Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | Admin_Russell  | | Posted: | Sep 13, 2019 14:33 | | Subject: | Re: We have a new Catalog Associate! | | Viewed: | 99 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
|
BrickLink
ID CardAdmin_Russell
|
Location:  USA, California |
| Member Since |
Contact |
Type |
Status |
| May 9, 2017 |
 |
Admin |
|
|
| BrickLink Administrator |
|
| In Catalog, jennnifer writes:
| | In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| |
...you will notice a sea of green, followed by a sea of blue, followed by another
sea of green. This means he continued to contribute to the catalog after having
once been an admin, which is (unfortunately) something rather uncommon. But it
demonstrates a great and correct attitude, the kind of attitude we wish to model
for all of our other contributors out there, especially the ones still cutting
their teeth.
|
Sorry, but I must say that I take offense at this statement. You are passing
judgement on the previous admins and their reasons for leaving the site. You
are implying that the 'correct' attitude would be to maintain one's
dedication to a site even after you may have had a bad experience.
You don't know how they were treated by the management and members of this
site.
Jen
|
This thread was supposed to be a joyful welcome for a new team member. I'm
sorry if it was offensive to anyone and I don't want to argue a point.
I will leave this thread as it is for now. But if people keep commenting on this
issue, I will be forced to lock it.
|
 |
| Author: | Admin_Russell | | Posted: | Sep 13, 2019 01:14 | | Subject: | We have a new Catalog Associate! | | Viewed: | 337 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
|
BrickLink
ID CardAdmin_Russell
|
| Location: USA, California |
| Member Since |
Contact |
Type |
Status |
| May 9, 2017 |
|
Admin |
|
|
| BrickLink Administrator |
|
| Hello everyone,
I'm very pleased to announce that we have appointed longtime member BricksThatStick
to the Catalog Associate position. Paul served as the site's 4th Inventories
Admin during 2010 to 2011 alongside Emma (SimplyBricks). He effectively replaced
Dan Jezek, the site's founder, who had a special fondness for inventories
work and who of course left very big shoes to fill.
If you take the time to scroll through Paul's 900+ inventories changes:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogInvChangeItem.asp?chgUserID=44744&v=3
...you will notice a sea of green, followed by a sea of blue, followed by another
sea of green. This means he continued to contribute to the catalog after having
once been an admin, which is (unfortunately) something rather uncommon. But it
demonstrates a great and correct attitude, the kind of attitude we wish to model
for all of our other contributors out there, especially the ones still cutting
their teeth.
Paul has, over the years, been very active as a seller and many of you will know
him also from his activity in the Forum. We look forward to his practical insights
and we are confident he will play a vital role in our growing catalog team.
Please welcome him back! 
Russell
|
|
|
| Author: | Admin_Russell | | Posted: | Aug 23, 2019 13:59 | | Subject: | Re: Email vs Message systems | | Viewed: | 76 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
|
BrickLink
ID CardAdmin_Russell
|
| Location: USA, California |
| Member Since |
Contact |
Type |
Status |
| May 9, 2017 |
|
Admin |
|
|
| BrickLink Administrator |
|
| We encourage people to use the onsite messaging system when discussing order-related
things, because it is something we can see on our end if there is a dispute.
I know it's a pain to not be able to send attachments, but for us it's
better than having everything done offsite.
In Suggestions, Gaston.La.Brick writes:
| | When a buyer contacts me, using the contact form on BL, I get an email from BL
with the message. However, replying to that email just results in a bounced email.
I am forced to go into BL message center and copy/paste my text. Even worse when
I need to reply with an attachment (like a photo of a brick): not an option.
This all ends up in two // streams of communication: some messages are sent using
BL, others over direct email.
I'm forced to use a communication medium (BL) that is not adequate. Until
it's adequate, I would suggest to remove the "Messaging" feature all together.
Until BL can offer a mature messaging feature that makes direct email obsolete,
I would suggest to remove the Message feature (and point the users to direct
email contact). Now it's just a very confusing and annoying mix of communication
channels.
|
|
|
| Author: | Admin_Russell | | Posted: | Aug 20, 2019 13:10 | | Subject: | Re: Cardboard sleeves in inventories | | Viewed: | 62 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
|
BrickLink
ID CardAdmin_Russell
|
| Location: USA, California |
| Member Since |
Contact |
Type |
Status |
| May 9, 2017 |
|
Admin |
|
|
| BrickLink Administrator |
|
| In Inventories, Proprietor writes:
| | In Inventories, Admin_Russell writes:
snip
| | Because our partout system is not yet capable of handling subparts, we're
probably not going to be able to add these sleeves to the regular section of
inventories. Maybe if we change the image and description we can do it, but right
now sellers will end up listing things in their store that buyers cannot identify.
Please have patience as we make some adjustments.
|
And yet, inventories are being changed, and the sleeve is being added as a regular
item and its component parts deleted:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogInvChangeItem.asp?itemType=S&itemNo=10220-1&viewDate=Y&viewStatus=1
|
Yes, there were a number of them done this way yesterday, but we'll probably
need to make an adjustment.
|
|
| Author: | Admin_Russell | | Posted: | Aug 20, 2019 12:37 | | Subject: | Re: Cardboard sleeves in inventories | | Viewed: | 67 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
|
BrickLink
ID CardAdmin_Russell
|
| Location: USA, California |
| Member Since |
Contact |
Type |
Status |
| May 9, 2017 |
|
Admin |
|
|
| BrickLink Administrator |
|
| In Inventories, hpoort writes:
| | In Inventories, Turez writes:
| | In Inventories, mwright5 writes:
| | Wow! Just seeing that cardboard cape boxes have been added to the catalog.
I usually would prefer to refrain from making a derogatory comment on something
so trivial, but I have to say, that is a new kind of stupid. Give me a break.
|
I would not say that it is stupid to have catalog entries for the cardboard sleeves.
It may be helpful to have a reference for them. But adding the whole cardboard
sleeves to set inventories instead of the included parts is something completely
different.
|
Understanding the wish for (1) having the sleeves in the catalog and thus the
need to include the in inventories somehow, and (2) leaving the functionality
of the inventories as is, brings me to a simple alternate solution:
Add the sleeves as ALTERNATE to the inventories only.
|
This would fall under what is currently described as the counterpart section.
| |
Similar to
- a part with the sticker applied is alternate (as opposed to the stickersheet
and the plain part)
- a combination of parts that is hard to separate is alternate (as opposed
to the parts that make up the combination)
- the parts that are removed from a sprue (as opposed to the entire sprue)
and thus finally:
- a part still packed within the original sleeve (as opposed to the part without
packaging)
How about this alternative?
Hans-Peter
|
|
|
| Author: | Admin_Russell | | Posted: | Aug 20, 2019 12:18 | | Subject: | Re: Cardboard sleeves in inventories | | Viewed: | 87 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
|
BrickLink
ID CardAdmin_Russell
|
| Location: USA, California |
| Member Since |
Contact |
Type |
Status |
| May 9, 2017 |
|
Admin |
|
|
| BrickLink Administrator |
|
| In Inventories, Turez writes:
Folks, if anything is going to improve in the catalog, we need to give some freedom
and grace to our admins so they can try things out. I can understand if people
get frustrated when they find something has changed and it no longer works for
them, but please understand that we have the long-term interests of the site
in mind, and also that we can adjust and/or reverse any decision that is made.
Regarding these sleeves, we have needed to add them to the catalog for quite
a while now, because of the need to search by the number printed on the sleeve.
Strictly speaking, this is not a PCC, but it's still a number people can
use for reference. Specifically, we want to give the ability to sellers to sell
the parts in the sleeves without having to open the sleeves. The only way they
can do this is to have a reference database showing the contents of every sleeve.
Because our partout system is not yet capable of handling subparts, we're
probably not going to be able to add these sleeves to the regular section of
inventories. Maybe if we change the image and description we can do it, but right
now sellers will end up listing things in their store that buyers cannot identify.
Please have patience as we make some adjustments.
|
|
|
|
|
| Author: | Admin_Russell | | Posted: | Jul 4, 2019 12:25 | | Subject: | Re: 10205 : Parts to be removed from Inventory | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
|
BrickLink
ID CardAdmin_Russell
|
| Location: USA, California |
| Member Since |
Contact |
Type |
Status |
| May 9, 2017 |
|
Admin |
|
|
| BrickLink Administrator |
|
| In Inventories, 62Bricks writes:
| | The foolish policy to which I refer is the one that uses the "official parts
count" as the primary guide for what goes in the regular section when there is
no part list.
|
Regular Items - Parts required to build the main model and any secondary models
plus any other parts on the official parts list. In the absence of an official
parts list, the official parts count, the instructions, and/or images on the
packaging are used to determine as closely as possible the contents of this section.
Where does it say anything about the official parts count being the primary guide?
It is listed first because it is the easiest and most useful thing to check.
There are cases where the instructions have the final say, e.g. in a situation
where the instructions call for a greater number of parts than the official parts
count.
| | That policy does not serve sellers who want to part out sets, because
there is no consistent way Lego has counted parts in the past, and part counts
are not included on all sets now.
|
LEGO part counts are exceptionally reliable. There are a few cases where things
don't line up, but for 99.9% of the cases they are spot on. We know that
some sets don't have them, but that is nothing new. Sets produced for the
European market in the 1970's never had them.
| | That policy is not spelled out anywhere in the help pages. It is listed among
the possible sources in the absence of a part list, but it is not explained that
it is considered more important than the instructions.
|
It is spelled out as much as it needs to be. Any further details about how part
lists were counted slightly differently over the years or limitations of their
usefulness are matters of discussion among collectors. Please read these as examples:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1027168
https://www.bricklink.com/aboutMe.asp?u=viejos&pageID=16500
We're not going to put that level of detail in the Help Pages. Our Inv Admins
have access to this kind of information to help them make informed decisions,
but it's too much for the general BrickLink public.
| | This case illustrates the foolishness of this policy. The criterion for including
these leftover parts in the regular section - and thereby including them in any
part-out and in requiring them to be present to sell the set as "complete" -
is a number printed on the package. If this set had been released just in Europe
with no part count on the box, those parts would be extras, could be excluded
from a part-out, and would not be required in a "complete" set.
|
Maybe, but probably not. We have other ways to determine what parts should be
considered regular, and one of them is related sets.
| | If you want to base the inventories on the consistent contents of the box, that
makes sense from a part-out viewpoint. But this policy does not guarantee that
will happen. It is determining what goes "inside" the box based on what's
printed on the outside of the box, and not what is actually included.
|
The parts count is just one tool out of many that we use. It is not used to remove
actual contents from a set, or to add things that were never there. BrickLink's
standard is a sealed set, and that's where we start from when building an
inventory.
|
|
| Author: | Admin_Russell | | Posted: | Jul 4, 2019 03:00 | | Subject: | Re: 10205 : Parts to be removed from Inventory | | Viewed: | 78 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
|
BrickLink
ID CardAdmin_Russell
|
| Location: USA, California |
| Member Since |
Contact |
Type |
Status |
| May 9, 2017 |
|
Admin |
|
|
| BrickLink Administrator |
|
| In Inventories, 62Bricks writes:
| | | | If there is nothing that can be done to stop this misguided inventory policy,
it would at least be useful to have it explained in the help pages. I hear a
lot of lip service being paid to consistency, but these policies are still opaque
and arcane to anyone trying to understand them from what is written, and as such
their application appears very inconsistent.
|
As this set demonstrates, the designation of "extra" items is essentially meaningless,
since the policy now is to document the contents of the box and not the parts
needed to build the models. The simplest thing to do to avoid confusion and the
appearance of inconsistency is to eliminate the extra parts designation entirely.
Of course that might mean apparent conflicts with what you are calling "official"
part counts, but you can't have it both ways. It appears that items are just
being moved from extra to regular or vice versa simply to make the BL inventory
count match the number that sometimes appears on some boxes in some parts of
the world.
|
| | That is a foolish policy because history has shown us that Lego has changed how
they count parts in the past. If they do it again in the future, we will be faced
with a dilemma.
The previous method of designating extra parts was unique to BL and would still
work no matter what Lego did. That method has been abandoned, and it was a shortsighted
mistake.
|
These policies are grounded in a thorough and correct understanding of LEGO history
in addition to the practical considerations of running a site that sells parts.
When you examine the change log of this inventory, you will see that as far as
extra parts goes, it has remained exactly the same as it was on the day it was
approved in July 2005. That was 14 years ago. Meaning that the extras policy
the admins are defending today is the same one used to create this inventory
all those years ago.
There was no “previous method”. There were some people who (after Dan passed
away) tried to change the way things were done, and for a short while it may
have seemed like there was some sort of new policy. But there was simply no easy
way to change everything the site had done up until that point to accommodate
a new way of defining extra pieces, so this idea of a new extras policy was confined
to a small subset of parts and an even smaller subset of sets that happened to
get inventoried at that time.
BrickLink has always preferred to document the contents of the box vs the parts
necessary to build the set. This is because BrickLink was from the a beginning
a site primarily designed to sell parts, and the inventory system was designed
primarily to part out sets. Sellers parting out sets don’t necessarily care whether
or not parts are used in the instructions. They want a list of parts that they
can upload efficiently to their store inventory and sell.
Initially there was no Extras section, and everything was placed in the regular
section. There is reams of evidence in the change logs to prove this. The Extras
section was designed to handle parts with variable presence so that sellers could
either exclude them categorically or treat them with special care during the
partout process. Parts that invariably came in a set were deemed regular parts.
Those that may or may not have been included were called extras.
Fast forward to several years ago when I was grappling with the task of more
firmly defining the rules for inventories (mainly so that conversations like
this wouldn’t have to take place). The site needed a standard to align itself
with, and it needed to be one that both sellers and collectors could live with.
A very small adjustment consisting of some rubber band holders and a few stacking
pins was all that was necessary to align the traditional partout-focused policy
with the historical practices of the LEGO Group.
So that’s where we are today, and it doesn’t seem shortsighted at all, at least
to me. I actually tried to envision what an instructions-based policy would look
like and where it would lead us. But we’ve got so many sets where there are no
instructions or the instructions only use a certain percentage of the pieces.
And when something is listed in a published parts list, it’s really not in the
site’s best interests to encourage sellers to leave those parts out of what is
considered a “complete” set. It’s just asking for problems.
|
|
|
|
|
| Author: | Admin_Russell | | Posted: | Jun 11, 2019 12:51 | | Subject: | Re: Part 2739b in sets from 2012-2014 | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
|
BrickLink
ID CardAdmin_Russell
|
| Location: USA, California |
| Member Since |
Contact |
Type |
Status |
| May 9, 2017 |
|
Admin |
|
|
| BrickLink Administrator |
|
| Hi Jonas,
I myself have wondered about this part in our BrickLink inventories for several
years. Confusion seems to have come from images that did not show the differences
clearly enough.
In Inventories, Turez writes:
| | Hello everybody,
before I (maybe) do some proper requests, I'd like to clarify the following
issue regarding part 2739a/2739b in black.
Set 8110 came with 2739b in August 2011. That is correct: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=5134871
In November 2011, 2739a was added as alternate. That is correct, too: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=5256458
According to the catalog, five sets from 2012-2014 still had 2739b. I think that's
wrong because...
- I tried to find images or videos showing 2739b, but didn't find a single
one.
- All those sets were inventoried by the same person and always with Source:
Parts List.
- The following sets from 2012 and 2013 have 2739a as regular and these sets
were inventoried with Source: Sealed Set Contents.
Images of new sets with 2739a:
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=5549146
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=5583833
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=5706003
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=5886402
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=6026821
Summary: I think 2739b never appeared in any set from 2012 and later, so I suggest
to delete it from the inventories of 9398, 9396, 9393, 42005 and 42021.
Regards,
Jonas
|
|
|
|
| Author: | Admin_Russell | | Posted: | May 26, 2019 13:45 | | Subject: | Re: 4070a | | Viewed: | 109 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
|
BrickLink
ID CardAdmin_Russell
|
| Location: USA, California |
| Member Since |
Contact |
Type |
Status |
| May 9, 2017 |
|
Admin |
|
|
| BrickLink Administrator |
|
| In Catalog, tonnic writes:
| | In Catalog, WhiteHorseMatt writes:
| | In Catalog, tonnic writes:
| | In Catalog, Brickitty writes:
| | In Catalog, tEoS writes:
| | Yes, BL has decided not to differentiate between these.
In Catalog, seymour3113 writes:
| | I have several of these bricks (4070a). They are being deleted from catalog.
Should I just list them as 4070?
|
|
Thankfully, since there are so many headlight bricks with varying levels of partial
holes. It was definitely a manufacturing defect.
|
You think the horizontal slot is a defect?
I believe, until Lego says otherwise, the slot is meant to be like this.
Out of all my 4070 at least 80% have a slot, no matter what year or color, no
matter what set it came from.
Too much for a defect.
It is a slot that is always the same form, sharply formed, very straight and
small.
I think it could be made for pressure relieve.
|
Yes, if you look from the inside, the hole is always moulded there. Sometimes
there is a thin skin over it. I think all my newer parts have the slot, with
older ones being hit and miss.
I believe the note on the part 'This part is occasionally found with a small
horizontal slot in the front near the base. This is believed to be an unintentional
feature.' is incorrect. Should be the other way round 'occasionally
found WITHOUT a small...'
|
Exactly my idea!
Maybe we should ask for a catalog change.
|
I've changed the catalog note for both entries. See if that sounds better
to you.
|
|
| Author: | Admin_Russell | | Posted: | May 20, 2019 12:51 | | Subject: | Re: Protest of 3830c01 marked for deletion | | Viewed: | 121 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
|
BrickLink
ID CardAdmin_Russell
|
| Location: USA, California |
| Member Since |
Contact |
Type |
Status |
| May 9, 2017 |
|
Admin |
|
|
| BrickLink Administrator |
|
| In Catalog, mnementh writes:
| | In Catalog, JusTiCe8 writes:
| | Especially when considering the reason why it has been marked:
"This item was marked for deletion because it sets a precedent for adding
dozens of unnecessary combinations of hinges as assemblies to the catalog."
|
And meanwhile, we now have 14 recently created entries for mixed color 3937/
3738 Hinges.
https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=3937c15#T=C
That decision goes directly AGAINST the catalog policy, so I deem those entries
to be stupid and unnecessary.
I believe keeping the 3830c01 single color combos is the right thing to do.
I dislike when admins forget that this is a COMMERCE website first and foremost
and does not exist to maintain a "pure" catalog.
3830c01 has been bought and sold THOUSANDS of times over the past 18 years and
it is clearly the preferred form for both buying and selling.
|
The decision to get rid of the brick hinge and add plate hinge had NOTHING to
do with any kind of purist notion. Rather, it was a decision based solely on
commercial concerns.
When a large portion of sellers list things as an assembly instead of the individual
parts, the listings are effectively split, meaning that for the part in question,
BrickLink's listing strength is diminished. What starts out as a well-meaning
idea based on someone's personal listing preferences then works its way through
the system as an ineffeciency, leading to more complicated wanted list assembly
and maintenance and a lot of missed hits from things like Easy Buy and traffic
that comes to us via Brickset and the Lego replacements parts website.
For that reason, we do not want assemblies in the catalog that have no good rationale
for their existence. The plate assemblies are very useful for sellers of used
parts because they don't have to pull the assemblies apart to list them.
The plate hinges break frequently when they are older.
The brick hinge, to my knowledge, does not break when disassembled. Neither is
it part of a larger class of items that can as a whole be treated as an assembly
- such as wheels and tires.
And lest people forget, this brick hinge assembly was completely removed from
inventories many years ago by Dan himself in what I believe to be was the first
step in decommissioning the entry altogether.
Regarding the idea that we could use the assembly *instead* of the individual
parts as the entry of choice on the site - this is kind of thinking that produced
this entry:
* | | 8c01 (Inv) Plate, Modified 2 x 2 with Wheel Holder Bottom with Red Wheel with Black Tire 14mm D. x 4mm Smooth Small Single (8 / 3464c01)
Parts: Aircraft |
It's just easier and simpler for everyone to use the assembly, and little
by little the assemblies are taking precedence over the individual parts in both
listings and sales.
But the reason we can't do that with the hinge brick is because Lego does
not issue the part as an assembly. They never have and likely never will. This
places a constraint on us, because we want to line up our catalog as much as
possible with the way bricks are treated by them. That way there is a smooth
pipeline through the supply chain. This is the same reason we started using multipacks:
|
|
|
| Author: | Admin_Russell | | Posted: | May 5, 2019 23:38 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 103-1 | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
|
|
BrickLink
ID CardAdmin_Russell
|
| Location: USA, California |
| Member Since |
Contact |
Type |
Status |
| May 9, 2017 |
|
Admin |
|
|
| BrickLink Administrator |
|
| In Inventories Requests, randyf writes:
| | In Inventories Requests, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Inventories Requests, SezaR writes:
| | Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Delete 1 Part 3058b Light Gray Plate, Modified 6 x 16 with Motor Cutout Wide
* Add 1 Part 3058b Light Gray Plate, Modified 6 x 16 with Motor Cutout Wide (match ID 6)
* Add 1 Part 3058b Black Plate, Modified 6 x 16 with Motor Cutout Wide (match ID 6)
Comments from Submitter:
See
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1139682
|
You should be able to use the change function now. It was fixed a few days ago.
|
I thought it would not be deployed to the live site until next week. Was it already
pushed to the live site, then?
|
Yes, an exception was made for this bug.
|
|
|
| Author: | Admin_Russell | | Posted: | Apr 15, 2019 13:41 | | Subject: | Re: Is the inv change request page broken? | | Viewed: | 19 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
|
BrickLink
ID CardAdmin_Russell
|
| Location: USA, California |
| Member Since |
Contact |
Type |
Status |
| May 9, 2017 |
|
Admin |
|
|
| BrickLink Administrator |
|
| In Inventories, Brixalotl writes:
| | I am trying to enter an alternate part change request and keep getting the error
of "item no required if item type is entered", which I know is incorrect since
the system already has the info when you enter the inv item number. I notice
the layout has been updated since the last time I used it, with the action column
being a drop down now and the item type column has been removed (part, gear,
etc).
I am curious if others are getting the same error, and what I can do to overcome
it.
Thanks,
Jim
|
Yes, there is an issue with the form and we have a bug fix in the works. You
will need to just add and delete for now whenever it involves a type change (Alternate,
Counterpart, etc.)
|
|
| Author: | Admin_Russell | | Posted: | Apr 9, 2019 18:15 | | Subject: | We have a new Inventories Administrator! | | Viewed: | 233 times | | Topic: | Inventories | | Status: | Open | |
|
|
BrickLink
ID CardAdmin_Russell
|
| Location: USA, California |
| Member Since |
Contact |
Type |
Status |
| May 9, 2017 |
|
Admin |
|
|
| BrickLink Administrator |
|
| Hello everyone,
I'm very pleased to announce that we have appointed a new Inventories Administrator,
to fill in the place that Marek left when he was promoted to Catalog Associate.
For this position we have selected member Paulvdb (Paul), whom many of you may
know as a catalog contributor, inventories contributor, and Forum participant.
He is also an established seller (since 2011, I believe) so many of you may know
him also through that channel.
Paul has distinguished himself especially by his work with older inventories,
sharing many sealed set contents data with the site for some of our precious
old vintage sets. We have found his contributions to be ultra reliable and think
he is going to do very well in this new role.
Congratulations are in order!
Russell
|
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
