Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | bje  | | Posted: | Dec 3, 2020 05:33 | | Subject: | Re: Please show address fields | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, mockingbird writes:
| | Would it be possible to show the names of the address fields?
With international addresses it sometimes is not clear what is the city, what
is the region, what is the streetname, etc.
|
Use the UPU tool, then it is easy to see:
https://www.upu.int/en/Postal-Solutions/Programmes-Services/Addressing-Solutions#scroll-nav__5
| |
And even with national addresses it is not clear. I just had somebody with two
streetnames and numbers. This is probably the address 1 streetname, number and
the optional address 2 streetname, number. But when shipping I can only use one
address. When would I as a seller use the optional address, how would i know
to use it?
|
The buyer should tell you, surely?
| |
And it would also be useful if the address is filled out in 'english'
(i.e. no chinese, russian, israelian characters that are not always available
in shipping label apps)
|
For international orders there are countries which require addresses to be written
in national alphabet. It would be better if the information is actually available
in BL as it is required by the buyer's postal system as it is a pain to get
the required information after the fact from buyers.
https://www.upu.int/UPU/media/upu/documents/PostCode/Universal-POSTCODE%C2%AE-DataBase-specific-FAQs.pdf
It is actually up to the buyer to provide the correct information, but buyers
are rather limited by BL's way of doing things.
|
 |
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Dec 2, 2020 00:38 | | Subject: | Re: In sales posts disclose all fees | | Viewed: | 47 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| | In Suggestions, hpoort writes:
| | In Suggestions, firestar246 writes:
| | In Suggestions, bje writes:
| | When sales and promotions posts are made on the forum, please have sellers disclose
all of the fees and additional charges as part of the forum post.
It is presumably also an unfair business practice in other economies to not include
important information in a promotion. Negating a discount through fees is sort
of important information.
|
I'm not sure I understand... if all fees are disclosed on the store terms
page, why does a quick 5% off post need to have the fees included in it?
|
|
|
See below
| | | | | |
Are you included shipping charges in that statement?
|
@Jean: Good relevant request even though personally I structurally ignore all
those sales posts.
@Firestar:
Because in at least one of the world's countries it is illegal not to explicitly
disclose this essential information in the advertisement itself. https://www.reclamecode.nl/nrc_taxonomy/algemeen/
#8.4 Disclosure of full address and all costs are deemed essential for distant
selling advertisements.
And indeed, if you advertise 5% off on everything, that must include the same
discount on shipping unless specified otherwise. If the discount is on the products
only, the sale post is in fact misleading,
|
| | which is illegal as well. That means that the majority of sales posts here on Bricklink are in fact breaking the ToS to comply with the applicable laws.
|
No offense, but...
The global stage of commerce is not mandated by the EU nor by any other specific
region in the world!
How can any rational thought expect all of the world's economic laws and
regs concatenated, be adhered to in a single transaction? If such a thing were
actually attempted, it would cripple commerce with conflation and disaccord 
|
None of what was said is any way determined to take away rational thinking. If
sale terms specifically wish to exploit a certain loophole, then just say so.
There is nothing in any law which prevents a seller from advertising goods to
the exclusion of another region or a specific person.
My original post was for the site to stop a certain mercenary practice, which
you would think should be good sense anyway. Which is to give the customer all
of the required information upfront as part of the promotion.
Alternatively put, imagine if your local supermarket advertises with a mail shot
that all soap is 20% off terms only in store. Climb in your car, get to the store,
put the items in a cart when there are no specific terms mentioned on the item
shelf, walk to the till and then get hit a 25% surcharge for packaging on soap.
When you say, no this is not what was advertised, the till operator points to
a small sign next to the till which says this. And then refuse to cancel your
purchase and force you to pay before you can leave. And throws a hissy fit. And
bars you from ever coming back.
If this sort of practice makes sense, it would be understandable that one would
balk at the notion of actually giving customers all of the required information
needed to make a binding decision.
Many sellers absolutely cannot stand the thought of cancelling an order if a
buyer asks them to. I should like to think that sellers be allowed to set the
hook once a customer nibbles, provided the lure they hang out is not coated with
poison.
| |
Who wouldn't want to hand their personal business decisions over to unelected
bureaucrats of other nations  Let's not go down that rabbit hole of which
nation's law/regs are to be adopted and to what extent, not yet anyway!
Laws, regulations and taxes on this side of the pond, are created by those we
elect or have chosen to represent our interest. Hopefully it's the
same for you and others.
|
Politics - willingly giving some people permission to tell you what to think
and make you pay for the privilege.
| |
My point is simple, be more reserved with such terms as "illegal" when applying
it to the actions other members, as some are wont to do here.
It's moot anyway, as the global path that BL/TLG takes and expresses in their
ToS contract, is what we've agreed to. It's the site that is threading
the needle, in other words.
-popsicle
|
Yes the ToS says a lot of things many sellers do not care for and actually do
not do or know about. So does PayPal's terms, so does every other commercial
entity. We can expect to self-police and be good at it as adults, but self-policing
(which is what I think you mean here, but I could be wrong) does not really work
- actually I've not known of any organisation which has tried to self-police
and be successful at it. If self policing was in any way successful, then feedback
would have been the most trustworthy aspect of this site.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Dec 1, 2020 02:44 | | Subject: | In sales posts disclose all fees | | Viewed: | 261 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | | Status: | Open | | Vote: | [Yes|No] | |
|
| When sales and promotions posts are made on the forum, please have sellers disclose
all of the fees and additional charges as part of the forum post.
It is presumably also an unfair business practice in other economies to not include
important information in a promotion. Negating a discount through fees is sort
of important information.
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Nov 28, 2020 00:31 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 41413-1 | | Viewed: | 19 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Add 1 Gear flyerfriends02 (Not Applicable) Flyer 2020 Friends Summer Cube Mia
Comments from Submitter:
Already included in sets as inventoried
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Nov 28, 2020 00:29 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 41411-1 | | Viewed: | 13 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Add 1 Gear flyerfriends03 (Not Applicable) Flyer 2020 Friends Summer Cube Stephanie
Comments from Submitter:
Already included in sets as inventoried
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Nov 28, 2020 00:28 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 41410-1 | | Viewed: | 16 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Add 1 Gear flyerfriends01 (Not Applicable) Flyer 2020 Friends Summer Cube Andrea
Comments from Submitter:
Already included in sets as inventoried
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Nov 26, 2020 13:07 | | Subject: | Re: Stockroom | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, Lulumika writes:
| | Hi there,
Is there are shortcut to where I can look at the Stockroom? I am confused (after
9 years of doing this) where the stockroom is.
Thanks,
M.
|
https://www.bricklink.com/myActivity.asp
Under the heading "selling" you will see your lots for sale. Next to that are
the reserved lots and next to that all lots in stockrooms. Click on that for
details.
Alternatively, if you only sue Stockroom A, go to:
https://www.bricklink.com/inventory.asp
Under "Search My Inventory" Select stockroom A and click on Go
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Nov 23, 2020 08:44 | | Subject: | Re: What is an animal what a figure? | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| Yet
I see it as a minifigure consisting of one part in the figure inventory. That
both the part and the minifigure are the same is immaterial. This is why we need
the definitions and consistency. It should be able to be sold as a part as well
as a complete figure if it is defined as such. Does not change the part count
on the set, does not do anything other than assign a PCC from TLG to the part,
which would not be possible if it was only there as a minifigure.
It is not in principle any different to a baseplate set.
In Catalog, starbeanie writes:
| | this breaks all sorts of rules by being in the catalog twice. Lego considers
it the same thing.
In Catalog, novabrick writes:
| | In Catalog, bje writes:
I see
are both listed. which makes the whole thing a bit weirder. But requires
some assembly so therefore he is listed both as part and brick so he's a
rare exception. Guess I have to look through minifigs if I can't find a specific
animal or part. Since making a double listing for the bat and the character minifig
would probably make things even worse.
Christian
novabrick-team
|
|
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Nov 23, 2020 05:40 | | Subject: | Re: What is an animal what a figure? | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | In Catalog, bje writes:
| | In Catalog, novabrick writes:
| | In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | Character based animals like these are a complete mess. None of them are minifigures
according to the LEGO descriptions.
|
Maybe the Catmins could look into sorting this mess then? Maybe another re categorization?
Christian
novabrick-team
|
Your catalogue experts had made some progress until the plug got pulled
See: https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=170
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1192559
and a few other posts
|
Even then, it needs to be clearer. For example, this sentence ...
|
They were still busy getting those properly done, and had plans for moving items
as well to answer Chritian also. I think these things comes in fits and starts
and the long delays in between and just makes it more of a mess and ads to the
inconsistencies.
Personally, I would prefer the sets with named characters as figures consisting
of parts and an inventory, even if just one part. That way sets with Polly can
have characters and sets without can have parts and Polly can be a figure or
an animal air part or both. Then we can search for either the part or the figure.
But of no use until we know what a complete figure is and in fact what a figure
(minifigure or otherwise) is.
| |
Animals - Animals, including pets with names, are not figures unless they
are characters or otherwise display exceptional behavior.
What does that mean? What is a character if not an a lifeform that is named?
An animal like Scooby Doo, he is a pet with a name, but surely he is also a character.
What about Santa's Little Help or Snowball II. Are they high enough billing
to be characters?
is named and therefore is a character in the Elves storyline.
If you give an animal a name, do they not become a character in whatever storyline
they appear in.
|
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Nov 23, 2020 05:12 | | Subject: | Re: What is an animal what a figure? | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, novabrick writes:
| | In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | Character based animals like these are a complete mess. None of them are minifigures
according to the LEGO descriptions.
|
Maybe the Catmins could look into sorting this mess then? Maybe another re categorization?
Christian
novabrick-team
|
Your catalogue experts had made some progress until the plug got pulled
See: https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=170
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1192559
and a few other posts
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Nov 16, 2020 04:51 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, yorbrick writes:
| | In Inventories, bje writes:
| | In Inventories, yorbrick writes:
| | | | Your request has been granted.
|
What about one without the lid? He doesn't wear the lid as a hat when he
leaves the trash can, does he?
|
Presumably you must still follow the headgear rule.
|
If rules are there to be broken though, why not have yet another version?
We now have a listing for
the head
the head, body and trash can lid
the head, body, trash can lid and trash can.
So might as well go for a full house and have the head and body. It makes it
harder to list and buy/sell by spreading the listings like this. And there are
other characters that come with things that might be important/unimportant depending
on the buyer/seller. It just shows how much an incomplete minifigure feature
is needed. In this case, the complete figure could be the group of four items,
and anything else is incomplete.
|
I fully agree, for what it is worth. I have no problem with BL defining what
a minifigure is, what it must consist of, how it must inventoried or indeed how
it must be listed. But then BL must have clear written rules and they must allow
catmins to actually apply those rules consistently. Only then can you actually
have rules for listing items, not before. Only then can you say I will remove
listings with no recourse or appeal. Only then can you say I do not want a thing
appearing in listings. Making up arbitrary decisions and rules to suit a specific
situation on a specific day does not help anything or anybody.
But it is their catalogue, they are going to do as they please and some buyers
will buy things expecting other things and so on and so forth.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Nov 16, 2020 03:09 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, yorbrick writes:
| | | | Your request has been granted.
|
What about one without the lid? He doesn't wear the lid as a hat when he
leaves the trash can, does he?
|
Presumably you must still follow the headgear rule.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Nov 16, 2020 00:44 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Minifig sw0074 | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
|
| In Inventories Requests, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Inventories Requests, bje writes:
| | Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Delete 1 Part 4073 Trans-Neon Orange Plate, Round 1 x 1
Comments from Submitter:
Part does not attach see also instructions page 3
|
As others have said, it's an integral part of the minifig. I'm not so
sure there is a rule about things having to attach, but in this case, and in
the other case you raised with the jewel, we'll make an exception instead
of changing these inventories.
The skis are another issue. It used to be they were not added consistently, then
we started adding them as a rule, but now we are thinking of removing them. We
need to wait until there is a decision about this before moving forward.
|
???
The rule not to have ski's is already in place and has been since 2018. See
the page I quoted when making the requests, it is the reason I quoted the rule
and made the changes. I was not aware that if something is a published rule it
is still something is being thought about or that needs to be decided on.
And just to be clear, and a general point for all who have left comments, I was
not making these requests to prove a point. The issue is that the site is removing
listings for incomplete minifigures from sellers stores. If we cannot know what
the site consistently defines as a minifigure and what consistently needs to
be included in minifigures and how set inventories are done, it makes a mockery
of the listing requirements. If we cannot trust the site to enforce catalogue
rules evenly and even-handedly across the board, the catalogue cannot be trusted
and then listings cannot be trusted.
While I am sure that reasonable sellers would not exclude these parts from minifigures
they sell, there is in fact nothing that precludes a seller from doing so. If
the rules are bad rules, change them. If the rules are good rules, apply them
consistently. That way management improves the catalogue and hence listings and
hence the site overall. That would be infinitely better than the current unwritten
substance over form rule which cannot be appealed.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Nov 15, 2020 03:19 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Minifig mm006 | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Delete 1 Part 30153 Trans-Neon Green Rock 1 x 1 Jewel 24 Facet
Comments from Submitter:
Part does not attach, see also instructions page 1 step 3
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Nov 15, 2020 02:47 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Minifig sw0412 | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Delete 1 Part 4073 Trans-Orange Plate, Round 1 x 1
Comments from Submitter:
Part does not attach, see also instructions booklet 1 page 4
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Nov 15, 2020 02:39 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Minifig sw0074 | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Delete 1 Part 4073 Trans-Neon Orange Plate, Round 1 x 1
Comments from Submitter:
Part does not attach see also instructions page 3
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 11:25 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 30260-1 | | Viewed: | 13 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
|
| | In Inventories Requests, bje writes: |
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 11:22 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 30260-1 | | Viewed: | 23 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Add 4 Part 3794a Dark Bluish Gray Plate, Modified 1 x 2 with 1 Stud without Groove (Jumper) (Alternate) (match ID 1)
Comments from Submitter:
Sealed set image to follow.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Nov 5, 2020 07:25 | | Subject: | Re: Add a help page about logos on parts | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, peregrinator writes:
| | Hi --
This thread was the catalyst for this suggestion:
https://www.bricklink.com/messageThread.asp?ID=277741
I'd like to see a help page added that notes that not all Lego parts will
have the Lego logo on them. Sellers could then, if they wish, link to this page
from their terms.
Thanks!
|
I'm ambivalent about this. There is in business a certain minimum standard
of knowledge which applies in a transaction. Thus we can be reasonably sure that
if a consumer buys vanilla ice cream, this might refer to ice cream flavoured
with a by product of paper manufacturing, an ooze from an animal's castor
sack, a toxic extract from a bean, or real grade A, B or C pods or any combination
of any of these ingredients. If the consumer cares then the consumer must ask
what is in here. If the consumer does not care, he does ask. Simple.
On the other hand, the site is gearing itself for one-off buyers viz expee. So
probably to these users who might not have any standard of knowledge at all,
it might be useful to explain this sad reality. Provided of course users can
actually find the help page.
Probably we will all be heading to the point where we have to put a million warnings
with every listing - take a look at some German stores if you want to see what
that looks like.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Oct 31, 2020 17:07 | | Subject: | Re: Number from inventory | | Viewed: | 19 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, DopamineNL writes:
| | Hi, I searched but found no explanation, I’m afraid I might not be using the
right words.
When I search using a part-number from the inventory (in the back of a lego instruction
booklet) bricklink gives me the right part in the right colour. So bricklink
knows those numbers. But on that page, where is that same number? For example:
if I select a specific in a specific colour, where (on the bricklink page for
that brick&colour) can I find the number that would be used in an inventory (as
it would appear in the back of an instruction book)?
|
Click on the "color images" link for any part and then scroll down to the list
of Part Color Codes.
|
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Oct 22, 2020 07:44 | | Subject: | Re: Incomplete Minifigures? | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, steamingpile writes:
| | I understand the desire to eliminate the incomplete minifigures from the listings.
But is there any chance that actual "minifigure" listings could come without
all the accessories?
For example sw0824 has 3 actual minifigure parts, and a 14 piece backpack. Wouldn't
the acutal minifigure end at the 3 actual minifigure parts, and not include the
random bricks?
|
Then you would need subsets or counterparts for minifigures in set inventories.
Which conceivably might be a good idea, but it will not happen since that would
probably require the ever elusive resources.
The case of springs to mind - the minifgure (head, torso and legs
assemblies) used in three sets with three different sets of headgear but only
one minifigure assembly with the headgear in the first set is recognised in the
catalogue. Presumably there is a market for the other two sets' minifigures
included in the instructions for those sets, but until such time as these can
reasonably be accommodated in set inventories as alternate minifigures or counterparts,
it is doubtful that such a market can be explored by sellers as a reasonable
alternative.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Oct 6, 2020 02:27 | | Subject: | Re: Option for Tracking Number PLACEMENT | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, MMillere writes:
| | In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| |
Sorry I just can't get my brain going enough to understand fully, Milissa.
Kinda feels like a Zen riddle at this point for me
I get that it's the Orders Received Page, but...
~On the right of each line & on the bottom of each line, or on the right-bottom?
~To the right of which "My Notes" notes on the order, or notes on the user?
popsicle
|
To the right of My notes of the order
|
Thank you Yes, and can I as a buyer have the tracking number on my own orders
screen as well please? Same place obviously.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Oct 1, 2020 00:51 | | Subject: | Re: Part | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, Darth7 writes:
| | Please, could someone tell me what the part of the nose is?
|
Try
or
Depending on the shape of the tip and whether it is curved or straight
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Sep 29, 2020 03:09 | | Subject: | Please add inventory note for set 10657 | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Inventories | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Once the inventory change request to move is complete, please add
the following inventory note as copied from as the circumstances are
identical.
"Part number 93608 in light bluish gray (listed as extra) is the lid of the
box but listed in the inventory as its shown in the instructions. Used copies
of this set may or may not have this part included."
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Sep 29, 2020 03:02 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 10657-1 | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Delete 1 Part 93608 Light Bluish Gray Brick, Modified 16 x 24 x 2 with 1 x 4 Indentations on Ends (Container Top)
* Add 1 Part 93608 Light Bluish Gray Brick, Modified 16 x 24 x 2 with 1 x 4 Indentations on Ends (Container Top) (Extra)
Comments from Submitter:
To make this inventory consistent with that of
Follow up request for the inventory note to follow.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Sep 24, 2020 16:22 | | Subject: | Re: Allow only complete animal listings | | Viewed: | 66 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| There will come a time when the catalogue will have animals which are figures
treated as figures, and move these from the parts category. That should help
with some of these listings.
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=170
Until that time, animals are parts. In my view, incomplete parts, similar to
incomplete stickersheets, are used. I do not think it can be a custom item if
it is an incomplete counterpart or a used part.
In Catalog, BrickBuy writes:
| | Similar to the "minifigs must be complete in order to list under minifig listing",
this should be extended to animals as well.
An elephant without ears should be listed as a custom item or broken down.
Likewise, a basilisk without teeth is not a basilisk, but a custom assembly of
part.
(discuss?)
Paul
|
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Sep 19, 2020 02:23 | | Subject: | October Main Item Type Moving Question | | Viewed: | 59 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| I might have missed something about this, but are there going to be movements
in the 6 main item types on 1 October as well?
So are there gear items moving to sets?
Are there animals moving to the figures category?
Are there printed parts moving to the figures category?
Is the minifigure main type being renamed to figures?
Or is that catalogue project still going to remain open?
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Sep 18, 2020 06:39 | | Subject: | Re: Please improve min average lot explanation | | Viewed: | 21 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, yensid writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, yensid writes:
| | What about being able to increase the handling fee based on the lot count? I
agree that the average lot limit is confusion for customers and ultimately leads
to a poor customer experience and potential loss of sales. But I also agree
that pulling an order with 700 lots of 1-2 pieces each is labor intensive. Being
able to increase the handling fee after 200 lots, for example, would cover the
added labor and i think be clear to the customer.
|
From the seller's persective that would be a great solution, but for the
buyer it would be frustrating because it wouldn't be transparent what they
are going to be paying. I prefer to offer buyers just the price of the items
and 1 single charge for shipping&handling that they can see in advance, to keep
it a smooth shopping experience.
Just thinking out loud - One way it can be done, is if the buyer could
choose to accept an extra handling fee. The system could say "your order does
not meet the minimum lot average etc., in order to continue, change it or accept
this added charge". But if course, that can lead to exploitation by sellers who
will force that extra charge onto buyers whenever their lot average is under
€10...
|
You could define it in clearly in your terms page, just like you do now with
S&H. Similar to having shipping cost based on weight, handling based on lot
count. For those customer that do not read the terms, they wouldn’t know any
different. When they check out, it would just be $3 instead of $2. They key
being that there would not be any error preventing checkout and irritating the
customer. Any hurtle for the customer to overcome is a potential for them to
give up and a lost sale.
|
It is already available, per shipping method...
|
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Sep 18, 2020 06:36 | | Subject: | Re: Please improve min average lot explanation | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, bje writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, bje writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
|
|
|
...
I understand that, and I get the comparison to buying at the supermarket. But
let's also appreciate how awesome it is that this is a marketplace where
you have thousands of items to pick from that are all just a few cents each,
and you can mostly buy whatever quantity you like. It's a rather unique webshop
experience and at least in my opinion, when I think about it, it's pretty
impressive that it all works. All that a seller like me would ask for, is that
if you're only going for several different tiny plates, then at least take
10 and not 3. I get that a supermarket doesn't force you to buy several of
an item, but on the other hand they offer packs of rice and not individual grains
of rice. You may not get ultimate freedom, but IMO you do get a heck of
a lot of freedom to buy what you want on Bricklink.
|
My example was hyperbolic.
I do from time to time need beads for fishing rigs and lures, for that I visit
bead shops. I've never been charged extra for buying exact quantities or
for not buying in pre-packs only or being forced to buy more than what I need.
I did phone the owner of a beading store a few minutes ago and asked her if she
would consider such imitations for her customers given that her inventory is
a lot of small low priced loose items which must be packed and counted at the
till. She thought the idea utterly without merit. Maybe we are just less sophisticated
here when it comes to the amount of work we do for whatever money.
And BL also gives you the option to charge an extra fee per shipping option on
average minimum lot value, so if it is important to you that a buyer values your
time, make the buyer pay for it with proper disclosure. Granted, some buyers
are going to moan about the fee, but at least they can see it in the cart and
can check out easier.
...
| |
| | On the balance of averages, does it help when buyers contact you and you explain
it to them better than BL does? In other words, do you close the sale to that
particular buyer once you have answered his question and do you get a return
for the effort you made to assist the buyer to checkout? Or do you never hear
from the buyer again?
|
I think it's about 50-50..
|
So in that case, for the buyers who already contact you about this issue, 50%
walk away regardless of how well you as the store owner explain it to them and
you do not get increased sales as a result. I really thought it would be less
than that number and that a good explanation and some understanding would make
buyers appreciate the extra effort.
And do not get me wrong, I fully understand where you are coming from. But I
still think customers would rather pay more than have restrictions or things
they do not understand. This is a really good example:
A large supermarket chain here sell garlic loose at R199.99 per kilogram.
They also sell two bulbs in a prepacked netted bag for R39.99 (the price per
kilo is not shown, it shown as R39.99 ea)
The only advantage the customer has to use the netted bag option, is that the
garlic they want do not have to be weighed. It is the same product.
Now, I asked 12 customers in the store the other day which is cheaper. EVERY
ONE of them said the R39.99 item is the cheaper and they would buy that one.
The fresh produce manager told me they sell more of those netted bags than loose
garlic at any time.
I did not speak further. The sad fact is that the pre-packed bag weighs about
75 grams. 75 grams of loose garlic is R14.99, including a packet to carry it
in. The price difference is 166%, which shoppers all happily pay because it is
convenient.
I give this example not to say that customers are stupid, but there is a lot
to be said for making a thing convenient and easily accessible.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Sep 18, 2020 04:39 | | Subject: | Re: Please improve min average lot explanation | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, bje writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
|
|
...
| |
Trouble is, I wouldn't use it if it wasn't necessary - I just get flooded
with tiny lots if I don't use it. My pay per hour would make a huge drop.
In my own webshop I am not able to set such a minimum, and sometimes that really
gets me the "order from hell" that sucks up all the time of the day that I planned
to use for 10 other orders on my list, for only €50 pay. Not fun for me and not
fun for the other 10 buyers.
|
Not fun or particular good use of time for a buyer to sit for two hours and still
cannot checkout either. I've had some of these where I sit for 30 minutes
and then go what the hell, let me buy everything in the store. Then I still cannot
checkout, because I still have not met the minimum lot average. I agree you need
a happy medium, but your pay per hour is dependent on your selling price less
overheads, not on buyers seeing listings at prices you are not willing to sell
at.
| |
On the one hand, I fully understand that from an interface point of view it is
not really good (you do not get immediate feedback), on the other hand it's
simply necessary for me to do business. So we best look into ways of making the
interface help out as good as possible.
|
On the balance of averages, does it help when buyers contact you and you explain
it to them better than BL does? In other words, do you close the sale to that
particular buyer once you have answered his question and do you get a return
for the effort you made to assist the buyer to checkout? Or do you never hear
from the buyer again?
| |
| | Rather suggest, if sellers really want to use this, that the quantities the buyer
wants cannot be added to the cart unless the minimum average is met automatically.
That way the cart is managed for the buyer and nobody has to know the why and
the wherefores of why an item cannot be bought for the price it is listed at.
|
Good suggestion, can't really decide right away whether this would be good
or bad, but it's definitely good to write such ideas down and investigate
them. (I guess the downside would be that your first lot immediately needs to
meet the criterium, which is unfortunate if you came for a small plate but also
plan to add a minifig).
|
Then your terms were not read
| | A colour marking in the cart of which lots are below
the threshold might also help.
|
Possibly, as long as the buyer knows immediately that there is some difference
and do not like, at present, either have to keep a running total in the head
or toggle between the store and the cart incessantly. In countries like my own
where data is expensive, this adds insult to an already horrible shopping experience.
| |
Whatever improves the interface to make the buying experience more positive,
I'm all for it, so it's good to keep these ideas coming.
|
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Sep 18, 2020 03:53 | | Subject: | Re: Please improve min average lot explanation | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | Again, can Bricklink please do something about the way the mininum average lot
value is explained to the buyer? I am getting many messages about it and find
myself explaining the same thing over and over. Please improve these descriptions
in the interface. Maybe by including an example, and by changing the terminology.
As is evident from many forum posts as well, many fresh buyers don't even
know what a "lot" is supposed to mean, let alone they will understand the concept
of minimum average lot value.
|
Walk into store to buy bread, get to till, no you MUST buy 1 kilogram of fillet
steak as well so that the average price of the goods you buy is more than what
the bread costs, which is the only thing you need. Leave bread, walk out.
It does not matter how good you explain it, buyers do not understand how you
have an item on the shelf you are not willing to sell for the price you are advertising
it at, or for which you need a degree in mathematics to work out how many you
must put in a cart before you can, well, pay for it at checkout.
I would rather BL take this away altogether. You already have minimum buys to
avoid small orders, you can already set a minimum lot quantity for purchase.
Why give an impression that an item can ship by itself, when you as the seller
is not willing to sell it like that? It confuses buyers when sellers willfully
shows prices for goods they are not willing to sell at.
Rather suggest, if sellers really want to use this, that the quantities the buyer
wants cannot be added to the cart unless the minimum average is met automatically.
That way the cart is managed for the buyer and nobody has to know the why and
the wherefores of why an item cannot be bought for the price it is listed at.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Sep 17, 2020 02:07 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 41413-1 | | Viewed: | 19 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
|
| In Inventories Requests, randyf writes:
| | In Inventories Requests, bje writes:
| | Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Delete 1 Part 64454 Lime Container, Box 3 x 8 x 6 2/3 Half Back
* Delete 1 Part 64462 Satin Trans-Light Blue Container, Box 3 x 8 x 6 2/3 Half Front
* Add 1 Part 64454c02 Lime Container, Box 3 x 8 x 6 2/3 Half Back with Satin Trans-Light Blue Container, Box 3 x 8 x 6 2/3 Half Front (64454 / 64462)
* Delete 1 Part 64454c02 Lime Container, Box 3 x 8 x 6 2/3 Half Back with Satin Trans-Light Blue Container, Box 3 x 8 x 6 2/3 Half Front (64454 / 64462) (Counterpart)
Comments from Submitter:
This container is pre-assembled, so the pre-assembled part should be the regular inventory only. It does require some force to split the assembled parts, so I doubt the split parts can be listed as new. Should have picked this up when I did the inventories, apologies.
|
Unfortunately these requests will not be accepted.
The site wants to keep these listed separately in the inventories to keep the
one-to-one relationships in tact with the official LEGO inventories and replacement
parts website, since LEGO treats them as two parts in the official part count.
Cheers,
Randy
|
Thank you for trying. I will still list as new for a complete assembly as it
is my belief that to separate these parts would make them used.
Thanks again
Jean
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Sep 10, 2020 07:19 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 41411-1 | | Viewed: | 23 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
|
| In Inventories Requests, bje writes:
| | In Inventories Requests, paulvdb writes:
| | In Inventories Requests, bje writes:
|
snip
| |
This was discussed in the admin forum when the first of these sets came out and
this was decided:
"These should be listed separately in the Regular section and together in the
Counterpart section. The fact that they are assembled is for display purposes
in a new set, just like the large wheels in set 8860.
|
|
Sorry, sometimes I am a bit slow, but if these are display items only, why are
they not gear items? These are not naturally parts (since they must forcibly
split), by being for display only, they are not used for "building models or
play scenes" and most certainly, if for display only, then they are accessories
to the set, and not part of the set.
Regardless of whether these are viewed as gear or parts, I say again, you cannot
split this and consider it new.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Sep 10, 2020 06:59 | | Subject: | Re: Superman - is this allowed in the catalogue? | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
I believe that the guidelines on this were changed by our team. I think the set
would now be allowed and have an inventory.
| | [g=superman]
They are gear rather than instructions, presumably as they cannot be listed as
instructions if it is a non-existent set.
Is the sticker sheet allowed to be sold here? And if so, where should it go?
It is not really any different to the instruction sheet, in that it was an in-store
giveaway but then it is a bit like the Castle Byers non-set, in that it came
with instructions and a sticker sheet. For that one, I can see the instructions
in the catalogue but not the sticker sheet.
|
|
Will that mean that the instructions entry as gear will be removed and attached
to the set if it is listed?
|
Yep, see this one for a cars set:
https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?G=Torque#T=S&O={%22rpp%22:%2250%22,%22iconly%22:0}
and
and its sticker sheet:
which was moved from gear as well if I remember correctly.
I'm hoping to find a bit of time to add the Batman and Robin PAB event set
with its sticker.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Sep 10, 2020 04:19 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 41411-1 | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
|
| In Inventories Requests, paulvdb writes:
| | In Inventories Requests, bje writes:
|
snip
| | | | Comments from Submitter:
This container is pre-assembled, so the pre-assembled part should be the regular inventory only. It does require some force to split the assembled parts, so I doubt the split parts can be listed as new. Should have picked this up when I did the inventories, apologies.
|
This was discussed in the admin forum when the first of these sets came out and
this was decided:
"These should be listed separately in the Regular section and together in the
Counterpart section. The fact that they are assembled is for display purposes
in a new set, just like the large wheels in set 8860.
Part Assemblies - Complete part assemblies are included in this section when
they come preassembled as a norm in a new set and not just for display purposes.
The other clue is that official data treats these box halves as separate units,
complete with PCCs."
|
Respectfully, 90% of the stickers are to complete the part and there are additional
parts added to it to complete the build as per the instructions - some of these
sets require an additional 5 parts to be added. Given that, I do not think that
by itself it serves any particular display purpose, unless it forms part of a
further assembly. I do not know about the other cubes because I do not have those
sets in hand, but quite possibly if they are not complete within themselves but
require additional parts to be added to complete the build of the part, then
they should change as well.
The container is not just used for display purposes. As a matter of fact, on
a quick perusal of the TLG official marketing for these sets in the summer series,
nowhere does it say that the container is by itself a display container. It ranges
from being a box, a carry case, a cube, play inside the box, desk companion.
Actually anything except a display container or display box by itself.
One of the marketing blurbs state that these CAN be split, but nowhere is an
image of how they are split or used in a split manner. I do not have a child
of 6 handy at the minute, but I would dearly love to see a child of 6 try to
split that box without some effort or the assistance of an adult. The split is
at least 15 degrees of centre and requires some force. That would probably be
the idea behind two separate PCC's, aside from the fact that the top colour
is used 5 times more than the bottom.
Also, the only time display is mentioned, is when TLG advises that the cubes
can be connected to display them in creative ways - meaning in my view that the
single case is not meant to be displayed by itself.
I did look at that rule as published prior to making these requests, and researched
TLG's marketing as well. I still cannot see how the part is used for display
purposes in a new set only.
Please reconsider as sellers splitting these parts and using force to do so,
would make these parts used if split and then only the counterpart can be listed
as new. This is a bit counter-intuitive as the catalogue does not inform users
that the parts should only be sold as new as a counterpart, not a regular part.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Sep 10, 2020 02:29 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 41411-1 | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Delete 1 Part 64454 Medium Azure Container, Box 3 x 8 x 6 2/3 Half Back
* Delete 1 Part 64462 Satin Trans-Light Blue Container, Box 3 x 8 x 6 2/3 Half Front
* Delete 1 Part 64454c02 Medium Azure Container, Box 3 x 8 x 6 2/3 Half Back with Satin Trans-Light Blue Container, Box 3 x 8 x 6 2/3 Half Front (64454 / 64462) (Counterpart)
* Add 1 Part 64454c02 Medium Azure Container, Box 3 x 8 x 6 2/3 Half Back with Satin Trans-Light Blue Container, Box 3 x 8 x 6 2/3 Half Front (64454 / 64462)
Comments from Submitter:
This container is pre-assembled, so the pre-assembled part should be the regular inventory only. It does require some force to split the assembled parts, so I doubt the split parts can be listed as new. Should have picked this up when I did the inventories, apologies.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Sep 10, 2020 02:27 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 41413-1 | | Viewed: | 22 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Delete 1 Part 64454 Lime Container, Box 3 x 8 x 6 2/3 Half Back
* Delete 1 Part 64462 Satin Trans-Light Blue Container, Box 3 x 8 x 6 2/3 Half Front
* Add 1 Part 64454c02 Lime Container, Box 3 x 8 x 6 2/3 Half Back with Satin Trans-Light Blue Container, Box 3 x 8 x 6 2/3 Half Front (64454 / 64462)
* Delete 1 Part 64454c02 Lime Container, Box 3 x 8 x 6 2/3 Half Back with Satin Trans-Light Blue Container, Box 3 x 8 x 6 2/3 Half Front (64454 / 64462) (Counterpart)
Comments from Submitter:
This container is pre-assembled, so the pre-assembled part should be the regular inventory only. It does require some force to split the assembled parts, so I doubt the split parts can be listed as new. Should have picked this up when I did the inventories, apologies.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Sep 6, 2020 10:18 | | Subject: | Re: Please reset variable image | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, bje writes:
| | Please reset the variable colour on the part inventory page to an N/A image.
Having Yellow as the variable colour is confusing.
|
Not sure exactly what you're asking for here. Can you post a screenshot
of what you're seeing?
|
Sure: When viewed as attached, there should not be a colour with variable or
am I confused with some other section of the price guide?
|
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Sep 6, 2020 09:54 | | Subject: | Re: Catalogue Dimensions - please have standards | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Catalog, bje writes:
But that still doesn’t take care of the “fixed” part: however high is a brick,
there’s only one stud on top.
My point was that it’s not Z x 11.4, it’s Z x 9.6 + 1.8 (or 1.6) or even Z x
9.6 + 1.8 - tolerance.
With correct measures, not exactly 9.6 or 1.8….
Which lead to my parenthesis: we don’t know what these values are supposed to
be exactly IRL, only in “brick geometry,” the “system,” and even that is sometimes
contradicted by RL.
|
Which is why the standard is set to the current 2 x 4 brick with solid
studs and a logo on top. The kilogram has changed with time, but the basic use
of a gram has not - it is still 1 gram in relation to a kilogram. So in that
system will the fixed part not be fixed with everything revolving around it,
similar to cg, dg to a kg, which can change over time to accommodate changes
in the basic measurement unit? Nobody knew what a kilogram was as a measurement
standard until somebody decided to determine exactly what it means. Just so,
if we do not know what the measurement unit of a part is in relation to another
part, we make the standard.
Given that currently the catalogue cannot accommodate actual mm measurements
but only a BL stud measurement. And we change the standard over time to accommodate
changes in the standard.
To get back to hollow stud vs solid stud:
If you cannot use the one part in LDraw at present because it differs, how would
having a measurement of both those parts in relation to a 2 x 4 brick change
things in LDraw?
| |
| | […]
I'll be very honest, I did not think in terms of LUD,
|
LDU = LDraw Unit.
|
Typo, thank you
| | I used them to not have to repeat “1 stud,” “1 brick,” because you always need
to specify what you’re talking about (a stud is a tenon, and the distance between
two tenons, … and a horse) and without using a real-life unit, like mm, because
then you have the discussion: “it’s not 8mm, it’s 7.93mm, no it’s 7.95mm, etc.”
I could have used “module” like LEGO or L like in descriptions here. 1M =
20LDU = 1L
LDU are useful in a perfect world (digital) and for brick geometry.
And by brick geometry, I mean the calculations one does for SNOT or trigonometry:
2 brick-width = 5 plate-heights and such.
The distance between the center of two tenons is exactly 20LDU, a brick’s height
is 24LDU, a plate’s height is 8LDU, etc., whatever the exact value of an LDU
is in mm IRL, those are constants.
Anyway, what I meant was the perfect width of a 1x brick is 20LDU (1M, 1L, 1stud)
but a real 1x brick is not 20LDU-wide, and a real Nx brick is not N times the
real width of a 1x brick.
So, one can’t just say “a 1 x 1 x 1 brick is A x B x C therefore a X x Y x Z
part is XA x YB x ZC.” This only works in a perfect world.
Or for a rough approximation.
|
But you have that exact system in use for all standards. I might not have enough
knowledge so I might be making a moot point, but you have no current measurement
to use in LDraw for a modified part, so how would having stud measures related
to a 2 x 4 brick or whatever other standard, change things in LDraw or anywhere
else? If you have never had the use of the part in LDraw because the measurements
are wrong or non-existent or not being carried over from BL to LDraw, then having
measurements in relation to something else, is still not going to change matters
for any user of LDraw or any useful discussion about the size of a modified part.
| |
Otherwise, frankly, LDU isn’t a unit I would recommend to use to show measures
in the catalogue.
|
Me neither. It is only the users' catalogue sometimes...
| | M / L / stud aren’t good units either because a brick-height is 1.2 brick-width
but everybody counts bricks’ heights in brick-height. What would people say
when the 3001 is said to be 2 x 4 x 1.2?
|
What did people say when their 10 000 acre farms became 4046.86 hectares, because
we decided to standardise to a decimal system and did not want to use chains
and furlongs any longer? I'm sure there were oddballs who thought the government
stole some of their land by making it smaller.
| | And would they be the same people who are now upset because non-brick parts’
height (like flags) are measured in brick-height?
|
The same thing people said when flagpoles started getting measured in meters
and not feet?
| |
And it was asked again when IC came out. And it was replied “just post on the
forum.”
And then they made a separate topic so that we could just ignore the whole stuff.
|
They've added another topic - "X" suffix. So now you have two topics to ignore...
|
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Sep 6, 2020 06:59 | | Subject: | Re: Catalogue Dimensions - please have standards | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Catalog, bje writes:
| | […]
So:
DimX for 1 Stud: 7.93;
DimY for 1 stud: 7.93;
DimZ for 1 stud: 11.40
[…]
Catalogue dimensions must be added in relation to the actual measurement of
a part in millimeters as follows: W: 7.93mm = 1 stud; L: 7.93mm = 1 stud; H:
11.40 mm = 1 stud.
[…]
|
Er, no.
First, DimZ is not “stud,” it’s “brick.”
Then, 11.40mm includes the stud (tenon) and the logo on top, otherwise you’d
have something near 9.6mm. So if DimZ is Z bricks, it should be translated to
1.8mm + Z x 9.6mm, not Z x 11.4mm for bricks with top solid studs. Hollow studs
don’t have the logo, so it’s 1.6mm + Z x 9.6mm.
|
I should have defined what I am doing: make BL's studs measure in relation
to a sandard , thus making stud measurement relative to something measurably
constant. So a hollow stud part would be have a different measurement, by being
relative to a solid stud with a logo and measured against that.
| |
(I’m not using exact measures.
According to Jamie Berard, the logo adds exactly 0.14mm to a stud. He said that
in his famous presentation about stress, while explaining why a SNOT brick can’t
lie on a solid stud because of the logo but it can lie on a hollow stud. That
last remark means a brick-width (let’s call that 20LDU) plus a stud (tenon) equals
a brick-height (24LDU), which makes the stud (tenon) at 4LDU, so around 1.6mm.
By that I mean it’s in-system, not just “convenient for us to believe it is even
if it’s not,” like when many of us consider the Technic holes to be at the same
height as a side stud (which they are not), or the same diameter as an anti-stud
(which they are not either). But there’s also the side stud on 4070 which, while
being hollow, actually goes further than the brick’s enveloppe: you can’t put
a 4070 with the stud facing a solid wall / a brick, the stud don’t fit. *sigh*
Measuring LEGO is complicated.)
Further, the same kind of issue occurs to DimX and DimY: you divided the measures
by the number of studs but you didn’t take into account that a brick is actually
20LDU per stud minus a tolerance at each end.
If the bricks were exactly 20LDU (or 7.93mm or 8mm or any constant measure)
per stud, 1. you wouldn’t be able to put them side by side without a hammer,
2. if you managed it, they would “fuse” and you wouldn’t be able to remove them.
So there’s a little shaving on each end, on all sides, but, of course, not between
the studs.
The tolerance is not much, and is totally ignored for brick geometry (hence the
exact measure in digital bricks and the tricks used afterward to add seams),
but it’s important if you want to go to 4 decimals in mm.
But even if you correct that, your proposition doesn’t work for Duplo or Modulex
bricks: the 2x4 brick in these system have a catalogue dimension of 2 x 4 x 1.
And, anyway, the catalogue dimensions don’t include protrusions, like side studs,
clips, bars, balls, and so on. So, many of the dimensions in the catalogue are
wrong for System bricks too.
|
I'll be very honest, I did not think in terms of LUD, which is obviously
required, but having said that, the current system does not allow for the measurement
of parts with any meaningful use, other than in LUD terms. Take stickersheets,
I normally have to eyeball the dimensions and round up or down to get to the
nearest whole stud measure. The relative measure I was proposing is to take cognisance
of every conceivable part in relation to a standard, similar to 1 gram having
a relationship to the standard 1 kilogram.
However, as my suggestion would not change the dimension of any standard part
with no protrusions (which currently in LUD terms is 0x0x0), would it really
impact on LUD as a system measurement?
| |
Now, what is to be preferred? Having wrong dimensions for shipping or having
no dimensions that would trigger the seller to check and set them?
|
Having LUD measure and millimeter measures in the catalogue. That will probably
require the ever elusive programming resources to be freed up to make IC work
properly and to make the catalogue work for uses than packaging. I do not think
they want to use programming resources at this time, but, as one of the sellers
who paid a lot of school fees in learning how IC works, I can also tell you that
releasing a BL product called IC and then, a. not maintaining and, b. expecting
sellers to adopt it when there are no standards, no performance and no proper
help from BL's side, is also not quite acceptable.
| |
Okay, the seller is more often surprised than triggered, and it seems many set
the dimension for themselves and don’t share them…. 
|
It's not that, by the time you get the dimension problem, it already on the
order, so why bother? You will end up paying extra or cancelling the order or
making the buyer pay extra, whatever the flavour of the month is for a systemic
BL failing. When you delete lots like I do, it is also a massive pain to relist
and then remember to add manual dimensions, so you end up paying again.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Sep 6, 2020 05:13 | | Subject: | Re: Stockroom Update will delete after Submit | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| Change your inventory page to the old view, then your changes will stick. Your
suggestion should rather be that Bricklink must check if things work before making
it a new default.
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1220050
The image there will show you where to switch over so that your changes are accepted.
InSuggestions, donossi writes:
| | Hello, I got a problem with the Inventory Update:
-Choose "my inventory" in the drop-down on the top of the bricklink page
-Search for a brick in my inventory.
-Find the brick with qty = 0, Stockroom = true
-Update the brick qty to greater than 0 (for example qty = 10)
-Uncheck Stockroom ( Stockroom = false)
-Submit Changes
-- The delete of the Stockroom Flag is not saved. So the updated bricks
are all in the stockroom.
This is annoying when I update many bricks in one submit.
I think this is a system error.
Another suggestion to bricklink: If on one brick the qty = 0 and stockroom =
false please set at submit the stockroom = true and show a warning instead of
the error message.
Kind Regards
Maico
|
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
South Africa, Western Cape
