Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | bje  | | Posted: | Feb 12, 2021 15:21 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 8313-1 | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
| In Inventories Requests, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Inventories Requests, yorbrick writes:
| | In Inventories Requests, StormChaser writes:
| | In Inventories Requests, yorbrick writes:
| | Do you prefer to wait until the minifig is approved before filing the removals?
|
I think it would be best to wait until you've had some time to calm down
so that we can have a more rational discussion on this topic.
|
You asked for me to be constructive rather than destructive criticism, so I have
started adding missing figures to the catalogue using these published Figure
guidelines: https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=170
Figure classification can sometimes be difficult. Therefore, this section
further clarifies how BrickLink decides if an item is a figure or not.
Figures: Characters, fantasy creatures, humans, mechanical objects, and statues.
Additional clarifications listed below.
Characters - These typically have a face and a name, but always display sentient
behavior beyond that of a similar animal or object.
Nick Bluetooth and so on all come under character, don't they? Even Shimmel.
|
There is also this rule from the Adding Catalog Items Help Page:
Large part assemblies. - Large assemblies of parts that can be built into
figures, vehicles, or other structures often comprise a substantial portion of
a set and should not be added to the catalog. An exception has been made in the
past for some DUPLO vehicles representing fictional characters and some other
large assemblies with the Item Number prefix "spa" which were added as experiment.
If the entire set (or half the set) is used to build a figure / character, we
would be going against precedent to add it to the catalog. Adding it as a minifigure
is even a further stretch.
|
And exactly here is the problem when you and your catalogue team do not speak
with one voice or even have a comparative understanding of what is happening.
The page you refer to:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=71
was updated on 18 November 2020 by you, but you apparently did not check that
that the catalogue item minifig does not exist any longer. The information relating
to large part assemblies of figures and the thing previously known as a minifig
have been replaced by the new definition of a "figure"
The new definition of figures are on this page:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=170
which has been in existence and confirmed as being active since 1 June 2020 and
which are the definitions used to add the figure items to the catalogue.
On that definition, there is no such thing as a minifig. There are only figures.
A figure can be any size part assembly, says so right there. There is no specific
limitation as to number of parts. There is no specific limitation as to what
percentage of the set must be made up to the figure. For an item to be a catalogue
item as a figure, the only standard that has to be met is that it must be an
autonomous entity. You and your catalogue team should perhaps get together and
actually fix the cross references and actually speak with one voice as to what
exactly is meant when catalogue items are discussed.
It has been pointed out ad nauseum that we still do not have a definition for
a complete minifigure (whatever that is, see above) either - so perhaps it would
be best to complete the definitions such that users are not confused.
And if these figures (note: figures) are in fact figures by definition, there
should be absolutely no reason not to add them as catalogue items.
|
 |
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Jan 22, 2021 03:27 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 60180-1 | | Viewed: | 19 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Delete 4 Part 6628 Black Technic, Pin with Friction Ridges Lengthwise and Tow Ball (Undetermined Hole Type)
* Add 4 Part 6628a Black Technic, Pin with Friction Ridges Lengthwise and Tow Ball with Round Pin Hole
Comments from Submitter:
From sealed set parted out
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Jan 22, 2021 03:25 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 30571-1 | | Viewed: | 12 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Delete 2 Part 6628 Black Technic, Pin with Friction Ridges Lengthwise and Tow Ball (Undetermined Hole Type)
* Add 2 Part 6628a Black Technic, Pin with Friction Ridges Lengthwise and Tow Ball with Round Pin Hole
Comments from Submitter:
From sealed set parted out
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Jan 22, 2021 03:21 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 7994-1 | | Viewed: | 13 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Delete 1 Part 6628 Black Technic, Pin with Friction Ridges Lengthwise and Tow Ball (Undetermined Hole Type)
* Add 1 Part 6628a Black Technic, Pin with Friction Ridges Lengthwise and Tow Ball with Round Pin Hole
Comments from Submitter:
From sealed set parted out
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Jan 22, 2021 03:21 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 7632-1 | | Viewed: | 16 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Delete 1 Part 6628 Black Technic, Pin with Friction Ridges Lengthwise and Tow Ball (Undetermined Hole Type)
* Add 1 Part 6628a Black Technic, Pin with Friction Ridges Lengthwise and Tow Ball with Round Pin Hole
Comments from Submitter:
From sealed set parted out
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Jan 22, 2021 03:20 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 4997-1 | | Viewed: | 12 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Delete 2 Part 6628 Black Technic, Pin with Friction Ridges Lengthwise and Tow Ball (Undetermined Hole Type)
* Add 2 Part 6628a Black Technic, Pin with Friction Ridges Lengthwise and Tow Ball with Round Pin Hole
Comments from Submitter:
From sealed set parted out
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Jan 22, 2021 03:20 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 3181-1 | | Viewed: | 18 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Delete 1 Part 6628 Black Technic, Pin with Friction Ridges Lengthwise and Tow Ball (Undetermined Hole Type)
* Add 1 Part 6628a Black Technic, Pin with Friction Ridges Lengthwise and Tow Ball with Round Pin Hole
Comments from Submitter:
From sealed set parted out
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2021 04:44 | | Subject: | Re: Editable Email subject for Invoice message | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| | In Suggestions, patpendlego writes:
| | Message Templates: Edit Order Invoice
Email subject
"Invoice for BrickLink Order #"
The Email subject is fixed / not modifiable, and I would like it to be editable
to suit my store's needs. E.g. replace the word 'Invoice' with something
else.
So I suggest to make this editable, including support for the macro's
in order to be able to match the email subject better with the contents of the
invoice template.
It is located on this page:
https://www.bricklink.com/v2/mystore/message_templates.page#/1
Thx,
Arnoud
|
Uh, never noticed this inability before.
What are some other possible uses beyond the macro tag mentioned, would edit-ability
be beneficial to the seller?
|
For VAT registered businesses the ability to call it a "Tax Invoice" as is legally
required to do;
For other sellers, the BL "invoice" is actually a summary of the order with an
account number for settlemet. It is not actually an invoice, so it would be better
to call it "order summary and payment details"
For international freight, the BL invoice does not suffice even if customised
as it is just a summary with some account details;
I've noticed some states calls the document on which US sales tax is raised
a "receipt", "bill" or even "memorandum of sale". It should be possible to correctly
state what is issued;
For US states, sellers are not collecting nor paying over sales tax so no seller
can raise a financial obligation to the buyer on their invoice. Sellers selling
to USA buyers should be able to head the document "BrickLink Sales Tax Bill"
to avoid confusion and misrepresentation.
I do not know the situation in the USA, but here all documents issued purporting
to be a business invoice must at the very least have numbers which follow on
or in series. The document currently called "invoice" fails on this and it would
be better if that can be retitled memorandum or sales bill or sales note or whatever
is suitable, anything but an invoice actually.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Jan 19, 2021 05:07 | | Subject: | Re: Have all printed Legs been deleted? | | Viewed: | 62 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, novabrick writes:
| |
Today I saw that the printed Leg in our inventory got marked for deletion. I
saw that even more are marked likewise. Is there a reason behind it I missed?
Christian
novabrick-team
|
This is awkward. Presumably you must now list it as an incomplete .
As leg assemblies are not being inventoried, perhaps these parts not appearing
in any inventory are now being deleted. I've never really understood why
leg assemblies cannot be inventoried.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Jan 16, 2021 00:40 | | Subject: | Re: Change Part Dimensions to Metric | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Suggestions, gogogovro writes:
|
snip
| | As some have already mentioned, we are presently working to improve the way the
site handles dimensions. The first step in the project will allow users to submit
packaging dimensions (which henceforth will be called "packing dimensions") through
the normal catalog upload forms.
These dimensions will be displayed on the catalog detail page. For parts, we
will leave the stud dimensions where they are and the packing dimensions will
be shown underneath, in centimeters (or inches, if that is how you have your
preferences set up).
On the catalog upload forms, the dimensions will be entered in centimeters. Users
will accumulate catalog credits for uploading packing dimensions data.
This project is currently underway.
|
So we are moving from the current millimeters to centimeters? Does that
mean all current measurements will be restated simply by a factor of 10? Are
there controls in place to ensure:
1. that this conversion is handled properly?;
2. that both inventory views are updated at the same time to ensure that custom
and catalogue dimensions for all items in seller inventories are correctly converted
to centimeter?;
3. that both inventory views display correctly in future?
4. That seller shipping methods and restrictions are updated automatically?
5. That you stress test catalogue items in carts first to make sure that the
correct answers are given for such carts?
6. That all current carts and open orders are not impacted with a change which
would make it impossible to continue with the order or having to redo the cart
entirely?
If the above cannot be done, it might be better to keep the standard as millimeters
I think you should also have the catalogue admins set the standards of how the
measurements should be taken prior to giving them the responsibility of approving
member requests for changes and ensure that the community is made aware of these
standards. It serves no purpose to make it easier to make submissions and then
3 years from now, we need a catalogue project again to fix everything back to
some defined standard.
Some standards:
The level of precision (should be 2 decimals in mm and 3 if you really are going
to cm)
How foldable and parts such as strings are measured;
How parts with two possible packing methods supplied by TLG are measured (eg
string loose and string wound around the cardboard insert);
How minifigures are measured;
How items in cardboard sleeves are measured when included with minifigures or
other parts;
How boxes are measured;
Standardise the measurement of decorated parts;
Automatically add measurements for new decorated parts form the standard measurement;
Automatically apply dimensions when variants are split;
When an item is defaulted to weight and when it is defaulted to volume;
Define the standard for weight and volume default if these default settings are
to be fixed by users at the time of submission;
How to determine the x y and z sides so that dimensions are displayed correctly
(I know it does not make any difference to actual volume calculations, but it
looks a bit neater if all parts are 8 x 8 x 16 and not some at 8 x 16 x 8 or
16 x 8 x 8)
Etc.
|
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Jan 4, 2021 16:12 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 305-2 | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Delete 4 Part 3004 Red Brick 1 x 2
* Add 1 Part 3004 Red Brick 1 x 2
* Add 1 Part 3007 Red Brick 2 x 8
* Delete 14 Part 3003old Red Brick 2 x 2 without Inside Supports
* Add 13 Part 3003old Red Brick 2 x 2 without Inside Supports
* Delete 23 Part 3002old Red Brick 2 x 3 without Cross Supports
* Add 22 Part 3002old Red Brick 2 x 3 without Cross Supports
* Add 2 Part 3001old Red Brick 2 x 4 without Cross Supports
* Add 1 Part 3039 Red Slope 45 2 x 2
* Delete 6 Part 3038 Red Slope 45 2 x 3
* Add 4 Part 3038 Red Slope 45 2 x 3
* Add 1 Part 3037 Red Slope 45 2 x 4
Comments from Submitter:
Confirmed to actual build with instructions in hand. . Set not sealed. Images of build process and detailed scans of instructions can be provided.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Jan 4, 2021 15:48 | | Subject: | Re: Why 38014pb01 is not a Minifigure? | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog Requests, Mirko8710 writes:
Also [p=3899pb006]
although I see Mrs Potts is now a minifigure
I don't think the debate around category definitions got finished, so probably
there are still issues with consistency.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Jan 4, 2021 04:42 | | Subject: | 3684b and other smooth slopes | | Viewed: | 63 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
| https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1208038
[p=3684b]
Has a decision been made on this? Or can a note be added to 3684a that the slope
face might have different textures while it is in limbo so sellers can just list
and be done with it? To be honest, I have no idea how to tell the difference.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Jan 1, 2021 03:01 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 8110-1 | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Add 1 Part BA043pb04 Orange Stickered Assembly 3 x 2 x 1 with Silver Mercedes Benz Logo Pattern (Sticker) - Set 8110 - 2 Slope Curved 3 x 1 (Counterpart)
* Add 1 Part BA243pb01L Orange Stickered Assembly 6 x 1 x 1 with Red and White Danger Stripes Pattern Model Left Side (Sticker) - Set 8110 - 2 Slope Curved 3 x 1 (Counterpart)
* Add 1 Part BA243pb01R Orange Stickered Assembly 6 x 1 x 1 with Red and White Danger Stripes Pattern Model Right Side (Sticker) - Set 8110 - 2 Slope Curved 3 x 1 (Counterpart)
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Dec 31, 2020 01:23 | | Subject: | Re: Know store's city | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, wildchicken13 writes:
| | In Suggestions, bje writes:
| | In Suggestions, Cysoth writes:
|
|
...
| | | |
Probably will not be implemented as most of USA market do not have a payment
method to accommodate in store collection and cash payments are not allowed except
in the few states where taxes are not an issue. New sellers also will not be
able to accommodate requests such as these as they can only work with onsite
payment methods for the first 10 orders, so no cash payments there either. It
is probably also not efficient to ship with tracking in the same town.
|
|
...
| |
What is wrong with paying onsite and picking up in person?
|
Buyers lose buyer protection for paypal payments. Site management has stated
that arrangements where buyers lose buyer protection are not allowed on BrickLink.
If the buyer pays paypal onsite whilst at your premises and it is funded by a
card (you would not know), the transaction is not valid if the seller does not
display VISA/Mastercard signs at the premises;
If the buyer pays with stripe at your premises, the transaction is not valid
if the seller does not display VISA/Mastercard signs at the premises;
The payment method allowed for in person pickups using paypal is a paypal generated
QR Code. BL has not implemented that. You might be able to use stripe, subject
to certain provisos for card issuers and stripe themselves. You cannot use any
other payment method in the USA where taxes are collected by BL on behalf of
the buyer.
Also, your taxes are collected by county, not so? If the address for record purposes
is your house and the buyer lives in another county with a different tax rate,
who is responsible for collecting the correct tax and paying it over? And if
you can move goods without paying the correct tax, why do we have bother with
this on BL?
| | The seller would lose
seller protection if the buyer paid via PayPal (no proof of shipping), but it
is their decision whether or not to take that risk. I think the OP is only talking
about local pickup or shipping and not cash payments.
|
Local pickups probably has to be paid for with an acceptable payment method for
BL to collect your taxes. The seller protection is not the only issue in the
USA.
| | Even when you are shipping
within a state, postage rates may vary from one city to another. Transit times
also vary. However, whether or not those time and money savings are worthwhile
is debatable.
|
See the note with the taxes above as well. I personally do not see anything wrong
with in person pickup or in fact deliveries. Buyers have always been very happy
when I deliver orders in person, but I can collect the monies in a suitable manner.
For USA users this seems to be an almost impossible thing to do.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Dec 30, 2020 11:47 | | Subject: | Re: Know store's city | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Cysoth writes:
| | It would be practical to know store's city in the case we want to do local
buying (buying bigger lots, bigger pieces, save on shipping or only buy local).
We have already the list by country and province/state.
We could add the city.
Also in the Buy Wanted Lists/Items for sale, we could add with the country and
the contient, a "near by X kms" or something like that.
|
Probably will not be implemented as most of USA market do not have a payment
method to accommodate in store collection and cash payments are not allowed except
in the few states where taxes are not an issue. New sellers also will not be
able to accommodate requests such as these as they can only work with onsite
payment methods for the first 10 orders, so no cash payments there either. It
is probably also not efficient to ship with tracking in the same town.
It is a legal requirement for me to disclose my address in my terms, and it is
done. I would prefer it not to be in my terms only as buyers tend not to read
and still ask. I think a lot of sellers would prefer this to be an opt in and
not a have to.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Dec 13, 2020 07:39 | | Subject: | Re: Why not Inventory the Levi's Dots Bag? | | Viewed: | 46 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, CrazyChris writes:
| | In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| | To my knowledge, the LEGO Group does not have sealed-set contents data that they
can pass on to us. They know what is supposed to come in any given set, but BrickLink
inventories are based on what is actually found inside a sealed product.
|
That's the weirdest answer I've ever heard.
TLG is able to print a fill inventory at the end of many building instructions.
Why not start with this data?
If real sealed sets show differences (how often did this happen?), then the initial
data can be corrected or enhanced.
|
Not all sets have parts lists in the instructions. This applies to newer as well
as older sets;
Not all parts lists are on TLG's website;
Not all parts lists on TLG's website are complete;
New parts needs dimensions, weights and packing dimensions for the catalogue
- TLG does not supply that;
Real sealed sets often show differences (check inventories for alternates);
Last but not least - the data TLG releases is filled in when an inventory is
first loaded. I've done more than a few inventories in my time and I doubt
I've ever had one that was 100% correct from the TLG available data.
This is of course where the classic site has always needed volunteers. In XP
BrickLink is going it alone - so presumably it might well be that you end up
with a catalogue over there which will include inventories only available as
TLG releases same.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Dec 12, 2020 07:09 | | Subject: | Re: Mass edit wanted list notify | | Viewed: | 21 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| No options, but similar to the suggestion you got already for the single wantlist,
sincerest thanks to user NelisSolis who took the time to teach me how to edit
xml files:
Replace all my square brackets with angled brackets
Download that single wantlist and open with notepad.
Delete the first line [?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?]
Press Ctrl+h
In find what, copy [NOTIFY]Y[/NOTIFY]
In replace with [NOTIFY]N[/NOTIFY]
You can "replace all" or cycle through the whole lot manually if you want to
leave some the same
Once complete close the pop-up, then Ctrl+a, then Ctrl+c
In your browser: https://www.bricklink.com/v2/wanted/upload.page?utm_content=subnav
Click on "Upload BrickLink XML format"
Select "create new wanted list" and name it
Paste into the window and verify.
Once correct as you want it, delete the old WL. This is how I normally do it
for users who ask me to help with remainder items or with foreign based orders
still to be done.
HTH
In Suggestions, Stellar writes:
| | In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| | In Suggestions, Stellar writes:
| | I just wanted to change a wanted list notify settings to all its items, but I
saw that I have to click each item checkbox.
Is there an option that I'm not seeing?
|
First checkbox:
https://www.bricklink.com/wantedSettings.asp?viewFrom=P
| |
The only way I found to do it in mass was downloading it, and changing the notify
tag to Y in each item and then upload to a new wanted list. But I would prefer
not have to do that each time.
Greetings,
Sergio
|
|
Thanks for your input, but I don't want to just disable them all, I wanted
to edit just 1 wanted list with all its items
|
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Dec 10, 2020 16:06 | | Subject: | Re: Why not Inventory the Levi's Dots Bag? | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | In Catalog, bje writes:
| | In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | In Catalog, ybtfbiwgw writes:
| |
Why hasn't this been inventoried yet? It's been out for 2 months now
and it's only 110 pieces. It has the exclusive Levi's logo that I want,
but I can't buy because it's not in the catalog. And I'm not paying
$40 just to tear open a sealed bag for a few 1x1 tiles  It would be a costly
crime. I think a lot of people want to keep it sealed, but there have to be at
least a few people who are willing to open it, or already have.
|
Looks like you have to buy some tacky clothing at levi.com to get it and almost
everything is sold out.
|
It is available here with the sewatshirt, but it is summer now and it costs $100.
I do not pay that much for clothes - even with the promise of exclusive LEGO.
|
But you could sell those dots in your store for over $1.
|
Nah, the normal dots parts certainly not. I think there are 8 or so exclusive
tiles in the packet and they won't sell for $12.50 each I should think.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Dec 10, 2020 15:50 | | Subject: | Re: Why not Inventory the Levi's Dots Bag? | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | In Catalog, ybtfbiwgw writes:
| |
Why hasn't this been inventoried yet? It's been out for 2 months now
and it's only 110 pieces. It has the exclusive Levi's logo that I want,
but I can't buy because it's not in the catalog. And I'm not paying
$40 just to tear open a sealed bag for a few 1x1 tiles It would be a costly
crime. I think a lot of people want to keep it sealed, but there have to be at
least a few people who are willing to open it, or already have.
|
Looks like you have to buy some tacky clothing at levi.com to get it and almost
everything is sold out.
|
It is available here with the sewatshirt, but it is summer now and it costs $100.
I do not pay that much for clothes - even with the promise of exclusive LEGO.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Dec 10, 2020 07:36 | | Subject: | Re: Why is this part in Panels? | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Stellar writes:
| | In Catalog, jonwil writes:
| | | | I believe there was quite the discussion about this unusual piece when it first
came out. From Brick Modified to Technic to Door Frame, everyone seemed to think
it should be anywhere but panel.
|
In case it somehow influences the discussion I should point out that LEGO has
put it in the same category in their database as the sort of parts Bricklink
labels "brick, modified".
I definitely agree panel is the wrong place for it. Technic isn't suitable
either.
Given how its been used in sets (between modules in some spaceships/stations
and one underwater station), Door Frame seems logical to me. That or Brick,
Modified like LEGO labeled it.
|
Before that would be better do the Catalog project 29.9 that is:
Combine Door Frame and Window categories presumably to make a Frame category
and define it.
|
+1 and also project 25. But the roadmap does seem to have hit a patch of quicksand
again, so maybe that part should just be requested to go to door frame (it is
definitely not a panel)
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Dec 8, 2020 00:16 | | Subject: | Re: Warning - zero dollars shipping . . . . | | Viewed: | 60 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Breakdown26 writes:
| | It's probably been suggested a billion times over, but it would be really
cool if the you didn't press save on the shipping costs . . . . or you forgot
if you are a seller that the system would have a nag page to say: "Are you sure
that you want to proceed with an order with zero shipping, and all you have to
do is say yes to proceed instead of either eating shipping costs on quotes, or
having to look unprofessional in front of customers asking for shipping fees.
|
Why is it unprofessional to send an invoice and demand payment for the financial
liability the buyer agreed to? I might be misunderstanding your suggestion. You
do know obviously that there are three different final buttons, depending on
your store setup? In your case as a non-IC store, the final button specifically
says the seller will send an invoice. I cannot see as you do not ship to me (and
I will not change my address), but do you have the quote function actually enabled
as well?
And last but not least - have someone in Canada check for you which shipping
option BL automatically picks for a buyer. It might very well be that one of
your pickup options are chosen for buyers and they just click through. There
are very experienced return buyers in my store who still click through with the
incorrect default shipping method BL chooses for them.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Dec 6, 2020 11:04 | | Subject: | Re: Mass update inventory: dimension | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
| In Inventories, Gaston.La.Brick writes:
| | I want to mass update the dimensions of the minifigs in my inventory.
|
You should not at this time, see below.
| |
Is it possible using the BrickLink user interface? Or should I look into a solution
using inventory download, adjusting the fields on my computer and re-upload the
inventory?
|
Not on BL, you have to use xml files to mass edit dimensions. And do not do this
at least until BL has fixed the new improved inventory page which still does
not work. If you make your own dimensions and change anything (quantities, prices,
settings, tiers whatever) the z dimension become the same as the x dimension
and you have to redo everything you did for the dimension change in the first
case.
If you decide to continue, change all your minifigs to volume by downloading
your inventory, keeping the lot numbers and making the condition of INVTREATAS
equal to S.
Then set your dimensions with INVDIMX, INVDIMY and INVDIMZ for each individual
minifig or pick a standard dimension and copy that in. Upload the new xml file
as a mass update.
Make sure you keep backups of the files and edit them manually every time you
add, remove of sell a lot. See the below threads as well.
https://www.bricklink.com/messageThread.asp?ID=260157&nID=1166489
https://www.bricklink.com/messageThread.asp?ID=262173&nID=1173595
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Dec 3, 2020 07:12 | | Subject: | Re: Please show address fields | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:
| | | | It is actually up to the buyer to provide the correct information, but buyers
are rather limited by BL's way of doing things.
|
It would be good to have an extra step, showing the buyer exactly how their address
will appear to sellers with a check box saying that they agree it is in the correct
format.
|
+1
| |
I once had a buyer that was along the lines of:
A Name
1 Street Name
LONDON
LONDON
London AB1 2CD
United Kingdom
I think they lived in London! I missed out two lines of the address and the parcel
still got there fine.
|
 A seller once got my address completely wrong. When I complained I was bluntly
told to move to a country with easier addresses (format here is street, TOWN,
post code, country). After 2 delivery attempts a front desk post office employee
working in the sorting room by chance saw it with the RTS sticker already on
and corrected the address. Took 5 months to get delivered.
|
|
| 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: | 23 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
|
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Sep 6, 2020 03:48 | | Subject: | Catalogue Dimensions - please have standards | | Viewed: | 66 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
| Refer:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1220057
Would it not be simpler to write a guideline, add the catalogue dimensions for
odd sized parts and do away with this issue of having packaging dimensions added
once in lifetime by forum request?
The standard 2 x 4 brick has the following catalogue dimensions:
2 x 4 x 1
Its current packaging dimensions are:
16 x 32 x 11.2
The correct millimeter dimensions to 2 decimals are:
15.86 x 31.72 x 11.40
So:
DimX for 1 Stud: 7.93;
DimY for 1 stud: 7.93;
DimZ for 1 stud: 11.40
So by having the correct standard measure of the standard in LEGO terms (a 2
x 4 brick), now the stud measurement of any part can be worked out and added:
So for [p=66954c01]
we have 10.40 x 54.42 x 5.01
Catalogue dimensions: 1.31 x 6.86 x 0.44
Packaging dimensions as a result: DimX: 10.39, Dim Y: 54.40, Dim Z:5.02
There is still a minor rounding error, but that would still be infinitely better
than the nothing error we have at present.
And for it stays 2 x 4 x 1 or DimX: 15.86, DimY: 31.72, DimZ:11.40
That should then translate packaging dimensions as near as possible (personally
I would prefer catalogue dims to 4 decimals (for 1.3115 x 6.8625 x 0.4395 in
part 66954c* as above but lets not be pedantic) as soon as a member adds catalogue
dimensions. Certainly this will be much easier than the current cobbled together
system where some parts have odd dimensions and others not and where some parts
have incorrect packaging dimensions as a result of these not being tied to the
catalogue dimensions when added through forum requests.
[p=3626c] which is apparently not difficult to measure, but
* | | 3626cpb2589 Minifigure, Head Dual Sided Female, Reddish Brown Eyebrows, Glasses, Nougat Lips, Braces, Open Smile / Scared Pattern - Hollow Stud
Parts: Minifigure, Head |
is.
Then the only thing admin has to, by request, do in between everything else is
to mark defaults for volume and weight until such time as long suffering members
can request a change to that directly.
Here I'll help you
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.
And then add a roadmap project to get these dimensions fixed along with the decorated
part weights asap, same form same time same approval. Easy.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Sep 3, 2020 09:32 | | Subject: | Re: Rounded bricks in "Slope Curved"? Really? | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Teup writes:
| | In Catalog, bje writes:
snip
| | | |
By the way, if rounded parts are going to be considered slopes, then shouldn't
parts with rounded sides also be considered having sloping sides? That would
mean that these are Wedges:
If a slope in the vertical dimension is going to be the same as a quarter circle
in the vertical dimension, then logically a slope in the horizontal dimensions
(which is what Wedges usually have) equates a quarter circle in the horizontal
dimensions.
|
You might want to spend a few minutes reading the definitions. Or do you want
new definitions as well?
Slope: For items with a square or rectangular base and one or more flat sides
angled from larger bottom to smaller top. (The curved in curved slope refers
to angle which is now a curve and not flat);
|
Hmm, the way I read this, those rounded bricks are not slopes by the catalog's
own definition. Because (unlike all Slope,Curved's) they are not angled -
they start at 90 degrees upwards at the base, and end in 0 degrees horizontally
at the top.
|
So they are inverted curved slopes? Perhaps you should look at the difference
between Kromme and Ronde - the one is defined by a line and the other by a circle.
I read a more logical progression:
Brik 2 x 4 - the standard of all LEGO;
Modified by a round base (circle): Brick, Round; or
Modified by being narrower at one edge than another: Wedge; or
Modified by angles (line from base to top or top to base) : Slope; or
Modified by a curved angle: Curved slope.
| |
| | Wedge: For items other than plates that have a narrow edge at one end and a
wider edge at the other end.
How do you move from edge to angle? Or do you want all wedges to be slopes?
|
No that's ok, the Wedge-Slope divide is very clear IMO. The one is about
the vertical dimension, the other about the footprint.
|
So is the round brick you are referring to - the (round) footprint.
| | I'm just applying this new rule that a quarter circle is equated to a slope
to some rounded bricks, and find that they then must be moved to Wedge - see
the picture where I apply your line to the rounded brick.
|
Nope, I think you are comparing apples and waffles. The quarter circle you are
presumably referring to is on the angle, not the base. Once on the base, it is
probably better a round brick than a wedge or a slope.
| |
| | Of course there is still a problem with the definition of round, but that is
being worked on best I know:
Brick Round:For items similar to bricks that have a completely or partially round
base, with or without attachments.
From there I think you can see that round refers to the base, wedge refers to
edge and slope refers to angle from base to top.
|
But I'm not sure what "edge" really means here... I understand both the Brick,Round
and the Wedge to refer to the footprint. That's all good. It's just odd
to me that in the footprint it does matter whether the shape is part of a circle
(if yes = Brick,Round, if no = Wedge), but in the vertical dimension it is not
recognised and just thrown in with Slope. Even though there are many builds where
parts with a rounding in the vertical dimension are used in combination with
Brick,Round's - if you SNOT them they often have matching curves.
|
If you lay any part on a different edge, you can presumably make it look like
something else.
| |
The way I would solve it is leaving all Brick,Round's and Wedges they way
they are now, and adding a new Brick, Rounded Top category, which would
consist of the following parts:
|
But first define that category instead of just saying here is a bunch of things
which look like they belong together, so now they must be together. Then make
the definitions of all the other things that do not fit your current definition,
also better. In that manner you can progress from a bunch of things all over
the place to a catalogue.
Vertically rounded sounds like a bit of a long stretch - where is the vertical
axis you are looking at - is it the front view, the side view, the SNOT view
or some other acrobatic view?
It seems you are now putting all manner of parts which are arches (bricks with
a curved underside) together with parts which are curves on the outside together
with some parts which are round and maybe add some dome things there and not
others. Me failing to understand the logic applied is probably down to some lack
of knowledge on my part. But I do have difficulty with what you are proposing
because I still cannot understand how you move from base to edge to angle and
make them principally all the same.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Sep 3, 2020 06:20 | | Subject: | Re: Rounded bricks in "Slope Curved"? Really? | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Teup writes:
| | In Catalog, Teup writes:
| | Very surprised to find moving rounded bricks to the Slope,Curved category. How
many people really were in favour of that idea and how many were against? I thought
the general sentiment was that curved slopes are an entirely different thing
than parts with a quarter circle.
Putting rounded parts in Slope,Curved really makes no sense to me. I'd really
like to see some kind of vote on this as I cannot imagine this is intuitive to
the users.
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2487
|
By the way, if rounded parts are going to be considered slopes, then shouldn't
parts with rounded sides also be considered having sloping sides? That would
mean that these are Wedges:
If a slope in the vertical dimension is going to be the same as a quarter circle
in the vertical dimension, then logically a slope in the horizontal dimensions
(which is what Wedges usually have) equates a quarter circle in the horizontal
dimensions.
|
You might want to spend a few minutes reading the definitions. Or do you want
new definitions as well?
Slope: For items with a square or rectangular base and one or more flat sides
angled from larger bottom to smaller top. (The curved in curved slope refers
to angle which is now a curve and not flat);
Wedge: For items other than plates that have a narrow edge at one end and a
wider edge at the other end.
How do you move from edge to angle? Or do you want all wedges to be slopes?
Of course there is still a problem with the definition of round, but that is
being worked on best I know:
Brick Round:For items similar to bricks that have a completely or partially round
base, with or without attachments.
From there I think you can see that round refers to the base, wedge refers to
edge and slope refers to angle from base to top. Of course we can differ over
what is the base, what is the angle, what is the edge of any particular part.
But at some time you have to put the thing down studs on top like a brick and
look at the base (square/rectangular/round), the angle (curved or flat), and
the edge (narrow or wide).
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Sep 3, 2020 00:43 | | Subject: | Re: Rounded bricks in "Slope Curved"? Really? | | Viewed: | 47 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Teup writes:
| | Very surprised to find moving rounded bricks to the Slope,Curved category. How
many people really were in favour of that idea and how many were against? I thought
the general sentiment was that curved slopes are an entirely different thing
than parts with a quarter circle.
Putting rounded parts in Slope,Curved really makes no sense to me. I'd really
like to see some kind of vote on this as I cannot imagine this is intuitive to
the users.
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2487
|
To me they've always been curved slopes and my rounded top bricks (all of
the ones as is intended to move) are stored on the same shelf as curved slopes.
I've had it like that even when I was a buyer only. So I would vote yes to
move them.
Where else would you put them?
|
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Aug 28, 2020 07:45 | | Subject: | Re: ASAQ and FAQ | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| I voted yes because I am a firm believer that having knowledge brings about true
freedom of choice, but I fear it would be optimistic to expect buyers to read
more.
You already said it - what is being asked is already written down, so to redirect
to a place where more is written will lead to more words not being read, and
having to answer the same question regardless.
And I think it is really wildly optimistic to expect that users will read through
the entire FAQ list after already not reading and ignoring your store policies.
In Suggestions, cosmicray writes:
| | Because of the continual stream of questions, many of which are already answered
in my Policies page, I am proposing a revised system for buyers contacting sellers.
This does not, and should not, change the method of contacting a seller from
an existing order.
1. Change Contact (from the store tab) to Ask Seller A Question (ASAQ).
2. Route those requests thru a page where the prospective customer can browse
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) that would be established by each store. Even
established customers, who deal with many sellers, forget what one seller has
told them (repeatedly) and keep asking the same questions over and over and over
(almost like they paste them into the Contact).
3. Buyer can then click that their question is not in the FAQ list, and they
can send a normal Contact.
thank you
|
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Aug 27, 2020 08:48 | | Subject: | Re: Please give notice before deleting a listing | | Viewed: | 64 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, starbeanie writes:
| | Minifigs have different rules than parts. Stickers are classified as parts. When
you remove a sticker from the sheet, you have used it. The Sheet itself is no
longer New.
|
Might be, but the listing policy page was only updated today to reflect that.
Previously of course you could list and state in the comments, exactly as this
seller did and it was not against official published listing policy.
| | This was discussed way back when.
|
That is not the way to make a policy. It is of course understood that a sticker
sheet missing stickers is not complete and hence not new, but there was nothing
in the previously published rules prohibiting a seller from listing as new.
| |
And no I don't agree with how mini-figures are listed.
In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:
| | In Suggestions, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Suggestions, mockingbird writes:
| | Before deleting an item listed for sale, please give a notice to the seller.
That way the seller can change the listing to comply with the rules (instead
of having to enter everything again).
The e-mail does not give the full listing details, so it is not always clear
what is wrong with the listed item. Also the reason given is not clear.
I just recieved an e-mail stating that a few stickers I listed are deleted.
Reason given: "Item is incorrectly defined as New/Used or Complete/Incomplete/Sealed"
It concerns a few incomplete sticker sheets. I have more incomplete sheets listed
and they are not deleted or mentioned in the e-mail.
Is it wrong to list incomplete sticker sheets as 'new' (with a picture
of the actual sheet and clearly stated in the comments that it is incomplete)?
The stickers still on the sheet are new (never used).
Just to be save I changed the remaining incomplete sticker sheets to 'used'.
And I will re-list the deleted items as 'used'. Hopefully I can still
fing the pictures of the deleted items.
|
Sticker sheets missing stickers must be listed as Used.
|
Why can't partial sheets be sold as new, but indicating incomplete? After
all, it happens a lot with minifigures, even though parts are missing and there
is no formal incomplete setting.
|
|
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Aug 26, 2020 07:37 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog Project - Moving Things - Technic | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Teup writes:
| | Hmm, I agree it's good to move some stuff out of the vanilla Technic category,
but I do think it's best to keep things that are really very much Technic
in Technic categories - especially the turntable.
|
Trouble is some of those turntables are used almost as much in non-Technic sets
than in Technic, making it almost impossible to say that it is more of Technic
part than not.
19/33 for Technic, or
or
* | | 2856c03 (Inv) Technic Turntable 56 Tooth Extended Arms with Light Bluish Gray Top (2856 / 2855)
Parts: Technic |
0/3 for Technic
It is specifically the turntables which led me to think that this category can
do with some changes.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Aug 26, 2020 04:39 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog Project - Moving Things - Minifigs | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| Since we have sub-categories in minifigure categories, please consider moving
all unclassified minifigures to sub-category "other" in each main category
Collectible Minifigures and Ninjago minifigures is classified with an "other"
category included, thus there is no need for the curly brackets next to the name
of the main category to serve as an indicator that there are minifigures that
do not belong to any of the sub-classes, such as these:
Star Wars: 47 unclassified figures out of 1168;
Town: 330 unclassified figures out of 2754;
City: 426 unclassified figures out of 1408;
Classic Town: 570 unclassified figures out of 755;
Space: 3 unclassified figures out of 207;
Racers: 12 unclassified figures out of 83;
Alpha Team: 9 unclassified figures out of 31;
Castle: 92 unclassified figures out of 551;
Duplo: 341 unclassified figures out of 866.
Furthermore, Superheroes minifigures have a sub-category "Super Heroes Other",
which should ideally be renamed just "Other"; and
Star Wars have unclassified minifigures (47) and a sub-category "Star Wars Other"(30)
which should ideally be renamed just "Other" after including all those presently
not classified.
This is of course not necessary if admins and members are comfortable knowing
that the curly brackets next to main categories names for minifigures refer to
an inconsistent treatment of unclassified items for some categories of minifigures.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Aug 26, 2020 03:45 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog Project - Moving Things - Sundries | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| Please consider:
* | | 2650 Hook Slider, Arm Base with Hinge with 3 Fingers
Parts: Hook |
to hinge
* | | 6040pb01 Propeller Housing with Red and White Danger Stripes Pattern (Stickers) - Sets 1782 / 6441 / 6442 / 6557 / 6559 / 6560 / 6599
Parts: Propeller |
to "aircraft" as these are probably not so much a component part of a propeller
or can better be used on the vehicle rather than to accessorise the propeller
* | | 2566 Bar 1.2L with Top Stud and 4 Bar Arms Up (Palm Tree Top)
Parts: Bar |
to "bar"
* | | 4022c02 (Inv) Train Buffer Beam with Black Train Coupling and Black Magnet Cylindrical (4022 / 2920 / 73092)
Parts: Train |
* | | 4022c01 (Inv) Train Buffer Beam with Black Train Coupling with Pin and Black Magnet Cylindrical (4022 / 4023 / 73092)
Parts: Train |
* | | 29085c01 Train Buffer Beam with Sealed Magnets - Type 3 (flat closed bottom)
Parts: Train |
[p=clikits108]
* | | 74188c01 Magnet Brick, Modified 2 x 4 Sealed Base with Extension Plate with 2 Studs and Hole
Parts: Magnet |
all to "magnet" by definition;
to "baseplate, raised" or "baseplate, road"
Please consider amending the definition of "string" to include "strands joined
to form a net", to avoid a new category for "net" only and consider renaming
the category to "string and net" and then consider:
to "string and net"
to "crane" by definition;
and deorated variants to "Baseplate, Road" or "Baseplate, Raised"
And possibly all the sports filed sections to "Baseplate, Raised"
Sports mask, helmet, chest protector, hockey player body, promo body and promo
parts, should these not be large figure parts by definition rather sports items?
All of "Vehicle, Mudguard Fast Food Racer" such as and to
"vehicle, base"
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Aug 26, 2020 02:44 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog Project - Moving Things - Windows etc | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| Window, Glass, Door, Door Frame, Windscreen
Consider please:
Window sashes and the like and shutters and the like do not
meet the definition of a window.
Consider making a new category "window, sashes and shutters" containing the 13
items that are sashes and shutters, or alternatively, combine these with glass
and rename glass to "glass, shutter and sashes" with a minor adjustment to the
definition of "glass" to include these items.
Also, consider combing "Window" and "Door Frame" into one category for all frames
and assemblies featuring doors, glass, shutters and sashes.
Please consider:
to windscreen, by definition
Please consider:
part 2352*
and assemblies;
and assemblies;
to window (or new combined category "window and door frames") by definition;
Roll cages:
These are not windscreens by definition. Also not windows or glass. Consider
please:
to category "vehicle"
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Aug 26, 2020 02:12 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog Project - Moving Things - Technic | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| Main "Technic" parts category:
Please consider cleaning this parts category up and moving items belonging to
underlying categories, such as:
Turntables from "technic" to "turntable" eg:
Tipper drums, bumper, digger buckets, air scoops, froklift forks from "technic"
to "vehicle"
Slopes from "technic" to "slope" or "slope, decorated" as the case may be eg:
* | | 2744pb021 Technic Slope 6 x 1 x 1 2/3 with Gauges, Red Rectangles and Olive Green Buttons Pattern (Sticker) - Set 79121
Parts: Technic |
Hooks from from "technic" to "hook" eg:
Propeller and propeller parts from "technic" to "propeller" eg:
* | | 99012pb03 Technic Rotor Blade Small with Axle and Pin Connector End with White Stripe on Dark Azure Background Pattern on Top (Sticker) - Set 70129
Parts: Technic |
Please move regardless:
Seats from "technic" to "technic, figure accessory", by definition:
and all decorated items of same;
and
[p=x136] to "Technic, Shock Absorber" by definition
Other considerations:
Saw Blades could possibly move to "Technic, Disk", by definition
* | | 37495 Technic Circular Saw Blade 9 x 9 with Frictionless Axle Hole and Teeth in Alternating Directions
Parts: Technic |
* | | 61403 Technic Circular Saw Blade 9 x 9 with Pin Hole and Teeth in Same Direction
Parts: Technic |
* | | 41125 Technic Circular Saw Blade with Pin Hole and Six Teeth (Large Shuriken)
Parts: Technic |
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Aug 26, 2020 01:21 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog Project - Moving Things | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| Please consider:
-Moving watch parts currently under gear item "watch" such as :
[g=bb1051b]
from gear to parts under a category "watch" such that the completed and built
watch item is the human accessory, which will then have an inventory consisting
of parts, not gear. By my count this would require a category consisting of 66
parts;
-Adjusting the definition of a item type "part" to include parts used to build
gear items;
-Moving all items under gear item "sticker sheet" to parts "sticker sheet";
-Moving the speech bubbles and decorated speech bubbles such as from
gear "office supplies" to parts "minifigure, bodywear".
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Aug 25, 2020 14:48 | | Subject: | Re: Was a decision made about smooth slopes? | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, Brickitty writes:
| | Back at the beginning of July there was a thread about removing 5 entries for
"smooth slopes," and the consensus seemed to be strongly in favor of removing
them.
|
| | I'm curious if a decision was made about those entries
|
Site management put the brakes on. We were therefore unable to address the issue.
|
I've parked those I thought should be redone in a stockroom. Are the brakes
on permanently, ie a screeching halt, or is it a temporary issue which will
be addressed later? Eventually I would like to drive again.
I think the only issue site management should have is with programming resources
since those seem forever to be taxed by overwork when something does not suit
them them and freely available when it does. I do not particularly see that this
can be a programming issue.
Or do we go for the unwritten rule thingie again when we consider it inconsistent
to have some variants allowed for textures and others not?
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Aug 21, 2020 03:31 | | Subject: | Re: Make neutral feedback actually NEUTRAL | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Suggestions, bje writes:
| | […]
Scene at Bricklink office: Some user made a new suggestion!!! Lets see the votes:
200 Yes votes;
10 No votes;
700 000 Abstains
% wanting the suggestion: 200/700210 = 0.02%
Obviously members do like this suggestion, so we can ignore it. Yes!! Less work
on a Friday!!
|
A “not” missing? “members do not like”
|
Friday typo, my normal curve got distributed to the weekend
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Aug 21, 2020 02:37 | | Subject: | Re: Make neutral feedback actually NEUTRAL | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, CanadaFirst writes:
|
snip
| |
Yep, voted yes. Pretty simply equation really: If there are 3 options, and one
of them accounts of 98% of the cases and the other two options are left for the
other 2%, that is just bad design. That means these are not meaningful options.
|
When I read this, I had the disturbing thought that BL do not understand statistics.
Scene at Bricklink office: Some user made a new suggestion!!! Lets see the votes:
200 Yes votes;
10 No votes;
700 000 Abstains
% wanting the suggestion: 200/700210 = 0.02%
Obviously members do like this suggestion, so we can ignore it. Yes!! Less work
on a Friday!!
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Aug 13, 2020 12:40 | | Subject: | Re: About Braille Bricks | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | In Catalog, bje writes:
| | In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | I guess this is more a question to “corporate” admins (aka Russell) than the
member admins but I feel that getting every one (non-admin included)’s opinion
will be healthful.
So, it appears the LEGO Braille bricks are (finally) soon to be released ( https://www.newelementary.com/2020/08/free-lego-braille-bricks-released-by.html
).
They’ll only be made available for free to blind children through the LEGO Foundation.
They won’t be buyable.
Will there be a policy to forbid their sale on BL? (to prevent encouraging collecting
/ second market, IOW, stealing from children¹)
And if so, will the bricks still be in the catalogue or not?
(Will it be possible to enforce a ban if they are?)
——
¹ Nah, I’m strictly objective, no way I’m sneaking my opinion here 
|
It has always been my intention to purchase some of these and donate it myself
as there is no official Braille partner here. This school would most definitely
gain from such a donation: http://www.pioneerschool.org.za/
I sincerely hope that admins will allow these to be sold on BL in order to reach
a wider audience than what TLG is aiming for.
|
I think this is a difficult one. If they are not going to sell them, then it
seems a bit wrong that they allow others to sell them if they are not a commercial
product.
I showed the original story to a partially sighted friend who teaches Braille
and he was quite positive about them but did point out that they are way too
big so probably best for younger kids only, like a sighted kid sounding out a
word letter by letter.
|
I think here we are privileged (?) that the government will not allow something
as a donation unless there is certification all along the transaction's entire
route. So from the sale on BL, the import, the distribution to the school - everything
has to be aboveboard and with a proper paper trail. I think under those circumstances,
the sale as a non-commercial product can be managed with all of the parties including
BL.
My thinking was not also only on the size but also for the fact hat we have 11
official languages and schooling is not available in all 11, the situation is
even worse for Braille books in for example SeSotho. So my thinking was they
could be used as mother tongue teaching aids, even if they are not used by the
children directly.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Aug 13, 2020 12:05 | | Subject: | Re: About Braille Bricks | | Viewed: | 62 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | I guess this is more a question to “corporate” admins (aka Russell) than the
member admins but I feel that getting every one (non-admin included)’s opinion
will be healthful.
So, it appears the LEGO Braille bricks are (finally) soon to be released ( https://www.newelementary.com/2020/08/free-lego-braille-bricks-released-by.html
).
They’ll only be made available for free to blind children through the LEGO Foundation.
They won’t be buyable.
Will there be a policy to forbid their sale on BL? (to prevent encouraging collecting
/ second market, IOW, stealing from children¹)
And if so, will the bricks still be in the catalogue or not?
(Will it be possible to enforce a ban if they are?)
——
¹ Nah, I’m strictly objective, no way I’m sneaking my opinion here
|
It has always been my intention to purchase some of these and donate it myself
as there is no official Braille partner here. This school would most definitely
gain from such a donation: http://www.pioneerschool.org.za/
I sincerely hope that admins will allow these to be sold on BL in order to reach
a wider audience than what TLG is aiming for.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Aug 13, 2020 06:02 | | Subject: | Re: Do not default new parts as weight bound | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, paulvdb writes:
| | In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:
|
snip
| |
I think it was primarily introduced in the beginning to get IC working for most
parts. Since many don't (or at least didn't) have dimensions it would
be almost impossible to use IC. But in my opinion the goal should have been to
get dimensions for all parts in the catalog and then gid rid of weight bound.
|
If you look at the dimensions you have in your store, you will see there was
a huge bunch of them done right when IC started, and then a trickle afterwards.
You'll probably find that most decorated parts, torso, legs assys and heads
are wither missing or wrong.
| |
Of course that would have required additional programming effort to make it easier
to submit missing dimensions. It's taking a lot of work to post these in
the forum and then wait for someone at BL to manually add them. There really
should have been shipping dimension fields in the add and change item forms so
that we could submit them there like most other changes to the catalog.
|
Yes please. Mooted some months ago already and since then no news.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Aug 13, 2020 05:58 | | Subject: | Re: Do not default new parts as weight bound | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, calsbricks writes:
| | In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:
| |
Weights are additive. It doesn't really matter if one part is 1g and another
100g. The order is 101g. And while volumes are (approximately) additive if all
the parts individually fit into a certain box size, individual part dimensions
cannot necessarily be warped. A 5x5x5 cm part is not the same as a 1x5x25 cm
part, even though the volume is the same. If the total parcel size doesn't
matter, the seller need not have a restriction and all parts will pass that size
check. Whereas if the parcel size does matter, then the size check is necessary.
Are there situations where weight bound is important?
|
When IC was launched we sent a message to BL development asking why they had
not included weight/volume as a packaging method and were told that did not fit
the design. That is because they used the US postal system as their focus., and
this is why we have always suggested that a regional based system would have
been better - taken longer for sure, and more complicated, of course, but much
better for those that want to automate their checkout.
|
We recently went from no volume restrictions for postage to freight restrictions
with additional restrictions on top of that. Freight has always used the volume
restrictions with those 5 000 factors, so for domestic, we've never had a
purely weight bound system. The USA changed over to a volume system last year.
So personally, I do not see any reason for any shipping method with only a weight
restriction.
As a buyer, I do have a forwarder which use a weight only system, but of course
it still has to be shipped in the country of origin, so again, even where the
extraordinary circumstance exists, it is negated by the fact that the regional
setting would need to be applied first and foremost.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Aug 13, 2020 05:49 | | Subject: | Re: Do not default new parts as weight bound | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, bje writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, bje writes:
|
|
|
snip
| |
Thanks, I didn't check that non IC search function before, it's quite
well hidden. I've got a poster that's got packing dimensions as if it's
unfolded. Hope that's not true for all posters in the catalog.
|
I think some posters get their dimensions off the catalogue dimensions, which
I believe are generally measured to open, not as it is when you receive it in
the box. The catalogue dimensions being something different to how you would
pack it of course.
| |
As for the warning, it could show up in the to-do items in the My Store menu.
I already have that green dot showing there permanently because it keeps telling
me to send notifications for parts which I simply don't want to do. It would
be good if those to-do items could be dismissed and the warning was clearer,
because now the green dot is just a fixed part of the interface for me that I
don't even pay attention to. If that function would work better and items
without dimensions would show up in the to do list, it may motivate people to
submit them.
|
I think it has to happen when you list or part out, but then the system of updating
them must also be a lot simpler. The current shortcut of just having something
to make another thing work in some manner is sort of weird.
| |
I've submitted 2 packing dimensions a while ago and neither seems to have
been implemented so far. I guess if they will, I'll have motivation to measure
a couple more.
|
THAT is a very very sore point - I picked up some from May this morning not done
yet. I don't think the issue is that members are not motivated, it is that
is so difficult to pick up on errors that most sellers just probably pad their
costs or restrictions or simply pay in and worry about it next time.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Aug 13, 2020 05:05 | | Subject: | Re: Do not default new parts as weight bound | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, bje writes:
|
snip
| |
Hmm, I never really understood these "volume bound" and "weight bound" concepts
very well,
|
Weight bound - measures for IC by weight only so if you have a volume/size restriction,
it gets ignored on checkout.
Volume bound: first checks for weight then for your volume/size restrictions.
If no packing dimensions, no IC, if packing dimensions are set, weight is ignored
at checkout insofar as the restrictions go, but not total package weight.
At issue is if the item is default to weight, it will ignore all of your volume
and size restrictions if you do not enter packing dimensions yourself. You have,
however, no way of knowing this, unless you manually check each listing in your
store.
| | 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.
|
Then you get to the issue again with instructions which are mostly just set to
be 1 cm high. Imagine your cart has 10 collectable minifig instructions in set
to a height of 10cm which is probably packet size... No good.
| | 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.
|
That is why you have the report on your inventory page which shows you the items
not qualifying for IC - you should run that once in awhile, it is an eye-opener.
Or maybe what you suggest is OK but then there should at least be
| | a warning for the seller or something like that.
|
Flagging an item on listing, how would that work, an error message perhaps? Or
actually showing the current dimensions and weight on the listing page with big
red letters if there is nothing. That might be achievable. But I think they also
have to fix the reporting so items with errors actually show up.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Aug 13, 2020 04:26 | | Subject: | Do not default new parts as weight bound | | Viewed: | 96 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | | Status: | Open | | Vote: | [Yes|No] | |
| When new parts are added to the catalogue and these parts have only a catalogue
weight, please do not default the item to weight bound for packaging type. Just
as IC is not possible if the item does not have a weight entered for the catalogue,
it should be just as impossible for IC if the volume is patently a problem.
This seems to be the only workaround at this time to make the inventory search
function for "Instant Checkout Unavailable" useful.
Case in point this part, which do not appear on that list even though all of
the information to determine whether or not IC should be applied, is not provided:
* | | 67138 Aircraft Fuselage Forward Bottom Curved 6 x 24 x 1 1/3 with 4 x 21 Recessed Center and 12 x 6 Wings, 20 Holes
Parts: Aircraft |
This part qualifies for IC, will fit my requirements for medium letter by weight,
but is in fact a small packet due to its height, the cost difference is 250%.
The argument that IC is useful enough without being too precise is not valid
if BL do not give sellers the reporting tools required. Setting defaults with
the potential of causing sellers financial loss, without giving sellers the opportunity
to address the issue on listing the item, is not useful.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Aug 11, 2020 10:20 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog Project - Moving Tile Round | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Teup writes:
snip
| | | | | |
Hmm, on the one hand I understand the proposed moves from Tile to Plate, on the
other hand Plate,Modified is already quite big and Tile,Modified isn't.
|
Not requesting a consideration for Plate, Modified, but Plate, Round, so the
size of Plate Modified is not really at issue.
|
Well the same is true for Plate,Round, but it was more a general comment on the
trend to move things with some studs missing from the smaller Tile categories
to the bigger Plate categories. Tile, Round is quite small.
|
My idea is that such a part with a few studs missing is a plate and not a tile.
Moving a thing from a category because it is in the wrong category, is in my
head not the same as worrying about the size of a category.
| |
| |
| | Therefore
not really in favour of the idea, but fair enough I guess, if many people want
it.
|
| |
| |
and to Tile Modified (so a category for Tile, Round, Modified is not required)
|
Nah, Tile,Round is correct, because Round has priority over Modified
|
When was that priority set?
|
|
snip
| |
But you're advocating Modified should take priority over Round in the case
of that Tile
|
I'm not advocating anything, I am requesting a consideration for something,
as opposed to your statement that one thing takes precedence over another.
| | but at the same time you're suggesting those Round+Modified
Tiles to be moved to Plate,Round - which should, by the same logic, then be Plate,Modified.
|
Ive not dealt with plate, round yet, only tile round. If it needs to move or
if I think another is change is to be requested inside the entire category, I'll
do so. I'm also trying to keep my comments grouped in categories to avoid
jumping all over the place. One thing at a time and one place at a time.
Of course that tile is modified, it is how we deal with the modification. If
you look closely at what remains after stripping put plates and bars, then this
is the only part in the entire tile round category with some attachment. Catmins
must consider if it is worth it to have a definition made such that its verbosity
includes one part only or if that part is better suited somewhere else to make
an easier category and easier definition.
| |
I guess we could change things around to make Modified take priority over Round,
to solve the issue you describe, although then the Modified categories will become
even bigger. It will also mean that anything in Brick,Round that isn't standard,
such as domes, rocket fins, bricks with holes, all end up in Brick,Modified.
|
Again, it is dependent on how catmins stress test the definitions. It can only
mean something if the definition fits. Those definitions are not tested or experimented
on yet, so we cannot know if what is being done here is correct. This is why
it is under consideration - for catmins to decide if the definition needs fine
tuning or if the part needs to move.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Aug 11, 2020 09:55 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog Project - Moving Animal Air | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| I'm going to try my hand at the figure definitions.
I don't think animals with two uses, one as a part and one as a figure, should
get defined based on the manner in which it is used in a set. Thus, I do not
think:
should be a figure in some sets and a part in others, but if the figure
definition takes precedence over the part definition, then of course some would
have dual functions.
I'm still not happy with that sentient idea and how it should be applied,
but lets see:
https://marvelcinematicuniverse.fandom.com/wiki/Ant-thony
https://lotr.fandom.com/wiki/Smaug
* | | buckbeakc02 (Inv) Hippogriff with Dark Bluish Gray Wings, with Beak, Dark Bluish Gray and White Feathers, and Bright Light Orange Eyes Pattern (HP Buckbeak)
Parts: Animal, Air |
https://harrypotter.fandom.com/wiki
Minecraft animals
All of these to figures.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Aug 11, 2020 08:12 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog Project - Moving Tile Round | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Teup writes:
| | In Catalog, bje writes:
| | Please consider to Plate Round:
|
Hmm, on the one hand I understand the proposed moves from Tile to Plate, on the
other hand Plate,Modified is already quite big and Tile,Modified isn't.
|
Not requesting a consideration for Plate, Modified, but Plate, Round, so the
size of Plate Modified is not really at issue.
| | Therefore
not really in favour of the idea, but fair enough I guess, if many people want
it.
|
| |
| |
and to Tile Modified (so a category for Tile, Round, Modified is not required)
|
Nah, Tile,Round is correct, because Round has priority over Modified
|
When was that priority set?
| | - if this
would be a Tile,Modified instead of a Tile,Round, then there are many Plate,Rounds
tha should be Plate,Modifieds as well. In fact, there are some of them right
there in your suggestion to move to Plate,Round.
|
I don't understand what you mean here. The plate round fits as those are
all have studs (a stud being a stud whether it is hollow, solid, blocked...).
The tile modified is suggested to make the tile round category smaller and to
get away from the definition where you have a modified category for some items
and for other items it is modified only once you get to the definition, it is
not apparent from the name of the category. Plate, round suffers the same indignity.
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
