BrickLink Discussion Forum

In Catalog, Stellar writes:

In Catalog, jennnifer writes:

In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:

We definitely could have talked about it on the catalog panel if the catalog
panel had EVER been consulted about this.

The catalog panel was informed of this merge project months before it was announced
publicly. But the purpose of the panel is to bring community voice to the development
team, not contribute to catalog policy.

Unless there was a meeting I missed somehow, I do not recollect that we were
informed of this project or asked to give any input or suggestions. There was
a brief mention that there was a variant project but no details or timetables
were ever given. Considering that many people on the Panel were among those who
expressed surprise and dismay when this was all introduced, I would think that
those meetings would indeed have been an ideal place to breach the subject with
the members at large.

The only thing I recollect is talking about the need to tackle the variants on
the catalog, but nothing specific, I must have missed it too.

We do address catalog policy when it comes up, but it's definitely a sideline
issue, as are all issues that relate to other BrickLink teams, like Marketplace
and Studio. Panel meetings are not the place to debate proposed variant merges.
The Forum is, and there was plenty of debate and even opportunity for more debate.

Perhaps it was not the place to discuss the exact specifics of each part being
looked at. But it would have been good to know how the project would be introduced
and carried out. We are supposed to be looking out for the community and sharing
out expertise after all.

Thanks,
~Jen

He only claims that we were informed of the project and that is the truth. We
were told that it existed.

Author:

axaday

Posted:

Apr 17, 2024 05:43

Subject:

Re: Variants Thread - April 16

Viewed:

69 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
The important thing moving forward, though, is that no

one is going to keep investing in that handful of variants that we removed.

This is a serious understatement. From now until I don't know when, I'm
not investing in any of the variants.

Author:

axaday

Posted:

Apr 16, 2024 20:59

Subject:

Re: Variants Thread - April 16

Viewed:

42 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Dhobeck writes:

In Catalog, axaday writes:

In Catalog, rickcraine writes:

In Catalog, axaday writes:

In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:

Hello everyone,

I thought it would be good to give people an update on the variant project. As
of now, everything we announced would change in this post:

https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1454437

has been completed, EXCEPT the decorated minifigure heads and new Help pages.

Link for the overview:

https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2625

Scheduled completion date is still the end of May.

I didn't realize 32064b was on the chopping block.

Wasn't there that whole controversy with that guy who claimed to have used
it in a "moc on top of a stud so therefore it was useful" even though
it cannot fit on top of a stud

32064b could go on a hollow stud. I would have spoken up on it, but I didn't
realize it was on the block.

We definitely could have talked about it on the catalog panel if the catalog
panel had EVER been consulted about this.

There went a double handful of my catalog work and all the give-a-darn that I
had stockpiled. I think I'll go touch grass and see if it is everything
people talk it up to be.

This minifigure seems fine after touching it

I brought some in and set it on my desk. I really don't know what all the
fuss is about. It's like a long skinny leaf?

Author:

axaday

Posted:

Apr 16, 2024 20:58

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Minifigure dp095

Viewed:

21 times

Topic:

Inventories Requests

In Inventories Requests, axaday writes:

Yes

Yeah. Maybe. Not. Anymore.

Author:

axaday

Posted:

Apr 16, 2024 20:48

Subject:

Re: Variants Thread - April 16

Viewed:

54 times

Topic: