Site Forum

As I am going through my PC which was last done a couple of years ago, I put the cards in the order they show up on the site (not in the order I think they should be listed) and sometimes I come across a card that is no longer in the proper order because SOMEONE DECIDED ON HIS OWN THAT THE SET OR INSERT SET NAME SHOULD BE CHANGED TO HIS THOUGHTS! In this instance it was the 1994 Fleer Ultra Award Winners. No matter what level you are, please stop doing this without either asking the community or by putting in an IR to have it reviewed by another level 8! I too am a level 8 but I don't make these type of changes without having someone else agree with me and make the change. Everytime a self-appointed god does this, our members collections get out of order.  Just because you think you know everything about the card hobby, you don't. Please use the IR system to have changes properly done; just because you are a Level 8, does not mean you can go rogue.

Thanks Jason for looking at the IR, agreeing with me, and changing the set name. I left my collection in the proper order because I figured someone sane would act on it.

The name was updated to reflect what was on the packaging. Since the word "Ultra" isn't on the card itself (unlike "Ultra Firemen"), it can be removed.

Just go ahead and call me out every time you have a problem.  It's obvious you have an issue with me and I'm getting tired of your b*tching.

First, I like both of you (Ed & Bruno), and respect both of you.

As an L8, IRs are not required to make edits to the database. When something is seen that is incorrect, it is perfectly within the permissions that have been granted to go ahead and make the change. IRs are really threre for the people that cannot make (or don't feel comfortable with making) the change themselves (and for when the only method is to use the tools in IRs, such as removing a card that doesn't exist). The change the name of a set, where a single word is being added because the packaging calls it that, is a perfect example of using that permission correctly.

That said, caution should be used in all cases of such database edits as to what the potential impact upon the membership at large may be.

Can someone just delete this post? I'm not sure if that is possible but there really isn't any reason for berating another member on the forums over this.

It's fine. It's just the latest comment from him complaining about how I've been cleaning up things around here and I doubt he would've put another L8 on blast like this. Am I perfect? Absolutely not, and I'm fully capable of listening to reasonable arguments about why something should be switched back if it was changed.

I never accused a single member; I raised the issue that changing things without asking anyone else is a problem, especially when something has been in place for 30+ years.  I have never singled out a member in a Thread but I do thank those who help make things correct when I raise an issue. But I do see some threads where others do single out members, I would say almost one a week including today.

As I said, I too am an L8 and will correct things in Notes and such but if I see something that may be questionable, I either raise an IR or start a thread about it to see what the membership thinks. Often, something has been discussed already and some of the long-time members can explain why it is the way it is.

As L8s, we've reached the highest level and Admin has trusted us to do the right thing. Some of us have additional permissions that aren't even on the Permissions page, which means even more trust from him. I've gone through so many sets over the past few months to update Release Notes because I saw a glaring issue on the site where we were missing insert odds, serial number/print run info, ways to distinguish one insert/parallel from another ... ways to make it easier for the site's visitors to identify their cards and cut down on images being in the wrong spots. One thing that has been apparent was many of the older checklists were pretty much copied from B*ckett, including "inserts" that should be standalones instead, inserts under the wrong set, inserts that were distributed among multiple sets but got bunched into one big checklist, "Update" sets that were included with the main release, and so on. When I see these issues, I tackle them directly, or I've done IRs to leave notes and come back to them myself or give others an opportunity to help out (and you can see the active IR list has three IRs about 2002 Upper Deck Rookie Update where the workload is being shared). With the Inserts/Parallels, I'm going through and confirming they're in the right spot (using multiple sources), they have Release Notes if possible and the card numbers are correct. I've also added more MEM info to Note2 to give people a better idea of what's on the card, like a swatch from a different team, or "Game Jersey" swatches that are actually pants or undershirts. I do a LOT of stuff in the background, and I don't feel like I need to post about every change I make in the forums, and I think most L8s feel the same. For example, I spent about 4-5 days updating 2002 Upper Deck and nobody noticed, which is perfectly fine with me, and I'm hoping it means we don't get any IRs about that set. I recently did over a thousand updates on 2013 Panini Absolute because people forgot to include rookie SPs and I needed to add distinguishing notes between BASE and VAR.

I love spending time helping out the site, and I'm also a sponsor of two player pages. If I was doing something harmful to the site, I would've heard about it immediately. I don't know what I need to do to earn your trust, but I'll keep doing what's needed to make this site the best.

Really appreciate the passion and all the work everyone puts into this site to make it the absolute best reference point!

A question if i may since we are on a related issue, 1992 Score  90's Impact player should it be left as is or add a fix where the first 45 were in series 1 and 46-90 series 2? And in general if things should be as either on card or "pluralization" is acceptable? as in this case on card says 1 thing and set name refers to many.

If the insert is split between two or more series of a set and the later releases are continuations of the first series, they can be in one checklist (and that is where we should be updating Release Notes to indicate #1-45 are Series One and #46-90 are Series Two).

In cases where the insert in the second series has a completely different numbering and/or design or they reuse the same numbering from the first series, that's where it's best to split them into two separate entries to avoid confusion.

For naming, we try to use what's on the card itself if it's unique, but many times we'll use plural for a certain general type of card, like "Game Jerseys" or "Refractors".

Before I gave up I always removed the plourilization from set titles. Beckett made that up.