|  | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | maxx3001  | | Posted: | Aug 25, 2018 03:53 | | Subject: | Re: The plight of part 44567 | | Viewed: | 71 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| | This part and its accompanying variant have spelled trouble for a number of years
now in the catalog, and finally a few folks decided to do something about it:
* | | 44567 Hinge Plate 1 x 2 Locking with 1 Finger on Side (Undetermined Type)
Parts: Hinge |
First we added the definitive non-grooved variant, which turned out to be the
most recent one.
And here is the really important line in this message:
the A and B versions of this part were just switched today
So if you've labeled bags containing this variant you will need to reverse
this numbering.
Renumbering is never taken lightly, but in this case we felt we had to do it
because of 2 other entries added with nearly the same situation - early grooved
version followed by a non-grooved version. Quite the opposite from what we know
to be true with standard tiles.
Thanks for your patience. Resetting the numbers to reflect the correct chronological
order will save a lot of misunderstanding in the future.
|
Thank you Russell for your effort to keep our site the best, it is apreciated
Maxx
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | BrickCompulsion | | Posted: | Aug 25, 2018 17:02 | | Subject: | Re: The plight of part 44567 | | Viewed: | 80 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| Can understand why the change
May I suggest that you send a message to everyone that has listed the variants
in case they miss or simply don’t read the forum
I know I would be frustrated if I got beg feedback or sent out the wrong parts
through no fault of my own and had to pay postage or refund to put the error
right
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | bagelboybugle | | Posted: | Aug 26, 2018 07:33 | | Subject: | Re: The plight of part 44567 | | Viewed: | 86 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, BrickCompulsion writes:
| | Can understand why the change
May I suggest that you send a message to everyone that has listed the variants
in case they miss or simply don’t read the forum
I know I would be frustrated if I got beg feedback or sent out the wrong parts
through no fault of my own and had to pay postage or refund to put the error
right
|
Totally agree, in this scenario I would switch all listings to undetermined,
email all affected sellers and then its the sellers choice whether to check their
varients or leave it listed as undermined
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | Admin_Russell | | Posted: | Aug 27, 2018 20:15 | | Subject: | Re: The plight of part 44567 | | Viewed: | 87 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
|
BrickLink
ID CardAdmin_Russell
|
Location:  USA, California |
| Member Since |
Contact |
Type |
Status |
| May 9, 2017 |
 |
Admin |
|
|
| BrickLink Administrator |
|
| In Catalog, bagelboybugle writes:
| | In Catalog, BrickCompulsion writes:
| | Can understand why the change
May I suggest that you send a message to everyone that has listed the variants
in case they miss or simply don’t read the forum
I know I would be frustrated if I got beg feedback or sent out the wrong parts
through no fault of my own and had to pay postage or refund to put the error
right
|
Totally agree, in this scenario I would switch all listings to undetermined,
email all affected sellers and then its the sellers choice whether to check their
varients or leave it listed as undermined
|
We can't switch everything to undetermined because many sellers have already
sorted their lots and this would undo all their work. Sorted parts will still
remain under the correct listings, so it's not a question of the listings
being changed, just a different label being used.
It would be good though to notify sellers, but before doing that, there are a
handful of other item numbers that need to be switched, and we could do it all
in one go. Please use this thread to let us know of any other item numbers that
would benefit from such a switch.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Hygrotus | | Posted: | Aug 28, 2018 05:03 | | Subject: | Re: The plight of part 44567 | | Viewed: | 65 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Catalog, bagelboybugle writes:
| | In Catalog, BrickCompulsion writes:
| | Can understand why the change
May I suggest that you send a message to everyone that has listed the variants
in case they miss or simply don’t read the forum
I know I would be frustrated if I got beg feedback or sent out the wrong parts
through no fault of my own and had to pay postage or refund to put the error
right
|
Totally agree, in this scenario I would switch all listings to undetermined,
email all affected sellers and then its the sellers choice whether to check their
varients or leave it listed as undermined
|
We can't switch everything to undetermined because many sellers have already
sorted their lots and this would undo all their work. Sorted parts will still
remain under the correct listings, so it's not a question of the listings
being changed, just a different label being used.
It would be good though to notify sellers, but before doing that, there are a
handful of other item numbers that need to be switched, and we could do it all
in one go. Please use this thread to let us know of any other item numbers that
would benefit from such a switch.
|
These could be
"b" variant is the newest one.
But here is nice comparasion additional photo which should be changed then so
it is more compilcated.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Aug 28, 2018 07:58 | | Subject: | Re: The plight of part 44567 | | Viewed: | 60 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| | […]
It would be good though to notify sellers, but before doing that, there are a
handful of other item numbers that need to be switched, and we could do it all
in one go. Please use this thread to let us know of any other item numbers that
would benefit from such a switch.
|
Not switches but:
and but no [P=3634a], and 3634b is the oldest.
and but no [P=3700a], and 3700b is the oldest (and no similarity
link between them).
Also
and but no [P=3855b].
And, “worse,” , no [P=7] nor [P=7a].
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Aug 30, 2018 08:57 | | Subject: | Re: The plight of part 44567 | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| | Please use this thread to let us know of any other item numbers that would benefit from
such a switch.
|
and
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
and
In both cases, the 'a' version is the newer version.
Randy
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Leftoverbricks | | Posted: | Aug 31, 2018 12:33 | | Subject: | Re: The plight of part 44567 | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| ...snip ...
| |
It would be good though to notify sellers, but before doing that, there are a
handful of other item numbers that need to be switched, and we could do it all
in one go. Please use this thread to let us know of any other item numbers that
would benefit from such a switch.
|
I have never received an email from BrickLink to notify me about important changes
to part numbers.
Today I received an email from the other site about such a change:
"The mold variant description of an item that you currently have listed in
your store has been changed in the [...] catalog. As your store differentiates
mold variations, we are sending you this e-mail to let you know of the change.
Please check your inventory to see if it needs to be adjusted to list the items
against the other variation."
So I would like to bring this to the attention of BL admins: please make it happen
that when important changes in the catalogue are made a message will be sent
to all sellers that have that part in their inventory.
Thanks!
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | Macaronis | | Posted: | Aug 26, 2018 11:06 | | Subject: | (Cancelled) | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| | (Cancelled) |
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Aug 26, 2018 07:55 | | Subject: | Re: The plight of part 44567 | | Viewed: | 78 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| | This part and its accompanying variant have spelled trouble for a number of years
now in the catalog, and finally a few folks decided to do something about it:
* | | 44567 Hinge Plate 1 x 2 Locking with 1 Finger on Side (Undetermined Type)
Parts: Hinge |
First we added the definitive non-grooved variant, which turned out to be the
most recent one.
And here is the really important line in this message:
the A and B versions of this part were just switched today
So if you've labeled bags containing this variant you will need to reverse
this numbering.
|
I suspect that switching the numbers could cause problems for a lot of sellers.
I am quite surprised to see this happening.
| | Renumbering is never taken lightly, but in this case we felt we had to do it
because of 2 other entries added with nearly the same situation - early grooved
version followed by a non-grooved version. Quite the opposite from what we know
to be true with standard tiles.
Thanks for your patience. Resetting the numbers to reflect the correct chronological
order will save a lot of misunderstanding in the future.
|
I think we need a better messaging system to inform the sellers who were affected
by the change. I think that bagelboybugle described the only possible route for
a catalog renumbering like this one.
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | mockingbird | | Posted: | Aug 28, 2018 08:07 | | Subject: | Re: The plight of part 44567 | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| | This part and its accompanying variant have spelled trouble for a number of years
now in the catalog, and finally a few folks decided to do something about it:
* | | 44567 Hinge Plate 1 x 2 Locking with 1 Finger on Side (Undetermined Type)
Parts: Hinge |
First we added the definitive non-grooved variant, which turned out to be the
most recent one.
And here is the really important line in this message:
the A and B versions of this part were just switched today
So if you've labeled bags containing this variant you will need to reverse
this numbering.
Renumbering is never taken lightly, but in this case we felt we had to do it
because of 2 other entries added with nearly the same situation - early grooved
version followed by a non-grooved version. Quite the opposite from what we know
to be true with standard tiles.
Thanks for your patience. Resetting the numbers to reflect the correct chronological
order will save a lot of misunderstanding in the future.
|
I think it is not wise to put some meaning to an itemID. So the change of the
a and b version should not have happened, in my opinion. Even if in other parts
the itemIDs were assigned chronologically.
Also I think the catalog should keep the 'undetermined' versions of parts.
Because: -not all set inventories have the specified mold varients
-not all sellers want to differentiate between small mold varients, and they
should be able to (or must) list as undetermined.
-not all buyers care about the mold varient, they should be able to buy 'undetermined'.
(Ideally if you choose undetermined all versions would show up)
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | bricksinbins | | Posted: | Aug 28, 2018 08:48 | | Subject: | Re: The plight of part 44567 | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, mockingbird writes:
| | I think it is not wise to put some meaning to an itemID. So the change of the
a and b version should not have happened, in my opinion. Even if in other parts
the itemIDs were assigned chronologically.
Also I think the catalog should keep the 'undetermined' versions of parts.
Because: -not all set inventories have the specified mold varients
-not all sellers want to differentiate between small mold varients, and they
should be able to (or must) list as undetermined.
-not all buyers care about the mold varient, they should be able to buy 'undetermined'.
(Ideally if you choose undetermined all versions would show up)
|
This ^^
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | Admin_Russell | | Posted: | Aug 28, 2018 12:58 | | Subject: | Re: The plight of part 44567 | | Viewed: | 58 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
|
BrickLink
ID CardAdmin_Russell
|
| Location: USA, California |
| Member Since |
Contact |
Type |
Status |
| May 9, 2017 |
|
Admin |
|
|
| BrickLink Administrator |
|
| In Catalog, mockingbird writes:
| | In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| | This part and its accompanying variant have spelled trouble for a number of years
now in the catalog, and finally a few folks decided to do something about it:
* | | 44567 Hinge Plate 1 x 2 Locking with 1 Finger on Side (Undetermined Type)
Parts: Hinge |
First we added the definitive non-grooved variant, which turned out to be the
most recent one.
And here is the really important line in this message:
the A and B versions of this part were just switched today
So if you've labeled bags containing this variant you will need to reverse
this numbering.
Renumbering is never taken lightly, but in this case we felt we had to do it
because of 2 other entries added with nearly the same situation - early grooved
version followed by a non-grooved version. Quite the opposite from what we know
to be true with standard tiles.
Thanks for your patience. Resetting the numbers to reflect the correct chronological
order will save a lot of misunderstanding in the future.
|
I think it is not wise to put some meaning to an itemID. So the change of the
a and b version should not have happened, in my opinion. Even if in other parts
the itemIDs were assigned chronologically.
|
BrickLink ID numbers are "smart" numbers - they aren't a series of digits
randomly assigned when an entry is formed. We have those types of numbers internally,
btw, and maybe one of the things we could or should do is to make those numbers
available on the main catalog page for every entry.
The -a, -b, -c pattern is so prevalent in the catalog that even if we put a large
disclaimer on the Help pages stating that a chronological order should not be
inferred, people would still assume so. 99 percent of -a, -b, -c variants are
chronological, and it actually is a great help in giving people an instant understanding
of the relationship between variants, especially when the auto-generated dates
on the catalog page can be so misleading at times.
| | Also I think the catalog should keep the 'undetermined' versions of parts.
Because: -not all set inventories have the specified mold varients
-not all sellers want to differentiate between small mold varients, and they
should be able to (or must) list as undetermined.
-not all buyers care about the mold varient, they should be able to buy 'undetermined'.
(Ideally if you choose undetermined all versions would show up)
|
Ideally we decide as a site what we are going to distinguish and not distinguish
and every seller falls in line and helps us uphold a site-wide standard that
buyers can rely on.
The problem is that there *are* variants in the catalog that are not worth the
hassle, and over the years this has resulted in many sellers justifiably rejecting
these distinctions.
I think there is room for a middle ground where for a certain group of variants
sellers can opt to flag their listings for one variant or another, and the listings
would encompass both sellers who distinguish and others who don't.
But for the majority of parts, we need a site-wide standard. To achieve this
we need a joint effort from sellers and the catalog. On the catalog side, we
need to decommission some entries that are needlessly precise. The classic example
of that (and it has already been done) is the headlight brick with slot:
[p=4070a]
Sellers, on the other hand, need to come to the table ready to sort some variants
they may not believe in personally. A great example for that would be the standard
1 x 2 tile:
No seller should be listing the old non-grooved style mixed in with the new grooved
style. They look terrible together and the old version can be very hard to remove.
in this case, we as a site need to make a clear distinction between the old and
the new.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Aug 28, 2018 13:12 | | Subject: | Re: The plight of part 44567 | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| | […]
BrickLink ID numbers are "smart" numbers - they aren't a series of digits
randomly assigned when an entry is formed. We have those types of numbers internally,
btw, and maybe one of the things we could or should do is to make those numbers
available on the main catalog page for every entry.
|
Please don’t.
People, especially newbies, have already enough trouble with BL ID, which are
the same but different from TLG’s DesignID, and Part Color Codes/PCC which are
TLG’s Element ID, and Inventory IDs (used when filing an Inventory Change Request).
I don’t see the need to add the DB ID to the mix.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Aug 28, 2018 13:18 | | Subject: | Re: The plight of part 44567 | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Catalog, mockingbird writes:
| | In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| | This part and its accompanying variant have spelled trouble for a number of years
now in the catalog, and finally a few folks decided to do something about it:
* | | 44567 Hinge Plate 1 x 2 Locking with 1 Finger on Side (Undetermined Type)
Parts: Hinge |
First we added the definitive non-grooved variant, which turned out to be the
most recent one.
And here is the really important line in this message:
the A and B versions of this part were just switched today
So if you've labeled bags containing this variant you will need to reverse
this numbering.
Renumbering is never taken lightly, but in this case we felt we had to do it
because of 2 other entries added with nearly the same situation - early grooved
version followed by a non-grooved version. Quite the opposite from what we know
to be true with standard tiles.
Thanks for your patience. Resetting the numbers to reflect the correct chronological
order will save a lot of misunderstanding in the future.
|
I think it is not wise to put some meaning to an itemID. So the change of the
a and b version should not have happened, in my opinion. Even if in other parts
the itemIDs were assigned chronologically.
|
BrickLink ID numbers are "smart" numbers - they aren't a series of digits
randomly assigned when an entry is formed. We have those types of numbers internally,
btw, and maybe one of the things we could or should do is to make those numbers
available on the main catalog page for every entry.
The -a, -b, -c pattern is so prevalent in the catalog that even if we put a large
disclaimer on the Help pages stating that a chronological order should not be
inferred, people would still assume so. 99 percent of -a, -b, -c variants are
chronological, and it actually is a great help in giving people an instant understanding
of the relationship between variants, especially when the auto-generated dates
on the catalog page can be so misleading at times.
|
If a change is needed, maybe it would be better to skip the previously used letters
(-a, -b) and simply use the next available (-c, -d).
Then
- the old part numbers will not cause confusion
- the new part numbers will be in alphabetical order
It might look a bit odd at first sight, but I think that it would be a good compromise.
| | | | Also I think the catalog should keep the 'undetermined' versions of parts.
Because: -not all set inventories have the specified mold varients
-not all sellers want to differentiate between small mold varients, and they
should be able to (or must) list as undetermined.
-not all buyers care about the mold varient, they should be able to buy 'undetermined'.
(Ideally if you choose undetermined all versions would show up)
|
Ideally we decide as a site what we are going to distinguish and not distinguish
and every seller falls in line and helps us uphold a site-wide standard that
buyers can rely on.
The problem is that there *are* variants in the catalog that are not worth the
hassle, and over the years this has resulted in many sellers justifiably rejecting
these distinctions.
I think there is room for a middle ground where for a certain group of variants
sellers can opt to flag their listings for one variant or another, and the listings
would encompass both sellers who distinguish and others who don't.
But for the majority of parts, we need a site-wide standard. To achieve this
we need a joint effort from sellers and the catalog. On the catalog side, we
need to decommission some entries that are needlessly precise. The classic example
of that (and it has already been done) is the headlight brick with slot:
[p=4070a]
Sellers, on the other hand, need to come to the table ready to sort some variants
they may not believe in personally. A great example for that would be the standard
1 x 2 tile:
No seller should be listing the old non-grooved style mixed in with the new grooved
style. They look terrible together and the old version can be very hard to remove.
in this case, we as a site need to make a clear distinction between the old and
the new.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Netherlands, Utrecht
United Kingdom, England
Poland, w. Wielkopolskie
France, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
Finland, Pohjanmaa
