| Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | calsbricks  | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2017 07:20 | | Subject: | Change Search Results for Find Stores | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | | Status: | Open | | Vote: | [Yes|No] | |
|
| I believe it would be very helpful for the collection of statistical data if
the way the search in Find Stores' returned its results was altered to include
a column for Instant checkout enabled/adopted. Use the same Lightning bolt that
is currently being used simply add the column rather than having to go back and
forth betwee the searches - without IC and the 2nd with
The example shown reflects the UK's top 11 stores for no of items. 5 of the
11 have implemented it so far. 6 haven't, for whatever reason.
This would save having to make 2 searches (and less calls on the server) apart
from making it easier to gather the data.
|
|
 |
| Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Oct 22, 2017 04:51 | | Subject: | Please add new item to Activity Page | | Viewed: | 65 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | | Status: | Open | | Vote: | [Yes|No] | |
|
| Please add new Non-Commercial Activity category to the My activity section to
cover add Packaging Dimensions to Catalogue Items. Include Pending, approved
and disapproved.
This will allow individuals to identify what is happening with their submissions.
|
|
| Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Oct 16, 2017 11:49 | | Subject: | Improvements to part descriptions | | Viewed: | 70 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | | Status: | Open | | Vote: | [Yes|No] | |
|
| It would be very helpful if in the part descriptions submitters were required
to put colours where appropriate. For example and especially for minifig torso
assemblies.
If someone submits a new minifig torso or legs assembly they should fill in a
short form for Hip colours, leg colour(s) as well as torso colour, arm colour
and hand colour.
If we could get this as a requirement it would make life much easier especially
when using tools like goatleg.
If the description doesn't include all this information then Goatleg doesn't
always find it and that makes identifying some of these parts much harder than
it needs to be.
|
|
| Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Sep 16, 2017 14:07 | | Subject: | Re: Change to information held in Catalogue | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Suggestions, calsbricks writes:
| | […]
There
are well over 1/2 million members of Bricklink now - even if only 20% of them
contributed […]
|
You’re overly optimistic about contribution rate.
I don’t think that there ever were 20% of BLers who contributed, even back when,
even counting one-time contributors.
And for something that will only interest sellers, 0.02% (100 people) seems more
likely. But maybe it would suffice 
|
There are two of us who have already said we would supply our data which, I can
assure you, would make a dent in what is needed. We are all 'whistling in
the wind' over this cause BL do their own thing and changes to the catalogue
are changes to their single most important and valuable asset. You will remember
the saga over image rights when they took over and how there is a shyness to
open the catalogue any further (the changes to Brickstock and logging in). Good
to get this out in the air and see what peoples thoughts are but it ain't
going to happen.
If it promotes dialogue with BL development we will have achieved something.
Dimensions, weights etc ?????
|
|
| Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Sep 16, 2017 13:49 | | Subject: | Re: Change to information held in Catalogue | | Viewed: | 14 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, qwertyboy writes:
| | In Suggestions, calsbricks writes:
| | In Suggestions, qwertyboy writes:
| | In Suggestions, calsbricks writes:
| | In Suggestions, brickbrowser writes:
| | In Suggestions, calsbricks writes:
| | The Bricklink catalogue has the perfect base for this change but it is a question
of whether the developers feel they can do it with minimum effort. Each item
in the catalogue has a PCC as well as its mould or design id number associated
with it. The PCC code is Lego's element id and it is what they print in their
instructions.
There have been lots of comments both in and out of the forum concerning part
weights and how there is a variance between colours of the same part number.
We have also experienced this. The simple way to deal with this is to add a weight
field against the PCC in the catalogue. This would allow the system to hold the
individual weights for each colour part and could be used to more accurately
provide cart weights for instant checkout when it comes out of preview.
|
There are far greater weight discrepancies / inconsistencies in batches of packaging
materials (even from same supplier), than those attributed to mold or part colour
differences. Furthermore, one weight submitter's scales and measuring technique
probably differs from another's to the extent that the exercise is moot.
I doubt that would ever be an effective use of people's time.
|
You may be right - the only thing is surely we have to start somewhere - as I
said in an earlier reply the current generic system only works because sellers/stores
have been doing this manually
|
For the record - when doing up shipping cost for an order, we have _never_ weighed
the order, we always used BL's supplied weight (unless of course the weight
was not specified). As far as I can recall, we have never had issues with an
order needing more postage than what was indicated by using supplied weights.
As others have indicated as well, adding weights to PPCs is a massive undertaking,
time that would be better and more profitably spent elsewhere.
Niek.
|
We weight every order and totally disregard BL's weight as
it does not make allowances for bags, other packaging materials and of course
the box we use. Strange you don't weigh your orders?
|
Poor choice of words, my bad. I meant - we don't weigh orders before determining
shipping cost. We have a good handle on what fits into where, and that includes
how much weight to add for packing material. We have enough NBPs to make packing-up-and-then-unpacking
a pain in the behind. If we over-estimated shipping, we refund. If we under-estimated,
we eat the diff. Same will happen when auto-checkout will come by.
For us, PPC weights are a non-issue, and (again for us) efforts would be better
spent developing other features.
Niek.
|
Then AFOL's comments about checking MyWeight a PPC weight or defaulting to
the generic weight solve that issue - if the PPC weight were available.
BTW
We work very differently to you. Our parts are picked and prepacked to determine
an accurate shipping cost - we never under or overcharge - no refunds no administration
just simply parcel sent at cost given to buyer. It has worked well for us for
6 years and 4100+ orders - not sure we need to change it. Haven't had an
NPB in all that time - so again that is not an issue for us. I have said this
many times and will keep saying it - if instant checkout can replace a manual
system which doesn't get it wrong - ever - then subject to them sorting out
the Paypal on site payment issue (to do with addresses) we will look at it in
seriousness if not we will stay with what works for us and hasn't let us
down - the old expression applies if it ain't broke don't fix it.
There are huge number of things that are needed on the site - we agree with
that but that all appears to be out of our (The community's) control or influence
- the roadmap has changed a multitude of times - no one knows where the seller
tools are or if we will ever see them - so many other things do need doing -
we agree but we and others do not see this as being the lead weight to bring
it all to a halt it would simply be another enhancement to the BL catalogue.
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
|
United Kingdom, England
