Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | bricksinbins  | | Posted: | Aug 13, 2020 08:37 | | Subject: | Re: Do not default new parts as weight bound | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | Hmm, I never really understood these "volume bound" and "weight bound" concepts
very well, so I'm not an expert, but I feel like parts that don't have
packing measurements entered should just have some kind of default large size.
If parts are going to disqualify IC entirely, it means they cannot be bought
in my store, and that's not a good user experience either. Someone pointed
out a set to me that IC didn't accept and it has been taking up space for
several years because it was impossible to buy it, and all that time I had no
idea.
|
Or maybe what you suggest is OK but then there should at least be
| | a warning for the seller or something like that.
|
The root of the problem here is that the BL people came up with this idea that
volume/dimensions don't really matter. That every part can basically conform
to a sheet/pile of sand. They don't seem to understand that dimensions AND
weight matters in most of the world when it comes to shipping things. BO does
not have this problem, there it "just works".
|
 |
| Author: | bricksinbins | | Posted: | Apr 13, 2020 09:06 | | Subject: | Re: Just an idea about Neutral Feedback! | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, infinibrix writes:
| | The topic of Neutral feedback and how they are seen as minor negatives comes
up
quite a lot and although I’m sure this idea may not go down well with some....
I think one interesting concept could be to make it so that after 3 months any
feedback
that has not been left automatically turns into a Neutral which would probably
mean about 30% of any sellers feedback will no doubt be made up of Neutrals which
might then make leaving a manual Neutral seem less Negative and more acceptable
for a buyer to submit and for a seller to receive?
|
....
And same should apply to buyers too, right? Sellers stop leaving feedback and
every buyer ends up with all neutrals. That oughta be fair.
|
|
| Author: | bricksinbins | | Posted: | Feb 3, 2020 08:19 | | Subject: | Re: Nougat is the new Flesh | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| I think the point here is that any changes, big or small, should be communicated
better than a post on the forum that most will never see.
Very glad about the color changes though. Calling something Medium Dark is an
abomination. As if there's a light dark and a dark dark too?!?
Ken
In Colors, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Colors, BigBBricks writes:
| | In Colors, Admin_Russell writes:
| | For those who may have missed this recent change, we have decided to change the
name "Flesh" to another color name in the BrickLink catalog. I'm not going
to get into the reasons why this was done - the purpose here is to inform you
of what the changes were and how they may affect your BrickLink user experience.
|
Russell, is there any way in the future we can be alerted to major changes like
this through the new email alert system we were asked to sign up for?
For many of us adding or changing a color is important to know about since it
concerns inventory for sale and the forum is difficult to track if it is not
kept up with.
Thank you for the consideration,
Big B
|
We have talked about a notification system for years where not only would you
be altered to major changes but also small changes that might affect you as a
seller of "X" in a big way. Sellers of course would be able to opt in / opt out
of notifications on several levels, including whether they had a given item (or
color) in stock.
However, one of our goals in any catalog work (which by its nature involves change)
is to minimize the impact that the changes will have on sellers. So in regard
to this change, the effects of it were weighed up. We had two major colors that
got a name adjustment that shouldn't have caused any serious seller any trouble.
And the other changes (though major) affected a relatively small number of listings.
If we decided to call the new colors Light Gray, Dark Gray, and Brown, and put
the distinguishing terms on the old colors (Light Yellowish Gray, Dark Yellowish
Gray, Stately Brown), THAT would be a huge process that involved an extensive
notification procedure.
But if we changed all "Gray" to "Grey", it would almost be worth not mentioning.
The "Flesh" name we handled today is somewhere between the two in actual effect
on sellers, but I would say much closer to Gray / Grey in scale.
|
|
|
| Author: | bricksinbins | | Posted: | Aug 28, 2018 08:48 | | Subject: | Re: The plight of part 44567 | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, mockingbird writes:
| | I think it is not wise to put some meaning to an itemID. So the change of the
a and b version should not have happened, in my opinion. Even if in other parts
the itemIDs were assigned chronologically.
Also I think the catalog should keep the 'undetermined' versions of parts.
Because: -not all set inventories have the specified mold varients
-not all sellers want to differentiate between small mold varients, and they
should be able to (or must) list as undetermined.
-not all buyers care about the mold varient, they should be able to buy 'undetermined'.
(Ideally if you choose undetermined all versions would show up)
|
This ^^
|
|
| Author: | bricksinbins | | Posted: | Jan 10, 2018 11:44 | | Subject: | Re: Not happy with instant checkout GUI at all | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| There is definitely room for a lot of improvements. Much of the site is plagued
with "developer UI". Things work (mostly) but it's all very inefficient to
use and far from practical. This is usually the result of the developers not
actually using what they make. I have seen this in other fields of software development
also.
BL management overall seem very disinterested in improving things. New half baked
stuff is being added and then mostly left like that. IC, as an example, still
needs many fixes and improvements but no sign from BL that they will address
the problems.
| |
No responses yet? I find it a small but crucial point. Even just now I was staring
at my list of received orders for 10 sec to make sure that there is nothing I
need to do for an order in the list that I overlooked. Things used to be much
clearer before instant checkout. Just spot anything "pending" and "updated",
sort it, put it on ready. Instead of checking out which "ready"-order really
is ready and requires action from the buyers side and, and which "ready" order
isn't actually ready and requires me to sort it.
|
|
|
| Author: | bricksinbins | | Posted: | Jul 24, 2017 09:29 | | Subject: | Re: Get shipping costs BEFORE final checkout | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In my experience, the minimum added weight for a padded envelope, bags, label
and paper invoice is at least 20 grams. As the order gets heavier the packaging
does too. 5 grams packaging is impossible unless you just stick loose parts in
a plain paper envelope. I don't think any buyer would be happy receiving
it that way.
The really tricky part is fragile items. Then a box is needed and just the box
itself can weigh 60 grams or more. That's already past a typical weight limit
of 50 grams without counting the actual order. It's very easy for a small
order to quickly get bumped up in the weight limits list because the limits are
quite close to each other. On big and heavy orders there is more wiggle room.
Also, remember that the shipping cost suggestion is only useful for a few countries.
If BrickLink does not include shipping cost tables for your country, then it
doesn't do anything for you. At least I was not able to make it do anything
useful in my case.
In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, tonnic writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | It's a common topic you're addressing. It has been in the making for
many years, but the system almost works. There is already a "shipping cost suggestion"
tool which is often quite accurate, but not always. For this to work, the system
needs to know the exact weight and size of all parts. This database still isn't
100% complete. But I suppose we will be getting there and step by step we're
getting to auto checkout. But expect it to remain this way for at least another
year or two..
Your solution 2 of estimating shipping costs before this database is in place
and 100% complete isn't really a good idea. If you order a brick from me,
pessimistic shipping costs are €18,50 - because the brick could be huge. In reality,
it will be €1,33. So it doesn't really mean anything and it would certainly
scare away alot of buyers.
In Suggestions, rumbi_rumun writes:
| | In my opinion the largest problem of the Bricklink page is that the final shipping
costs are often unknown till the invoice. It is much too late. I suggest calculating
the maximum shipping costs before the final checkout.
Let me display an example:
The buyer Alice orders parts which weigh 80 grams. The seller Bob states that
the shipping costs are 3 EUR up to 100 grams and 4 EUR up to 200 grams. Bob means
the TOTAL weight while from Alice's point of view the weight of packing materials
is unknown and never stated. This way Alice doesn't know the final price.
(Btw. I suppose it is against the EU law.)
Once I have come across such a case that in seller's opinion the maximum
net weight of parts was about 30 grams to keep the total weight below 100 grams!
Is it fair and clear?
I can see the following solutions:
(i) suggest the buyers to state their shipping costs precisely, in terms of net
weight of parts or dimensions of parts
(ii) apply automatic calcultion of maximum shipping costs on the checkout page
so that the seller couldn't apply higher costs.
The latter one is much better.
Best regards
Tomasz Witkowski / rumbi_rumun
Gdynia, Poland
|
|
A lot of buyers, maybe some sellers too, do not know the weight of the order.
They are not aware of the excistence of a weight function they can select.
Maybe there is a reason but I think this function should be default and, if not
wanted turned of. Not the other way around. I think it is very helpfull in almost
all orders.
Another thing, sometimes understandable but also sometimes common sence can help
quite well, is the fact that if an order is 15 grams of Lego and one of the shipping
tresholds is 20 grams the order with an envelope etc. will rise above the 20
grams.
A few times a year buyers believe that envelopes, small or large, do not weigh
more than 5 grams and that there is no need for an extra stamp.
A seller could, or even should, mention at the parts description that the dimension
or weight does not allow it to be shipped in an envelope but in a (far) more
expensive parcel.
I am still a bit anxious about a system through Bricklink that 'knows'
what shippingcosts must be.
There are so many variations possible.
It is about the amount of the parts, dimension, strangely formed parts, weight,
value, fragility etc.
|
I made a tool for myself to generate my invoices, and it generates a shipping
cost table in the invoice. This way, buyers can see where they're at and
how much more they could add. I think the opaque way it is now is OK, as long
as in return, sellers will allow additions or removal of some items. In my opinion
it's not OK if shipping costs are unclear in advance and the seller is rigid
about this after the order is placed. I think that at least the ability to add
more to an order should be mandatory. I don't know any professional webshop
that doesn't allow this.
I get what you're saying about the automatic calculation. You can already
turn on the shipping cost suggestion feature. I am not "using" using it, but
I have it switched on to monitor how it's doing, and I must say it's
usually correct when predicting when something is a letter or a parcel. On
Brickowl there's full auto checkout with this, and there it's correct
95% of the time. (You can debate what to do with the other 5%) I have my weight
bands set up so that they take into account progressively increasing envelope
weight, ie. 20g minus 5g, then 50g minus 10g, or something like that.
|
|
|
|
Finland, Pohjanmaa
