BrickLink Discussion Forum

In General, par016 writes:

I didn't have to do any verification like that. Honestly without knowing
exactly what you are describing, it sounds a bit like further phishing. My verification
was only in an email from Russell. As for response time, unfortunately, I was
hacked at 1030PM and had to fend off the hacker for 7 hours while I waited for
an admin to wake up lol

FYI I think we've got Rick's situation sorted out.

Our admin staff does not have access to the communcations with various members
over the years, so they cannot act as quickly or with as much confidence. Because
of the sensitivity of the situation, they follow a strict protocol that puts
security above everything else.

Author:

Admin_Russell

Posted:

Mar 21, 2024 15:58

Subject:

Re: WARNING! Login from new device phishing emai

Viewed:

97 times

Topic:

Problem

In Problem, Saitobricks.ca writes:

In Problem, Admin_Russell writes:

In Problem, randyf writes:

In Problem, chetzler writes:

I don’t know why BrickLink has suddenly become such a juicy target.

All of it started fairly shortly after all of the extremely unpopular part merges
started to actually occur. I have a strong feeling that a user here that was
very upset about the decisions made is having some "fun" at BrickLink's
expense.

Interesting theory. But the scammers that caused the November 3 incident are
the same ones that caused the problems last night, and the variant merge project
was not exposed to the public before January 2024.

As much as companies tend not to boast about the number of online attacks they
receive, we do see a remarkable increase in scammer activity across the board
- throughout many companies and across different industries. To us, it does not
feel like BrickLink is being singled out.

Does there happen to be a plan in the works to stop this activity?

Yes. In fact, most of what is being done to prevent this type of fraud is being
done behind the scenes, and BrickLink members are not aware that it is happening.

Author:

Admin_Russell

Posted:

Mar 21, 2024 15:44

Subject:

Re: WARNING! Login from new device phishing emai

Viewed:

96 times

Topic:

Problem

In Problem, randyf writes:

In Problem, chetzler writes:

I don’t know why BrickLink has suddenly become such a juicy target.

Author:

Admin_Russell

Posted:

Mar 21, 2024 04:53

Subject:

Re: HELP HACKED (Some new info)

Viewed:

110 times

Topic:

In General, par016 writes:

In General, Nubs_Select writes:

In General, Chickaroo writes:

In General, Nubs_Select writes:

In General, Chickaroo writes:

In General, kittybrickz writes:

I'm heading to bed, best wishes to a speedy resolution.

Goodnight and sweet dreams of paid orders, positive feedbacks and pizza, to everyone
who isn't a HACKER

Night!
I’ve got the coffee on for anyone who is still up

Roo

Do you have tea? I’m still up for about an hour and a little

I think you need the one on the right Nubs!

Roo

Well I’m off for a short bit. Hopefully your are able to get it resolved soon!

Thanks for the company! He's been quiet for a while now. Probably hoping
to lul me into complacency, but I'm still refreshing constantly. The next
admin shift can't come soon enough

I have taken control of your account and sent you a message using an old email.
If you don't get my message, contact me at admin@bricklink.com

Author:

Admin_Russell

Posted:

Mar 19, 2024 11:09

Subject:

Re: Need "Item For Sale Condition" Clarification

Viewed:

113 times

Topic:

Selling

In Selling, aaronaar writes:

Hi!

I didn't get a response from the help desk, so I'm asking here.

I noticed that I can part together some official sets using 100% new parts. Am
I allowed to list those sets as "new incomplete" if I mention in the
comments that I parted together the set myself using new parts and am missing
box/instructions/stickers? Or are you only allowed to list a set as "new
incomplete" if you only took items out of a NISB set?

If you are not allowed to list it as "new incomplete", could you list
it as "used incomplete" and say in the comments that you parted it together
using new parts and am missing box/instructions/stickers?

Given that:

"Custom sets or instructions may be listed, provided they do not infringe
on any intellectual property rights, including those of the LEGO Group."

I do not believe I could list it as a custom set instead?

Thanks for information and if possible would like clarification from an admin.

Upon further investigation I have found at least one lot
https://store.bricklink.com/SortStation?itemID=336122737#/shop?o={%22invID%22:%22336122737%22}

where this exact scenario is listed as “new incomplete” and it has been listed
for over a year.

Wether this is due to it being allowed or simply never noticed is up for debate.

The big question here is whether that tile is original. There have been a few
fakes sold on BrickLink over the years before we caught them, so maybe it's
one of those.

In general, we do frown on used sets that have been BrickLinked, especially some
of the highly collectible ones like this:

21021-1 (Inv) Marina Bay Sands
602 Parts, 2014
Sets: Architecture

But we don't proactively remove them. If they get reported, they will get
taken down though.

If someone wants to sell a collection of parts that may or may constitute a complete
set, they can always list it as a custom lot.

Author:

Admin_Russell

Posted:

Mar 18, 2024 10:44

Subject:

Re: Selling Removed Stickers

Viewed:

114 times

Topic:

Selling

In Selling, zorbanj writes:

In Selling, brickerking writes:

So just to follow up on this one...

I asked the help desk:
Can I list an incomplete set of peeled off stickers stored on wax paper as a
used sticker sheet with notes and a photo?

They got back to me and said it would need to be listed as a custom item.

So then I reported a couple other stickers listed in the above condition and
they were all removed from the store within a couple days.

The help language was changed:

https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=102

It now reads (second sentence is new):

"Sticker sheets missing stickers must be listed as used. Individual stickers
not attached to the original sticker sheet must be listed as Custom Items."

Yes, as a result of the complaints against these sticker listings, we have decided
to address the issue in the listing rules.

The main problem with individual stickers separated from the sheet is that we
don't have catalog entries for them. It is simply a practical concession
that we allow sheets with missing stickers to be sold as used, since for the
most part, used complete stickers sheets are very uncommon and of questionable
market value.

In the listings that were pulled down, the used stickers were placed on felt
and this is not great, with the fibers from the felt getting stuck to the back
of the sticker. Wax paper (freezer paper) is better since this is similar to
the surface the stickers were originally stuck to.

However, I do believe there is a valid market for used stickers for vintage sets,
especially some of the plastic based stickers (e.g. Fabuland). So I will be consulting
with our Marketplace and Catalog teams to see if we can make a provision for
listing them in some way under the sticker entry and not as custom items.

Until we make a decision on this, we won't be removing any more used sticker
listings.

Author:

Admin_Russell

Posted:

Mar 15, 2024 21:25

Subject:

Re: Address change that I didn't make?

Viewed:

86 times

Topic:

Problem

In Problem, jasonpenn writes:

First screenshot is my actual address 3120 Cuervo on the Feb 11th order and the
Second is a combination of my old address 12817 Roma and my new address 3120
Cuervo on the March 4th order. I didn't make the change in between. I think
an admin needs to look into this because there was no date on the log of changing
my address in between
Jason

Your store address is still listed as the old one, btw.

Author:

Admin_Russell

Posted:

Mar 15, 2024 14:37

Subject:

Re: One time pin random generation

Viewed:

76 times

Topic:

In General, Saitobricks.ca writes:

In General, brickerking writes:

In General, Ianpugh writes:

Is anyone else getting random one time pin notifications? I’ve had about 6 sent
at times when i have not tried to log in to my account so far……. Not sure if
this is happening to everyone or just me?

They just turned that on for everyone without warning: https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1459423

Yep, went to check my store settings and it was on.

You can turn it off if you wish.

Author:

Admin_Russell

Posted:

Mar 14, 2024 17:40

Subject:

Expanded feature for power users

Viewed:

171 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Hi everyone,

One of the side effects of the variant merge project is that some of our more
advanced users began asking for Alternate Item IDs to be included in the catalog
download feature.

So we have added this field to the download - see attached images. Downloads
(as before) are available in either CSV or XML format.

By way of reminder, for the variant project we are adding all original item numbers
as alternates to make sure people are able to easily find parts where the number
has changed.

Author:

Admin_Russell

Posted:

Mar 13, 2024 13:22

Subject:

Re: Is this a legit email?

Viewed:

110 times

Topic:

Help

In Help, adam.r writes:

I have received an email asking me to sign up to be a BrickLink Research Member.

Whilst I have no problem with being BrickLink's guinea pig however given
the recent warnings about phishing emails targeting BrickLink users, I figured
that it would be best to check if this is a legitimate email before signing up.

The Sign up! link goes to an Office 365 form that asks questions including Name,
Email address and BrickLink username.

Could someone from BrickLink please advise if BrickLink has indeed been sending
out such emails, or is someone else up to no good?

This is a legitimate email from our BrickLink team. Please sign up if you are
interested.

Author:

Admin_Russell

Posted:

Mar 12, 2024 14:18

Subject:

Re: Color Guide now show all images in the color!

Viewed:

69 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Stellar writes:

Wow, that would make searching quite easier to not miss what you are looking
for:

[Catalog] Fixed Color Guide Parts listings to show the part images in the color
selected

https://www.bricklink.com/catalogList.asp?catID=7&catXrefLevel=0&colorPart=86&catType=P

Thanks for noticing. Makes a big difference!

https://www.bricklink.com/catalogListOld.asp?catType=P&colorPart=167

Author:

Admin_Russell

Posted:

Mar 11, 2024 13:34

Subject:

Re: Add links not working

Viewed:

50 times

Topic:

Help

In Help, randyf writes:

In Help, Admin_Russell writes:

In Help, Turez writes:

In Help, Saitobricks.ca writes:

I’m trying to add a link for Jangbricks channel for reference, but I tried to
add a link before and it didn’t go through.

Is there something I need to fill out for the link I don’t know about?

There is an issue with the image upload. Try adding the link without an image.

The image upload was just fixed last week.

So, it only took five months for the fix. That is pretty fast for BrickLink speeds.

Actually, the links image issue was reported in June of 2021. Definitely one
of the longer fixes.

Author:

Admin_Russell

Posted:

Mar 11, 2024 13:19

Subject:

Re: Add links not working

Viewed:

52 times

Topic:

Help

In Help, Turez writes:

In Help, Saitobricks.ca writes:

I’m trying to add a link for Jangbricks channel for reference, but I tried to
add a link before and it didn’t go through.

Is there something I need to fill out for the link I don’t know about?

There is an issue with the image upload. Try adding the link without an image.

The image upload was just fixed last week.

Author:

Admin_Russell

Posted:

Mar 5, 2024 12:05

Subject:

Re: Phishing email UPDATE March 5

Viewed:

272 times

Topic:

Administrative

Hello again everyone,

Our security team was able to get the original bricklinks.net site taken
down, but we got reports this morning of a new bricklinks.org site and
evidence that phishing emails have been sent to our users, directing people to
this new site. The new site is much more realistic (see image below).

Please log in ONLY to bricklink.com and be aware that an effort is being
made to steal your BrickLink credentials. We will keep you updated if this problem
persists.

The BrickLink Team

Author:

Admin_Russell

Posted:

Mar 4, 2024 11:01

Subject:

Re: Variant merge - clarification 553b/c

Viewed:

114 times

Topic:

In Catalog, jennnifer writes:

Hello,
[p=553b]

I see that the old 553b Blocked Stud has been merged with the much newer 3626
Vented Stud.

Was I wrong in expecting that it was also to be merged with 553c Hollow Stud?
Wasn't the point to not have to differentiate between the different stud
types?

Thanks,
~Jen

The big merges have not been finished yet. I need help from a developer to make
sure we don't shut down the servers with the merge operation.

Author:

Admin_Russell

Posted:

Mar 2, 2024 22:22

Subject:

Re: Seriously?

Viewed:

175 times

Topic:

In Catalog, here4bricks614 writes:

In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:

In Catalog, here4bricks614 writes:

What was the point of merging 44302 and 54657? The other hinge bricks/plates?

All of the element numbers are gone and now it’s going to be harder to find the
specific variant.

They are all here. They have to be added manually after the merge has run its
course. Because of a bug in the PCC upload process, it can be really tedious
to add many of these at once, so I break up the process a bit to keep my sanity:

https://www.bricklink.com/catalogColors.asp?itemType=P&itemNo=44302&v=2

If you spot some that are missing, please file a request to add them. Same thing
with any alternate part numbers. I am adding all original numbers as alternate
numbers so there shouldn't be any trouble with people finding things.

And for the other comments in this thread with concerns that the project is being
executed in a careless or haphazard way, I am working line by line through a
spreadsheet that was prepared and proofread weeks ago. Nothing has been merged
by mistake, and nothing will be.

Sometimes I will do things out of order, or leave a section partially done. This
is because of time (and I am quite behind on the project already) and because
of some technical limitations of the merge feature. There are several "big"
parts where I will need help from a developer to complete the merge without jeopardizing
site performance.

Why were the grooved variants merged?

Because they were on the list from the beginning:

https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2629

The reason they got on the list is because they are not classified as cosmetic
variants or typical grooved parts. The groove became apparent when the teeth
on the hinges was being examined, and the grooves were distinguished for the
same reason as the teeth. But when we remove the reason for recognizing the teeth,
we also remove the reason for recognizing the groove.

Author:

Admin_Russell

Posted:

Mar 2, 2024 22:14

Subject:

Re: Seriously?

Viewed:

227 times

Topic:

In Catalog, here4bricks614 writes:

What was the point of merging 44302 and 54657? The other hinge bricks/plates?

All of the element numbers are gone and now it’s going to be harder to find the
specific variant.

Author:

Admin_Russell

Posted:

Feb 27, 2024 14:29

Subject:

Re: Special assembly item

Viewed:

68 times

Topic:

Catalog Requests

In Catalog Requests, Saitobricks.ca writes:

In Catalog Requests, richspin writes:

Thanks Saitobricks.ca but they don't show up there either.

Sorry wrong category, try going to the special assembly category.

Lot ID: 392424894

Lot ID: 392424541

Author:

Admin_Russell

Posted:

Feb 16, 2024 22:10

Subject:

Re: Seeing completed NSS

Viewed:

95 times

Topic:

In General, TheBrickGuys writes:

Is there any way for a store to see if they have ever had an NSS completed against
themselves?

Jim

No there, is not (at least not an easy way) but you can ask customer service
any time and they can provide a response.

We are considering sending out a notice after 2 NSS alerts are completed, just
as a warning to sellers. We understand that many NSS alerts are completed accidentally
by well-meaning buyers, and that a completed NSS does not necessarily mean that
a buyer was disenfranchised.

Author:

Admin_Russell

Posted:

Feb 16, 2024 22:06

Subject:

Reaction to the R.R. Slugger video

Viewed:

430 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Hello again everyone,

This is my official response to the video from R.R. Slugger concerning the merging
of part variants in the BrickLink catalog:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGRxNX8Cg_o&t=1s

Here is an initial response to the video, specifically regarding the set inventory
for the Core Magnetizer:

6989-1 (Inv) Mega Core Magnetizer / Multi Core Magnetizer
473 Parts, 3 Minifigures, 1990
Sets: Space: M:Tron

https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1450164

Here is today's response:

*************************************

I’ll start with a couple points I actually agree with Slugger on:

1) BrickLink certainly is an invaluable tool, and one of the things that has
motivated me to invest in the catalog over the years, long before I became a
community admin or started working in the BrickLink office, was knowing that
whatever corrections or additions I would make would instantly circle the globe
and potentially benefit thousands of fans everywhere.

2) Regarding the suggestion to double down on accuracy – that is actually what
we’re doing, if you look at the big picture. I remember discussing with one of
the authors of the LEGO Collector books that came out a few years ago:

810003 Collector's Guide - 50 Years of Play 1st Edition
Books: Informational Book

9783935976640 Collector's Guide 2nd Edition
Books: Informational Book

and one of the points we discussed was why certain things weren’t included in
a publication that was so comprehensive. The answer was that if a particular
data field didn’t have at least 80% of the data, then there were questions raised
as to how useful that field would be.

Of course this case does not cover all of the changes being made to the BrickLink
catalog, but it does pertain to some of them. The smooth slopes and frosted bricks,
even after 20 years of accepting data from the community, have a very weak connection
to our inventory system. Many of the parts are not represented even a single
time, and of those that are represented, there are serious questions as to the
accuracy of the inventory change requests.

The biggest obstacle in separating variants on BrickLink, especially the older
ones, is lack of real data. So the question comes up, should we have entries
on BrickLink that can’t or never will be represented sufficiently in the inventory
system?

Being orphaned or partially orphaned from the system is a bad thing, and our
stance on that is one of the things that has really changed since Dan built the
inventory system in the early 2000s. It used to be acceptable to have entries
floating around just for buying and selling, but over time we have realized the
power of our inventory system, to the extent that we now use artificial inventories
to represent certain parts (like BAM parts):

bam2023-1 (Inv) Build-a-Minifigure (BAM) 2023 Parts
39 Parts, 2023
Sets: LEGO Brand: LEGO Brand Store: Build-A-Minifigure
Marked for Deletion

By removing some of these variants, the accuracy and inclusiveness of the inventory
system goes up, and that is the primary driving force behind these current changes.
Why not just fill out the data instead of consolidating entries? Because we simply
do not have the data, and if we did, we couldn’t handle it all anyway. There
is no way we can add thousands of new minifigure inventories to the system simply
to accommodate different types of studs.

Next I’d like to give an actual example or something that WILL be lost in
the transition.

Slugger is right – just because the example he gave may not have been the perfect
example, it doesn’t negate the point that something will be lost. So here goes:

Set 7171 from 1999 (Mos Espa Podrace):

7171-1 (Inv) Mos Espa Podrace
831 Parts, 10 Minifigures, 1999
Sets: Star Wars: Star Wars Episode 1

is one of the celebrated early Star Wars sets and as such we may consider it
to be at the pinnacle of collector interest. In that set is a yellow dome with
a “blocked open stud” which is part no. 30151a:

[p=30151a,3]

The next version of that part by all accounts was introduced around 2010,
[p=30151b]

and by that time, the Mos Espa Podrace had long been retired. So we can say with
reasonable certainty that this set came originally with domes with blocked open
studs. If you see a copy of the set sitting on someone’s shelf and the domes
on Anakin’s podracer have hollow studs (no little Mercedes symbol), that is a
sure sign that the parts, and maybe even the whole set, is not original.

So if the BrickLink catalog stops distinguishing the “a” from the “b” version,
someone might build it wrong and wouldn’t even know it! However, as a quiz question
for savvy readers, why would this scenario never actually happen in the real
world? What do we know about these the 30151 variants that puts this problem
completely into the realm of the hypothetical?

Next example, set 4778-1 from 2005 (Desert Biplane):

4778-1 (Inv) Desert Biplane
104 Parts, 1 Minifigure, 2005
Sets: Town: Classic Town: Airport

This is not Star Wars buts it’s still a classic in my book. There is a different
kind of dome on the front of this plane (553), but it has the same issues as
the previously mentioned dome part.

[p=553b,5]

This set is from 2005, so it’s not likely that it ever came with the “c” variant.
The 2008 appearance is in the first UCS Death Star which had a really long production
run and has over 50 lines of variants in the BrickLink inventory:

10188-1 (Inv) Death Star - UCS
3696 Parts, 24 Minifigures, 2008
Sets: Star Wars: Ultimate Collector Series: Star Wars Episode 4/5/6

But if this little set were produced up through 2010, there might be a real possibility
of seeing one with a “c” variant.
[p=553c,5]

So with the current merges, this is data that would be lost. People wouldn’t
know about the stud variants, and someone could get any of 3 different stud types
– blocked open, hollow, or even vented. All three exist in red.

[p=3262,5]

Next up is set 6745-1 from 2009 (Propeller Power).

6745-1 (Inv) Propeller Power
247 Parts, 2009
Sets: Creator: Model: Airport

This also has a red 533 on the nose of the plane, but here the inventory system
says it could have either the “b” or “c” variant. Check the change log to see
if you recognize any of the people who added these variants to the set:

https://www.bricklink.com/catalogInvChangeItem.asp?itemType=S&itemNo=6745-1&viewDate=Y&viewStatus=1

We’re pretty sure this came with both “b” and “c” types. It didn’t come with
a vented stud, and someone might mistakenly put one on this model if BrickLink
doesn’t educate them about it, right? That is the premise on why we need these
variants in the catalog, correct?

The thing is, how can we tolerate the difference of stud type in this model,
and not in other models where it is historically incorrect? In this plane model
from 2009, both are correct, so what does that say about the mixing of variants
in other models?

True collectors know that there actually is no replacement part that will ever
perfectly replace a part that is lost. The only truly correct part is the part
the set originally came with. It’s nice to get as close as possible to a correct
replacement part, but it’s a futile attempt.

So I will admit that something is lost in the catalog by harmonizing all the
hollow studs types. But the second message is that whatever is lost is quite
unimportant in relation to the effort it takes for the BrickLink community to
recognize these variants.

We weighed it up, and decided that stud types are not important enough. They
have some importance, and there are some workarounds available for the people
who really want to go down that path. But overall, what we seem to be losing
is less than what we believe we are gaining.

**************************************

One more detail about the video – in navigating around the BrickLink catalog,
I noticed Slugger used the new inventory tab on the catalog page instead of the
proper inventory page accessible by the link at the top of the page.

https://www.bricklink.com/catalogItemInv.asp?S=6989-1

There are multiple problems with this version of the inventory. First, there
is no link to the change log, which for specialists is a must. Reading the change
log lets you determine the accuracy of the data you are consuming.

Second, the match IDs do not line up with the inventory notes, so any mention,
for example, of “match ID 99” (which is critical to understanding variant inventories)
doesn’t make any sense.

Indispensable

Some of my colleagues were surprised to see such a strong reaction from our users
on this topic. But the fact is, variants are an indispensable feature of the
BrickLink catalog and they are one of the main reasons for the “sealed set” standard
we maintain for new inventories. Keeping this standard comes at a cost, and it’s
important for people to know that all of this work and energy is appreciated.

https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=1103

BrickLink is not descending into a parts oblivion where nothing is distinguished.
I made that very clear from the very first announcement. This is simply a mid-way
correction to enable us to do better at what we already do. I trust that over
the coming months and years you will come around to believing me on that point.

Author:

Admin_Russell

Posted:

Feb 16, 2024 14:57

Subject:

Re: Variant merger causing XML files to fail

Viewed:

75 times

Topic:

Technical Issues

In Technical Issues, DonnaxNL writes:

Hi there,

I got notified by a Rebrickable customer who purchased moc instructions from
me that uploading of the XML file didn't work. After taking a look at it,
I noticed they were all parts that have a 'b' suffix in them. They all
are from tile pieces, just removing the b's from all the items works, but
tile pieces are really common and I assume this has not only broke mine, but
will break everyone's XML files people have shared.

Please let someone take a look at it.

Meanwhile there is no consistency...

3069pc1 Tile 1 x 2 with Vehicle Control Panel Pattern
Parts: Tile, Decorated {Dark Bluish Gray}

Has the -b and 'with Groove' moniker removed, but [P=3068bpb0431,1]
has not. While the regular

3068 Tile 2 x 2
Parts: Tile {Blue}

has...

We are still updating the 2 x 2 decorated tiles. There are over 2000 of them,
so it will take a while.

Author:

Admin_Russell

Posted:

Feb 15, 2024 14:39

Subject:

Re: Variants Thread - February 12

Viewed:

276 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:

Hello again everyone,

Today the catalog team got a message (in all caps) protesting the variant merges.
Some of the points have not been addressed yet, so I thought I would take this
opportunity to answer these before we get started with merging.

Sorry it's so long.

01 WHY RUIN SOMETHING THAT WORKS SO WELL! YOU WILL LOSE MANY CUSTOMERS AROUND
THE WOURLD,
IN THIS HOBBY/WORK OF ART THE BUYER ALWAYS COMES FIRST!

One of the things people will learn about the BrickLink catalog is that it is
HUGE. Meaning that it would be hard to ruin it by just changing a few entries.

02 IF YOU DO THIS, YOU WILL DESTROY THE GREATEST REFERENCE FOR LEGO PARTS ANYWHERE
ON THE INTERNET, PEOPLE FROM AROUND THE WORLD HAVE BEEN DOING DATA ENTRIES FOR
20 YEARS, ALL THIS DATA WILL BE GONE!

We are actually saving the data, and others have done this too:

https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1454780

In some cases we will be making Help Pages to preserve the most useful data.

03 THER IS NO NEED TO DO THIS IN THE FIRST PLACE BACUSE WHEN THERE IS 2 OR 3
VARIANTS THER IS ALWAS A PICTURE OF THE TOP AND BOTTOM OF EACH PART SHOWING THE
DIFFERENT DESIGN IMPROVEMENTS!

The need is both for sellers who have boxes of used parts to sort and buyers
who have to make their way around a catalog with entries that are hard to explain.

04 MANY OF US WILL USE CHINESE BASED WEB SITES AND OR BRICK-OWL.COM TO SOURCE
OUR PARTS!

I don't think so!

05 YOU ARE MAKING TO VERY BAD OF A DECISION WITH NOT IN PUT FROM THE US, AFOLS
/ BUYERS / SELLERS,

We took input from people for the last month in the Forum, plus other input for
many years. These decisions were not made in a vaccum.

06 DIFFERENT VARIANTS HAVE HAD SEPARATE ENTRIES FOR 20 YEARS, DONT "FIX"
WHAT IS NOT BROKEN OR YOU WILL HAVE THE SAME FATE AS SEARS

07 THIS DOES NOT HONOR DANIEL JEZEK, THE FOUNDER OF BRICK-LINK.COM IN ANY WAY!

For sure, Dan would have been on the side of this project. He sometimes referred
to the "balkanization" of the catalog as a bad things. Many of the variants
being removed would likely not have been approved under his leadership.

08 THIS RUNIS EVERTHING HE DID FOR AFOLS / BUYERS / SELLERS
IF HE WAS STILL ALIVE TODAY HE WOULD BE VERY DISAPPOINTED!

I think he would be relieved to not have to account for several different kinds
of hollow studs. In fact, he was the one that made the policy that only ONE head
stud variant would be used in all minfigure inventories. By continuing to allow
solid stud heads in early inventories, we are actually breaking this policy.

09/A IN JULY 2018 YOU INTRODUCED STUDIO WITCH IS IN INDISPENSABLE, STUDIO AND
BRICK LINK ARE LIKE SALT AND PEPPER OR PRIMER AND PAINT THEY MUST BE IN SYNCHRONIZATION
WITH EATCH OTHER

Agreed, although it is interesting that despite my personal efforts to further
integrate Studio into this Forum, both the administration and the Studio userbase
have insisted on keeping them separate.

09/B RIGHT NOW I CAN DESIGN A MOC ON STUDIO, I WILL THEN EXPORT THE PARTS TO
BRICK LINK AND ORDER THE PARTS, BUILD THE MOC, CREATE THE INSTRUCTIONS AND SELL
THEM ON REBRICKABLE.COM

Or you could do this in MOC shop next year (2025), but only if the MOC meets
certain standards.

09/C WHEN YOU MERGE VARIANTS YOU WILL RUIN BRICK LINK WEATHER YOU INTENDED TO
OR NOT! IF YOU DO THIS I WILL HAVE NO CHOSE BUT TO USE BRICK-OWL.COM FOR THE
MERGED VARIANTS

I'm not entirely sure whether Brick Owl will retain these variants after
we have merged them. I would advise against it, but if Brick Owl wants to corner
the market on parts that almost nobody wants, they are free to to that. The Brick
Owl catalog was decoupled from the BrickLink catalog years ago with the invention
of the Brick Owl ID (BOID).

09/D THE PROBLEM IS BRICK-OWL.COM IS NOT INTEGRATED INTO STUDIO, THAT MAKES ORDERING
PARTS A LOT MORE DIFFICULT, AND VERY TIME CONSUMING!

Well there is a reason that Studio is integrated with the BrickLink catalog and
not other catalogs. We pay for the development and maintenance of Studio, and
we choose to benefit our platform with the integration.

09/E I WILL HAVE TO MANUALY AND IVDVUALY LOOK FOR EACH PART ON BRICK-OWL.COM
THIS WILL TAKE HOURS!

My advice is keep using BrickLink. The variants we are removing aren't going
to make a lick of difference in a Studio model. I would welcome any real-life
cases where this variant merge project affects people's using of Studio.

10/A ALSO IF I BUY INSTRUCTIONS ON REBRICKABLE.COM AND BUY THE PARTS FROM BRICK-LINK.COM
THIS PROCESS SHOULD ONLY TAKE A FEW MINUTES FOR THE ALGORITHM TO PROSESS THE
DATA

Rebrickable is an affiliate of ours, and they are being briefed on all changes.
They Rebrickable folks are quite the experts at mapping things, so I wouldn't
worry about this too much.

10/B IT IS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT TO KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETTWEEN SLOPED BRICKS
WITH A RORGH OR TEXTURED SURFACE AND SLOPED BRICKS WHITH A SMOOTH SURFACE

Sorry, it is not. There are not simply 2 kinds of textures. There are a range
of textures that are out there, and only showing 2 on BrickLink presents a false
dichotomy to our users.

10/C FOR EXAMPLE SLOPE BRICK 2 x 4 (45°) WITH ROUGH SURFACE 3037 IS MORE DESIRABLE
BECAUSE IT DOES NOT GET SCTRATED AS EASLY AS ONE WITH A SMOTH SURFACE

Yet currently on BrickLink (pre-merge) there is no way to order only a "rough
surface" slope. You could get any of a wide variety of textures, including
ones that some people think are smooth. There are a lot of blind partouts going
on out there, so don't think for a minute that every seller listing even
the smooth ones has actually looked at every brick, especially the New stock.

10/D https://img.brickowl.com/files/image_cache/larger/lego-red-slope-2-x-4-45-with-rough-surface-3037-32-935193-81.jpg

BrickLink Discussions Moderators, please leave this link as an exception. That
is indeed a beautiful image.

11/A IF YOU INTEGRATE BRICK-OWL.COM WITH STUDIO, IT WOULD MAKE THINGS EASER FOR
US AFOLS

The chance of that happening is very, very low - sorry.

11/B HOWHEVER THE NUMBER OF PARTS, NUMBER OF STORES AND THE SIZE STORES ARE FAR
GREATER ON BRICK-LINK.COM THAN ON BRICK-OWL.COM OR THEY MIGHT NOT HAVE THE PART
IN THE COLOR THAT I WANT SIMPLY BECAUSE THER ARE LESS AVABILE

Very true, and one of the reasons for that is the active catalog present on BrickLink.
People are attracted to the catalog, even though most variants the LEGO Group
releases never make in into the catalog.

12/A LET US THE SELLERS AND BUYERS DECIDE THROUGH A BINDING VOTE, WEATHER OR
NOT TO MERGE THE VARIANTS AFTER ALL IF THERE WAS NO DEMAND / BUYERS THER WOULD
BE NO REASION FOR THIS WEB-SITE TO EXIST IN THE FIRST PLACE

I've said this before, but if we left it up to a general user vote, BrickLink
would lose most of the variants in the catalog today.

12/B THAT MEANS THAT YOU WOULD HONOR THE VOTE AND PUBLISH THE NUMBERS FOR ALL
TO SEE!

We don't even publish the votes for Forum suggestions or BDP models. It would
increase transparency, but that may be too transparent.

13 THE PROBLEM IS BRICK OWL.COM IS NOT INTEGRATED WITH BRICK VALUT.TOYS
THAT COULD RUIN ONE OF THE BEST PLACES TO GET CUSTOM STAR WARS MOCS/SETS

Brick Owl and Brick Vault are their own sites with their own concerns.

14 PUT THE OLD MOULDS / VARIANTS ON A SEPREATE WEB SITE! LINKS INCLUDED

There are some great sites out there that document many variants that we don't
recognize on BrickLink. We have no issue with people building or using those
sites.

15 IF YOU DONT LIKE THIS IDEA, ASK US THE SELLERS AND BUYERS WHAT SHOULD BE DONE
TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM! ALSO THER WAS NO PROBLEN IN THE FIRST PLACE,

We have been asking these questions for years. Every meeting, every convention,
every Forum thread. These changes have been a long time coming, and community
input was at the heart of the decision to move ahead.

16 ARE THE PART NUMBERS GOING CHANGE OR MERGE ON STUDIO?

Yes. Studio pulls these from the BrickLink catalog, so they will change. The
tiles have already changed.

Author:

Admin_Russell

Posted:

Feb 14, 2024 19:55

Subject:

Re: Store Inventory Description Changes

Viewed:

90 times

Topic:

Technical Issues

In Technical Issues, 1001bricks writes:

In Technical Issues, macebobo writes:

Recently a change was made to the UI that only impacts sellers who like to add
a little color to their listings.

When the UI updates, it escapes any valid html color to the exact same rgb equivalent
for some unknown reason, taking 10 of the already limited 255 characters.

Please go back to not altering perfectly valid html code.

Please re-allow people to voluntarily open BrickLink pages in an iFrame (broken
since 15 dec 2023).

Even more important, please implement a log of any user side change?

We DO know BrickLink is "AS IS".

But it may increase your Karma thing if you to be completely transparent with
us?

The iFrame and the HTML issues are intentional security related changes. In both
cases, we tried to minimaly disruptive.

Author:

Admin_Russell

Posted:

Feb 13, 2024 20:39

Subject:

Re: Variants Thread - February 12

Viewed:

144 times

Topic:

In Catalog, oukexergon writes:

In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:

Inside supports

We will merge 46212 (Brick 1 x 2 x 5) as planned

Can you please respond to the given rationales for why this should not happen?
These are very different parts (not variants) in connectivity, function even
within Lego instructions, and of course aesthetics where they have a specific
purpose in this case (usually used for transparency). Where else is this part
merged? Who would benefit from the loss of this unique part?

Can you comment on why this and not the 1x2x1 without inside supports would be
merged?

Because the transparent 3004 and 3065 both exist, so this is necessary to keep
them apart.

3004 Brick 1 x 2
Parts: Brick {Trans-Clear}

3065 Brick 1 x 2 without Bottom Tube
Parts: Brick {Trans-Clear}

The 2454 and 46212 do not both exist in transparent colors:

2454 Brick 1 x 2 x 5
Parts: Brick {Trans-Clear}

[p=46212,12]

The only reason to keep them separate is to distinguish the early solid color
versions which had no side supports. But that is a minor consideration and practically
speaking there is no functional difference.

You would also be hard pressed to say that any of those early sets came ONLY
with the earliest version of the part. Both types are correct, and maybe there
were both types present in some copies.

As for people needing to place 1 x 1 round tiles inside the 46212, this only
happens with the transparent version.

Author:

Admin_Russell

Posted:

Feb 12, 2024 22:20

Subject:

Variants Thread - February 12

Viewed:

610 times

Topic:

Status:

Open