tools….
|
 |
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 25, 2020 11:04 | | Subject: | Re: Why are these Hinges? | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | […]
The Hinge category should probably be defined as those parts that had no purpose
other than being a hinge. And even then it's still a problematic category.
I don't know that it would be eliminated completely, but there seems little
need for it when parts with a hinge can be located by typing "hinge" in the search
box.
|
Exactly.
Because defining a category by “purpose” (or “function”) is The Problem.
First, how can you know what’s the purpose of a piece you’ve never encountered?
Then, as the usual examples show, parts all have multiple functions. What’s
the main one? The first one? The most frequent one?
You need too much previous knowledge to even try to answer that.
If you already need to know which parts are in a category to know what’s in the
category, the category is useless.
Categories should help find the parts, not the other way around.
When you’re looking for a part, say a plate with appendices, you shouldn’t end
up in “Hinges” because you failed to find it in “Plate, Modified.”
Hinges, turntables, small fingers, locking fingers are all features that are
or should be present in the descriptions.
| | The one thing I can say for sure is that it could definitely be expanded or pared
down. 
|
Expanding it means removing parts from other categories. But (most of) these
parts are in those categories for a reason, a supposedly good reason.
I say “Off with purpose-defined categories!”
|
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 21, 2020 21:11 | | Subject: | Re: Have Quantity in Wanted List | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, clohr writes:
| | Hi!
I have uploaded a parts inventory to "Wanted List" using the "Have Quantity"
field, I want to export this information, but it is not possible because downloading
does not rescue the information in that field.
How can I export this information??
|
It’s in the “QTYFILLED” element in the XML.
(“Want” is in “MINQTY”.)
It works both for download and upload.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 21, 2020 18:08 | | Subject: | Re: Stickers: Space Shuttle Discovery (7470) | | Viewed: | 23 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
|
In Suggestions, Bricksonbricks7 writes:
| | I was wondering, how can I go about finding the parts with the stickers? it looks
like some of the stickers are placed over multiple parts
|
They are in the inventory in the Counterparts section, no?
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 21, 2020 14:16 | | Subject: | Re: Is dual color mold really decorated? | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | […]
I’ll try to make a comparison picture….
|
Dang. I can’t: I only have the surface paint in black.
I have both versions of the chrome ones but there already is a comparison picture.
I note exists in both versions: there’s a comparison picture but
only one part in the catalogue….
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 21, 2020 14:03 | | Subject: | Re: Is dual color mold really decorated? | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | […]
Which makes me wonder what the catalog means when it uses the word "embossed:"
|
If you actually are wondering about this part, the pattern is both embossed and
painted, while on
it’s only painted.
I’ll try to make a comparison picture….
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 20, 2020 16:16 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 6980-1 | | Viewed: | 23 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
|
| In Inventories Requests, anathema writes:
| | In Inventories Requests, anathema writes:
| | The hose in my copy of the set is 77mm (slightly under 10 studs) in length.
There is no way to know if it's been cut down at some point, of course.
|
I've done some more investigation.
My hose is a different colour to the other 'classic hose' parts I have;
it also has a slightly smaller inner diameter, although it is still larger than
that of a genuine pneumatic hose.
So either there have been different types of hose used over the years (possible)
or else what I have is an aftermarket replacement.
Whichever it is, I'm inclined to believe that this set most likely only ever
shipped with a 12L hose.
|
Is it slightly transparent?
When I checked mine, there was a ~10L black one near them but only one and slightly
translucent. I compared it with the pneumatic hose from the same period I had
in another drawer and they match (so in the pneumatic drawer it went).
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 19, 2020 11:37 | | Subject: | Re: More Variants Discovered | | Viewed: | 53 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | […]
Fair point. But the same sets packaged in different factories or even at different
times in the same factory, or perhaps even at the same time in the same factory,
may contain different variants.
|
That other sets came out differently from the same (or not) factory at the same
time (or not) doesn’t change the fact that one set is as it was when it came
out of the factory.
All the sesterces are different, it doesn’t change the fact some of them can
be certified as being real antique coins from a certified time-period.
| | I stand by my opinion that period-specificity is at least somewhat delusional.
|
If you’re “bricklinking” the set.
And it also depends on your value of “good enough”: Do you trace all the parts,
asserting they came from boxes the siblings of the set you’re bricklinking?
Or are you content with “we know these variants were made around that time”?
| | | | So even if BL’s catalogue didn’t exist, one could still be proud of owning a
period-specific set.
|
True. But what does that even mean?
|
Well, you are the one who used the term 
| | […]
Because of the aforementioned variability in packaging for a given set, what
real meaning do the words "historically accurate" or "period-specific" even have?
|
There’s the same thing with cars: there are the “only original parts,” the “we
replaced some parts with others from the same manufacturer and period,” and the
“we used some 3D-printed parts” and so on. And some parts (chassis, engine…)
are more important than others (belts) and even on some important parts, some
modifications are allowed without removing value (remove rusted parts of the
body, weld some new bits).
There’s the same thing with all collectible items.
And the “meaning” of “historically accurate” or “period-specific” is not binary
(is / isn’t), it’s, like about every word, a gradation of what people agree it
is.
It can be discussed precisely, generally between a seller and a buyer, to translate
it in monetary value, but it’ll still be generally fuzzy.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 19, 2020 10:22 | | Subject: | Re: More Variants Discovered | | Viewed: | 56 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | […]
Only if every single variant was thoroughly documented and also documented to
have appeared in that set could you say that your copy of a set is historically
accurate.
|
Er, not exactly.
One’s owning the set since it was bought sealed and never having mixed its parts
allows one to say one’s copy is historically accurate.
Or any certified track of the set and its parts from the time it was bought sealed
allows the latest owner to say their copy is historically accurate.
So even if BL’s catalogue didn’t exist, one could still be proud of owning a
period-specific set.
| | And considering that many (if not most or all) parts have variants,
chasing those phantoms might become rather nonsensical at some point.
|
And the one who discovers a variant can’t even have the ego-boost of the variant
being named after them.
No “3961 stormchaserus” for you 
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 18, 2020 06:20 | | Subject: | Re: Part 4345a vs 4345 | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, normann1974 writes:
| | […]
| | | | | | | | seem to appear in sets up to 1992.
|
|
|
That would “1982” 
|
What "would" 1982? I don't understand. The part appears in set 1896 from
1992 according to BL.
|
Sorry, I was a bit tired and the second time I read it, I thought it was “from”
(as I was correcting one typo, my mind was looking for “typos”).
Case in point: I didnt’t type “be.”
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 17, 2020 20:09 | | Subject: | Re: Parts Tracker | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, kkronk writes:
| | […]
Personally, I have never used the "upload" feature for Lego Digital Designer,
so I cannot say if this feature already exists or not.
|
It does: Want | Upload accepts LDD, LDraw, Studio, or BrickStock formats (file
upload), or BL’s XML format (paste).
| | Given that I am trying
to keep my build a secret, to a point, I did not use the "upload" feature, thinking
it may reveal my design.[…]
|
‘Want | Upload’ only uploads to a Wanted List.
There’s absolutely no reasons for BL to keep the temporarily uploaded design.
If you’re really frightened for your Super Duper model, you can always dismantle
your design (move all its parts haphazardly) before uploading it.
‘Want | Upload’’s totally unrelated to Studio’s “Gallery.”
Besides, even in Studio, there’s a Wanted List upload that doesn’t upload the
whole design, only the parts.
As for the rest, what you want is an inventory system for buyers.
There are many suggestions for this already….
Have been for years….
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 17, 2020 18:48 | | Subject: | Re: Part 4345a vs 4345 | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Inventories, normann1974 writes:
| | | | Part starts to consistently appear in sets from 1990, while
seem to appear in sets up to 1992.
|
|
|
That would “1982”
| | | | | | Is it not strange then, that the latter is
not found in these sets:
from 1985
from 1984
from 1985
|
As a side note, Peeron claims that the solid studs are in those three sets.
/Jan
|
The only blue ones I have have solid studs.
They come from
Old my old (letter)boxes have solid studs.
|
That would be “All.”
Request filed.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 17, 2020 18:44 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 6882-1 | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Add 2 Part 4345a Blue Container, Box 2 x 2 x 2 - Solid Studs (Alternate) (match ID 2)
* Change 2 Part Blue 4345 Container, Box 2 x 2 x 2 {match ID 0 to 2}
Comments from Submitter:
From my old collection.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 17, 2020 18:37 | | Subject: | Re: Part 4345a vs 4345 | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, normann1974 writes:
| | | | Part starts to consistently appear in sets from 1990, while
seem to appear in sets up to 1992. Is it not strange then, that the latter is
not found in these sets:
from 1985
from 1984
from 1985
|
As a side note, Peeron claims that the solid studs are in those three sets.
/Jan
|
The only blue ones I have have solid studs.
They come from
Old my old (letter)boxes have solid studs.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 15, 2020 18:20 | | Subject: | Re: Proper way to tag extra parts in XML | | Viewed: | 19 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, randyf writes:
| | In Inventories, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Inventories, randyf writes:
| | […]
It sure does, doesn't it. Unfortunately, I can't edit that page.
|
’twas worth a try
|
Russell worked some magic, and I now have access to it. I will be looking into
it.
Cheers,
|
Cheers indeed. It really was worth a try
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 15, 2020 16:42 | | Subject: | Re: Studio Import/Export to BrickLink | | Viewed: | 14 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, AFOLBlds4Rlxn writes:
| | Hello,
I took a close look at the export file coming out of Studio 2.0, just space delimited.
My first round with exporting a BL WishList was XML. These are not compatible.
I saw one post where someone suggested to export the Studio Design file, import
to Lego Digital Designer, then use that properly formatted file to import into
a BL shopping list. Kludgy, but a temporary solution.
What about going the other way? From a design posting, to BL WishList to a Studio
parts import so you can try the model virtually?
Thanks in advance!
|
Maybe you could start reading the answers to your previous questions?
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1197306
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 15, 2020 16:40 | | Subject: | Re: Studio Import from Official Set | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, AFOLBlds4Rlxn writes:
| | Hello,
Where can I read up on piece geometries and how to fix the parts inventory in
Studio? I have a couple of train sets to merge together and the noses and a
few other pieces I like the look of did not import correctly.
|
The dedicated forum for Studio is https://forum.bricklink.com/ (red Studio icon
on every page, “Builder Forum”).
After having visited that forum, learn about LDraw.
You may also give a try to PartDesigner but it’s more for decorating and simple
parts.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 15, 2020 16:37 | | Subject: | Re: Proper way to tag extra parts in XML | | Viewed: | 19 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, randyf writes:
| | […]
It sure does, doesn't it. Unfortunately, I can't edit that page.
|
’twas worth a try
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 15, 2020 14:43 | | Subject: | Re: Proper way to tag extra parts in XML | | Viewed: | 23 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, randyf writes:
| | […]
And that should be "You're" for all you English speakers. Grrrr...
|
For non-English speakers too
| | […]
| | Thanks for bringing that help page to my attention. The site is stripping the
characters out. I will get that page fixed.
|
|
The reverse problem is encountered on https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=207
“Use & instead of &” isn’t very clear
(Also the “Field Explanation” link doesn’t lead to any explanation….)
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 15, 2020 11:49 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 6980-1 | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
|
| In Inventories Requests, paulvdb writes:
| | […]
I checked my set and I also have a hose that ca. 10 cm.
|
Only sets 6881-1 and 6980-1 here too.
Mine are 9.6cm, 9.7cm and 10.1cm long.
| | It's possible that
the person who added the 10L hose thought that 10L meant 10 cm. The hose was
added to this inventory before the length in cm was added to the name of the
hose.
|
To avoid any confusion, the Yellow ones in
are 10L / 8cm (as precisely as I can measure them).
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 14, 2020 20:10 | | Subject: | Re: Some interface improvement proposals | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Legoboy_II writes:
| | […]
I'm not clear what you're suggesting here? I have my WL's broken
down by projects, and when I shop, I pull up the WL's that I'm working
on. Then on the "Buy Wanted Lists" page, I check or uncheck the other lists when
I need to meet minimums or want to offset S&H.
This is a form of prioritizing?
|
Another form: in the Wanted Items tab, you can click on the little lock icon
on each part to make it a required part and only show the stores that have it.
| | […]
Asked for many times. I have been told these settings exist, but I either haven't
found them (even when given directions) or they're reset after the page refreshes.
|
A lot of things are refreshed spuriously.
Like “keep me logged in”…. 
| | […]
The fact that system goes down, every day, strongly suggests
the severs are not redundant, or if they are,
are not properly configured.
|
A number of things are computed off-line during the downtime.
It’s more a problem of code written when it was very costly and not useful to
do them on the fly than non-redundant servers (which there weren’t anyway, I
think).
| | […]
Also, having an action extend across multiple pages, that aren't in view,
could have serious unintended consequences, I'm not sure I agree on that
point.
|
+1
| | […]
Okay, I need to research "mosaic". I've seen the term in a few places, but
have no context of what that actually looks like.
|
OP actually meant “grid view.”
A mosaic is an ancient pixelated stone or faience artwork.
By extension 1 (maybe only in French?): the blurred zone in an image or film
by over-pixelization (generally faces or naughty bits).
By extension 2: an image made of other images.
By abuse (in France French): a special channel where all the channels are shown
in a grid of thumbnails.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 13, 2020 14:28 | | Subject: | Re: Category Definitions Discussion - Parts V- | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
not 30633
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 13, 2020 14:26 | | Subject: | Re: Category Definitions Discussion - Parts V- | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, bje writes:
| | […]
Wheel - For items that is a solid disk or a rigid circular ring connected
by spokes to a hub, designed to turn, which may or may not fit tire and tread.
|
Hmm, those are wheels:
and fit your description but I’m not sure we’d want them in the Wheel category
| | | | | | […]
2. A vehicle is by definition only something with wheels for land transport.
Consider rather moving the aircraft section out.
|
By which definition?
A vehicle is a means of transporting, carrying, something or someone. I don’t
see anything preventing vehicle to be used for aircrafts or boats.
Indeed, this is from WP ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle ):
“A vehicle (from Latin: vehiculum[1]) is a machine that transports people or
cargo. Vehicles include wagons, bicycles, motor vehicles (motorcycles, cars,
trucks, buses), railed vehicles (trains, trams), watercraft (ships, boats), amphibious
vehicles (screw-propelled vehicle, hovercraft), aircraft (airplanes, helicopters)
and spacecraft.[2]”
The references are [1] OED and [2] MacMillan Contemporary Dictionary.
|
Vehicle noun (MACHINE)
B1 [ C ] formal
a machine, usually with wheels and an engine, used for transporting people or
goods on land, especially on roads
Cambridge English Dictionary set to US English specifically
|
Dang. No one ever agree with anyone, not even lexicologists.
(French “véhicule” (the etymon) admits the “extended” usages.)
| | Also, we have aircraft and boat sections, which presumably should exclude those
from being in another section.
|
Okay.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 13, 2020 13:44 | | Subject: | Re: Category Definitions Discussion - Parts V- | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, bje writes:
| | […]
Wheel - For items that is a solid disk or a rigid circular ring connected
by spokes to a hub, designed to turn around an axle passed through the centre,
which may or may not fit tire and tread. Note 6
|
Potential problem with “axle”: it could be understood as “Technic axle.”
Maybe it should be amended with examples, like “(Technic axle, Technic pin, or
wheel pin).”
| | […]
2. A vehicle is by definition only something with wheels for land transport.
Consider rather moving the aircraft section out.
|
By which definition?
A vehicle is a means of transporting, carrying, something or someone. I don’t
see anything preventing vehicle to be used for aircrafts or boats.
Indeed, this is from WP ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle ):
“A vehicle (from Latin: vehiculum[1]) is a machine that transports people or
cargo. Vehicles include wagons, bicycles, motor vehicles (motorcycles, cars,
trucks, buses), railed vehicles (trains, trams), watercraft (ships, boats), amphibious
vehicles (screw-propelled vehicle, hovercraft), aircraft (airplanes, helicopters)
and spacecraft.[2]”
The references are [1] OED and [2] MacMillan Contemporary Dictionary.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 7, 2020 03:50 | | Subject: | Re: Ants | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | […]
I would be willing to bet that somewhere on those two parts there is a tiny difference.
I can't think of any instance at the moment where a new item number was
assigned by TLG without there being some kind of difference. Here it may just
be the marbling, though. […]
|
Two injection points instead of one?
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 6, 2020 10:34 | | Subject: | Re: Dual molded arms | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, hpoort writes:
| |
[…]
The choice is of course arbitrary, but during this catalog project, would it
be wise to adapt to LDraw's (and thus Studio's) choice?
|
+1
IIRC, LDraw’s rationale was that the upper part is a sleeve, so the main colour
is the one used on the lower part: the arm (and hand) is yellow with a blue/red/white/…
(short) sleeve.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 5, 2020 13:54 | | Subject: | Re: Junior Accounts? | | Viewed: | 69 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, WoutR writes:
| | […]
Before LEGO bought BrickLink I would have said no...
But I can see a point in using Studio (especially now LDD is not supported),
and linking that to a wanted list...
|
Danger, danger.
If you let kids upload their digital work in the gallery¹, it will soon be even
messier than it is (or than it was at the beginning or the LDD gallery or any
gallery kids can upload their 3-stacked-bricks creations (yes, that’s condescending
but let’s face it, most kids aren’t Mozart)).
¹ If you want to share a WL, you might want to add a picture of the model with
it, and that’s exactly the same thing as uploading to the gallery.
Besides, what’s the purpose of a WL if it’s not to buy it?
So, your kid uploads a WL (or a MOC) on their teen-account, and you download
/ transfer / share it so that you can buy it from your account.
It’s quicker to let them directly upload a WL in your BL account from Studio.
If they are savvy enough to manage what is proposed, they can understand not
to touch your WLs and to name theirs intelligently.
(Studio can upload a WL directly to your BL account in one click.
What it can’t do is make a XML file of the WL so that you wouldn’t need to let
your kid have your BL credentials. It can do a useless CSV though….)
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 5, 2020 03:55 | | Subject: | Re: Wanted List Sort By Default | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Legoboy_II writes:
| | In Suggestions, Kenopolis writes:
| | Currently the wanted list "SORT BY" defaults to "Newest."
Could there be a way to remember the last choice?
Or change the default setting for the user?
I prefer to see it in alphabetical order, because it makes it faster to find
what I'm looking for. Currently I have to change it every time, and wait
for the page to reload.
Thanks!
|
Always been like that since I became a member last year, it is very annoying.
I've been told you can change that behaviour in "Preferences", can't
find it.
|
I believe the one who told you that didn’t understand what you were talking about.
There’s no default sorting option for the WL.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 3, 2020 06:27 | | Subject: | Re: Please add new Forum Topic | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, calsbricks writes:
| | To save the almost constant threads that come up in the forum for things like
dealing with shipping to , as well as sales history as well as .... Please add
a new topic to the forum for Knowledgebase items.
That way Brickwilbo and others can refer people to the knowledgebase area for
their answers - it will save a lot of time and effort on everyone's part.
|
I’d say most of the answers should be in the help pages….
(Brickwilbo points to them when they are. The rest of the time, we copy-paste….)
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Apr 30, 2020 04:43 | | Subject: | Re: Item Type Discussion | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | […]
I had already questioned this in the admin forums yesterday. None of us even
knew this was happening, and we are as surprised as anyone else. We pretty much
got the rug pulled out from under us, and I honestly have no idea where we go
from here.
|
Change the buying process, don’t ask anything to experienced buyers.
Change the selling process, don’t ask anything to experienced sellers.
Change the catalogue, don’t ask anything to catalogue admins BL appointed!
“Hobby project” indeed.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Apr 29, 2020 10:32 | | Subject: | Re: 3626cpb2463 Fright knight head | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, starbeanie writes:
| | Whoever submitted it obvious thought the ghostly wisps around the eyes were eyelashes.
|
Or because it looks like their mother in law?
(Yes, I’m ashamed to encourage that non-PC stereotype.)
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Apr 27, 2020 14:49 | | Subject: | Re: Set 6891 Gamma V Laser Craft | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
|
In Inventories, javh writes:
| | Part number 4895 shows as black in Bricklink inventory yet at the bottom of the
inventory it indicates - 1 sp074 (Inv)Classic Space Droid - Dish Base, Blue with
Trans-Red Eyes and Black Antenna in which the blue version is used. In an inventory
on another site (Peeron) it indicates blue. Which is correctÉ
|
Both.
The black one is used in the ship.
The blue one is used in the droid, whose parts are in its inventory, not in the
set’s inventory, unless you “Break Minifigs” (link or View option on top of the
inventory).
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Apr 25, 2020 14:54 | | Subject: | Re: Item Type Discussion | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, wildchicken13 writes:
| | […]
I'm just bored. I've been on BrickLink for a while, but I haven't
been active on the forum until very recently. You don't have to listen to
my answers if you don't want to.
|
I, for one, welcome any new participant to the forum
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Apr 25, 2020 01:41 | | Subject: | Re: Own database of parts? | | Viewed: | 51 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, Legoboy_II writes:
| | In Inventories, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Inventories, Legoboy_II writes:
| | […]
I have read the forums, looking for a solution, and all of the suggestions, including
the one above, are for cloud based solutions. While that is not necessarily
a bad thing, I am weary that if something happens beyond the confines of my local
computer, I would lose everything - and we all know that managing our respective
inventories, whether we're sellers or not, is not an easy task.
|
Note though that you can download your inventories from Rebrickable for back-up.
The format is simple and you can download them in other formats (like BL WL).
So the main problem is that you need to be connected to manage your inventory
and you need to back up frequently if you work on it frequently
|
SylvainLS, I do appreciate that you responded to my reply, but here's my
issue:
|
I understand you have problems with connecting BrickStock and BL. More later
on that.
But first, to be clear, I was just answering your remark about being wary (careful)
about cloud-based solutions because you fear losing your data if the site goes
down.
As you can easily export your Rebrickable inventory to (and import from):
1. their CSV format,
2. BrickStock BSX format,
3. BrickLink XML inventory format,
…and as those formats are open and any tool can read them,
…and as Rebrickable also provides a back-up feature for the Pro version (I’m
no Pro),
…then you should not fear losing your inventory: if you back it up locally, you
can upload it back afterwards.
(Of course, all the items and colours are coded by their IDs, so you need to
have access to their meaning. But you can download Rebrickable’s catalogue to
understand their CSV, BrickLink’s catalogue to understand BL XML or BrickStock
BSX. You just need to do that before the site goes down.)
| | […]
Nonetheless, we can manually manage our inventory, using the program in full
standalone mode, we simply cannot access our member records. Which equates to
giving a baby candy, then snatching it back because they didn't say thank
you fast enough, then slapping the child for crying in protest.
|
I don’t know anything about the connection between BL and BS. I only tried BS
a bit and never to connect to BL.
What I know is that you can download your BL orders (as files) and import them
in BS, without having to connect to BL from BS.
| | Ultimately, the idea is to work smarter, not harder, and having to manage multiple
databases, just to manage one, when they all essentially desire to do the same
thing, and the one did and still could do it without the unnecessary running
around, but now you need the intermediates (so you allude),
|
Nope. I didn’t allude that you need Rebrickable AND BrickStock to manage your
inventory.
Just that if you choose Rebrickable (or another cloud-based solution with similar
features), you don’t need to fear losing all your data.
| | just to manage the
one. This capricious attitude would make my hero Prof. Wm. Deming, roll over
in his grave. However, you raise another question: are you suggesting that
the site you mentioned can access our member records, do a conversion, and then
import into the broken software? I've not seen that option, in the software,
nor elsewhere...
|
No, I’m not suggesting that whole chain of conversions.
But, for the record, that’s possible:
— Rebrickable can import your orders (and WLs) from BL (or BO) (automatic connection,
especially if you use the same username on both sites).
— Rebrickable can export in BSX (or BL XML) for BrickStock to import.
Or you can manually download your BL orders, import them into Rebrickable, then
export them to BS format, then import them in BS.
But I’m not advocating that.
I’m not advocating anything. I’m just explaning options:
You can choose to use BrickStock. And if you can’t connect to BL from BS, you
can still download your orders from BL to import them in BS.
You can choose to use Rebrickable. And you can import from BL or BS (or BO),
export to BL or BS, and connect to BL (or BO).
You can choose another solution, cloud-based or not, with similar features.
Or you can choose to use many tools at once and waste your energy by constantly
correcting conversion errors.
You can even choose to do all that in Excel or Brainfuck (@moderators: this is
not a curse!), they are both Turing complete.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Apr 24, 2020 20:09 | | Subject: | Re: Own database of parts? | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, Legoboy_II writes:
| | […]
I have read the forums, looking for a solution, and all of the suggestions, including
the one above, are for cloud based solutions. While that is not necessarily
a bad thing, I am weary that if something happens beyond the confines of my local
computer, I would lose everything - and we all know that managing our respective
inventories, whether we're sellers or not, is not an easy task.
|
Note though that you can download your inventories from Rebrickable for back-up.
The format is simple and you can download them in other formats (like BL WL).
So the main problem is that you need to be connected to manage your inventory
and you need to back up frequently if you work on it frequently.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Apr 24, 2020 12:52 | | Subject: | Re: Select All option to add parts to wanted | | Viewed: | 21 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, zombiereign writes:
| | I'm trying to replace a large number of missing parts from a single set.
I think it would be helpful if - from the set list - I could select multiple
pieces and add to my wanted for ordering. If there is a way - I must be overlooking
it
|
The shortest if you have many parts missing: https://www.bricklink.com/v2/wanted/partout.page
(There’s a “Part out” link on the set’s page.)
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Apr 23, 2020 16:49 | | Subject: | Re: Images/Renders Part 4447 | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | […]
So, as Studio uses LDraw 3D models and already did use LDraw 3D models in 2017
and the LDraw 3D model for 4447 doesn’t have hollow studs and never had hollows
studs (at least there are no traces of such change and the 3D model didn’t change
since 2010), the renders should show plain studs.
|
So, I stand corrected: the 3D model did have hollow stud, until February 2009,
which is still way older than Studio.
But I still don’t get how the Studio renders used such an obsolete 3D model.
Did BL use a Studio version that is not the same as the released one?
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Apr 23, 2020 16:11 | | Subject: | Re: Images/Renders Part 4447 | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Catalog, randyf writes:
[…]
| | Those are not LEGO renders.
|
|
That was just a guess. They sure are renders and they sure don’t look like usual
LDraw renders.
| | | | They are renders from something else. And the images
definitely show hollow studs.
|
|
I beg to differ.
| | | | I don't know how they could be interpreted
as anything else. If the part really has solid studs, all of the images need
to be replaced.
|
|
The part has solid studs.
| | Those are Studio renders from the 2017 image project.
|
So, as Studio uses LDraw 3D models and already did use LDraw 3D models in 2017
and the LDraw 3D model for 4447 doesn’t have hollow studs and never had hollows
studs (at least there are no traces of such change and the 3D model didn’t change
since 2010), the renders should show plain studs.
(The other parts Studio uses are LDD parts converted to LDraw when the part isn’t
in the official LDraw library, and 1. 4447 has been there for ages, 2. 4447 in
LDD doesn’t have hollow studs either.)
| | We retained all photographs
in that project and only replaced render with render. In this case there were
no official LEGO renders available and our only guideline for accuracy was the
lo-rez LDraw render that was just deleted.
|
But Studio never changed plain studs for hollow studs.
| | I agree, if the actual part only ever had solid studs all of these images need
to be replaced.
|
Yes, at least to show the studs with a better angle.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Apr 23, 2020 15:27 | | Subject: | Re: Category Definitions Discussion - Parts B sect | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | […]
This is a difficult area to contend with. My personal opinion is that themed
parts really don't need to exist if we create appropriate generic part categories
that combine like items. I honestly believe it is possible.
[… example for Large Figures parts …]
|
+1
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Apr 23, 2020 11:52 | | Subject: | Re: Images/Renders Part 4447 | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, bje writes:
| |
I have one of these from but mine have all 4 studs as solid studs
and no hollow studs. Are the renders for this part correct or is mine an undocumented
variant?
|
All the colour images look like LEGO renders and if you look closely, the studs
aren’t hollow, it’s the angle and the logo that make a shadow that may look like
they are.
Only the bad yellow render (second image, not the one you see when you select
Yellow or look at the “User image”) shows more as if the studs were hollow but
it is a very very bad LDraw render.
If you look at the (also LDraw-based) 3D image and the 3D view, they show plain
studs.
I don’t know why they kept that awful render.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Apr 20, 2020 12:44 | | Subject: | Re: Move Variants Discovered | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | […]
How much work was put into this non-functional, non-appearance-affecting part
split by everyone involved? And this is just one part. There are more.
|
I beg to differ for these parts. The difference is appearance-affecting
and is even more functional: you can’t put a bar in a square hole.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Apr 20, 2020 12:40 | | Subject: | Re: More Variants Discovered - Update | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, bje writes:
| | […]
The catalogue has been following hypothesis 1. Thus you cannot effectively
have new variants until you cannot prove the existence of the variant in a set,
irrespective of its production by TLG or its release onto the market by sellers.
[…]
Probably we should move to theory 2 at some stage. This might prevent the “is
it genuine or fake” question from popping up more frequently or, worse, exposing
sellers to more risk after June when PayPal will be hitting sellers for damages
when selling fakes and clones. In this regard, variants must be documented, they
must be shown to exist and they must have comparatives.[…]
|
I believe you missed two contributing practises / rules (of thumb):
1. “not a functional difference,”
2. “everybody knows that.”
Plates exist with full and hollow underside pins? Everybody knows that, not
a functional difference, no new entry and no need for pics or notes.
There are lots of different 3001? Everybody knows that, not a functional difference,
we won’t have 45 entries, we won’t document them all. There, here’s a 3001old
entry for you to put some of them, we won’t define which are to be put in 3001
and which are to be put in 3001old.
These variants do have been found in sets. So, if the cataloguing were really/scrupulously
following theory 1, they would have been added or documented. It’s the above
two rules that prevented that.
Rule 1 is a good rule of thumb to decide whether a variant deserves an entry.
It shouldn’t be applied to decide whether a note or a pic should be added.
Rule 2 is rather stupid (and totally human).
Would changing to theory 2 have included these variants?
I think it depends on whether the two above rules were applied or not.
Theory 2 only says a variant shouldn’t be added if you don’t have proof, it doesn’t
say a variant (entry or note) should be added even if you have proof, because
one can still apply the above two rules and decide not to.
Look at 4070: for a time, there were the slot/no-slot variants (well, still are
but one is marked for deletion), until it was finally decided that the slot was
unimportant, “of little or consequence to most users.” It has been discussed
ad nauseam whether it was intended or not, whether it was a bit of plastic that
should be there and fell or a bit of plastic that shouldn’t be there. This isn’t
important now, what is is that a line has been drawn because a line has to be
drawn.
That same “of little or no consequence” rule, the same “it’s just a moulding
artefact” remark, can be used with theory 2.
Another example:
Everybody knows the moulding can cause bubbles in (trans) 4L bars.
Everybody knows the moulding can cause lines on 4L bars.
But bubbles deserve a note (because there were many questions about it on the
forum?).
Moulding lines apparently don’t (but there were questions about their proving
fakeness on the forum).
Would using theory 2 change that? I don’t think so.
Some variants don’t have a logo, or ©, or ID. Does that deserve an entry? A
note?
Applying theory 2 doesn’t change that.
What we need is to decide what is important and what is not, and to document
that.
A “what everybody should know” page? But who would read that?
Or a note on each every and every part (“can have bubbles” “may not have a logo”…)?
No more unwritten rules. No more rules of thumb. No more whims.
That won’t prevent discussions or the need for case by case decisions but it
would be clearer and more consistent.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Apr 17, 2020 14:40 | | Subject: | Re: Condition(s) for Used Items | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, tonnic writes:
| | […]
Therefore I guess a lot of sellers have different ideas regarding the condition
of the Lego they sell.
|
Are we talking about the sellers who class Incomplete sets as Complete or Used
minifigs as New (“because I never played with them, I only built them and exposed
them in the sun and dust for 20 years”)?
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Apr 16, 2020 10:02 | | Subject: | Re: Category Definitions Discussion | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, bje writes:
1. You’re confusing the whole European continent and Continental Europe.
From the very link you gave: “‘European continent’ redirects here. For the whole
of the European continent including its islands, see Europe.”
“Continent” has two meanings: a large landmass, and one of eleven¹ recognized
parts of the world.
So “European continent” is more commonly the large landmass, the “not-islands”
part, of the continent “Europe” but some islands, including the British islands,
are parts of “Europe.”
(¹ Europe, Asia, Australia², North America, South America, Africa, Antartica,
Eurasia (Europe & Asia), Oceania, America (both North and South), or Afro-Eurasia
(Eurasia & Africa).
² The continent Australia, not the country….)
2. ”Was never” is too strong a phrase: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doggerland
| | Was the whole point not that you must become your own thingie?
|
Geography shapes politics, not the other way around
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Apr 13, 2020 10:32 | | Subject: | Re: Just an idea about Neutral Feedback! | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, infinibrix writes:
| | […]
You make it sound like I have a problem with people disagreeing or criticizing
an idea I’ve put forward....
|
That’s what saying “people don’t like change” make it seem to me.
| | I really don’t but then if people criticize and
question why I even put forward such a half-baked idea in the first place then
that’s a different thing. Half-baked ideas can become fully baked ideas when
other minds and suggestion are brought together! […]
|
Agreed.
| | Either way whether it’s a bad idea or not some will disagree anyway simply
because it means they will have to raise their standards or simply because they
like to shoot down ideas and disagree for the sake of disagreeing!
|
Yes, but by repeating “people don’t like change”, you make genuine questions
and critics sound like epidermic reactions or even trolling.
| | I could even
question your own motives? You don’t sell, you rarely buy, but you seem to have
a very strong opinion on most matters when it comes to ideas or suggestions in
the forum even though they don't directly affect you?... Just saying!
Even though you are of course as entitled as anyone to voice an opinion!
|
My motives for answering on the forum are simple:
If it’s a question, I try to give an answer. Either because I know it, or because
no one has given one yet and I think I can find it or help find it (and am in
the mood to search for it ).
If it’s a debate (that includes suggestions), as the saying goes, opinions are
like …, everyone has one, the matter affecting them directly or not.
More, I think the PoV of someone who has no horse (or only a tiny pony) in the
race is as interesting as the PoVs of those who have a bone to defend.
| | Again its not my prefered option but I'm just looking at ways to help improve
sellers standards. I'd rather see sellers unable to leave retaliatory feedback
for buyers but that does'nt seem to go down well with many people either,
or is that simply because those that voice their opinion against the idea don't
want to lose the hold they currently have over their customers? Whatever suggestions
are put forward those that strongly oppose an idea are more likely to reply in
the forum than those that don't!
|
As you remarked, I have no real bone in this race (no horse to defend?), so what
I did in my first answer is what I explained in the second: I put on my critic
hat. That generally means I find flaws and questions more easily than praises.
I believe people work like that, even unconsciously. Their first reaction is
“what could go wrong” (or “what will go wrong” for the more pessimistic ).
It often is “what could go wrong FOR ME” because, of course, “me” is important
to them but also because it’s their PoV, what they know.
I don’t believe it’s the “I don’t like change” cliché.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Apr 12, 2020 18:47 | | Subject: | Re: Just an idea about Neutral Feedback! | | Viewed: | 58 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, infinibrix writes:
| | […]
Like I say it’s just an idea to spark some debate
|
And debate there was.
| | I don’t necessarily have all
the answers that would be up to Bricklink themselves but it’s unlikely to change
anyway and even less so now people have responded to it like a Lead balloon
|
Sure you don’t have all the answers, we don’t either. But that doesn’t prevent
us from finding the questions.
Because I believe ideas thrown around without trying to dig a bit deeper make
poor suggestions.
And I believe you believe that too because you just said you wanted to spark
some debate.
A debate isn’t “yeah, let’s go for it.” It’s trying to find pros and cons and
questions.
Sure, cons are always a bit more vocal or blunt.
And questions often appear to be cons (which they are not necessarily, unless
they are sarcastic).
But that’s the purpose of the debate: finding what other people think, what’s
their point of view, using their own vision to criticize your idea, because your
own PoV isn’t sufficient.
| | but
hey ebay made a similar change where you only now see a year’s worth of transactions,
I’m sure that upset many people at the time especially those with flawless track
records but it didn’t stop ebay from doing it anyway because I think they recognised
the long term benefits!
|
BL also changed a bit, at least in the way the stats are presented to buyers
in stores.
| | The thing is when all said and done a lot of people just don’t like change either
because they prefer the existing method or they prefer to hold onto the comfort
of what they’ve always known and trust? However when change finally comes a lot
of people complain at first but then when they get used to it they actually prefer
things not to go back to the way they were before!
|
And that’s always the answer when people try to discuss an idea, “people don’t
like change.”
Guh.
You make a suggestion, we discuss it, pros AND cons AND questions.
That’s not “not liking change.” That’s how creation works: you throw an idea,
you criticize it, you throw other ideas to answer the questions, alleviate the
cons or further the pros, you criticize again, and so on.
And BL is certainly not going to consider it if it’s just a half-baked idea.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Apr 12, 2020 10:27 | | Subject: | Re: Just an idea about Neutral Feedback! | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, infinibrix writes:
| | […]
A seller could say why should I have to accept receiving Neutrals just because
a buyer couldn’t be bothered to leave feedback but firstly you have to remember
that the same situation will occur for everyone so that shouldn’t matter too
much […]
|
Except that, and that the everpresent flaw / unanswered problem with propositions
to change the feedback system, there’s the historical feeeback to consider.
Would you want all previous transactions with no FB to become neutrals? Or would
it only apply to future transactions?
Is that fair for new members? Or to older members?
Those FB were left (or rather, not left¹) when the system was that they would
stay this way, not when they would become neutrals after a while.
The current (Saussurean) system is not “Good, Neutral, Bad,” it’s “Good, None,
Neutral, Bad.”
If you want to remove “None,” you’re losing information.
¹ Is a “not left” feedback a “right” feedback? (Hmm, isn’t that why PurpleDave
never leave FB?)
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2020 07:30 | | Subject: | Re: 3830c01 Hinge Brick 1 x 4 marked for deletion | | Viewed: | 56 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | […]
When they set everyone's default to ignore superlots, they killed the superlot.
Perhaps another function could be made just for paired parts.
|
Yes, some kind of superlot but limited to some approved parts.
Whitelisted superlots.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2020 07:25 | | Subject: | Re: 3830c01 Hinge Brick 1 x 4 marked for deletion | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, hpoort writes:
| | […]
- whether inventories of MOC's will state both halves separately (like Studio
does) or together.
|
Let’s be careful with Studio’s inventories: (if the model doesn’t use them in
a fixed position) they also separate hands and arms and torsos, legs and hips,
2430 and 2429, and so on.
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
France, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
