Discussion Forums - Questions about PaperBackSwap Questions about PaperBackSwap

Topic: Date for New Wish List?

Club rule - Please, if you cannot be courteous and respectful, do not post in this forum.
Page:   Unlock Forum posting with Annual Membership.
Subject: Date for New Wish List?
Date Posted: 7/26/2009 12:33 PM ET
Member Since: 2/25/2008
Posts: 66
Back To Top

Hi,

I've been a member, and have enjoyed PBS very much, since early 2008.  I have heard several times about the "new" Wish List that is coming, which will merge Wish List and Reminder List.  Does anyone have a projected date for when this will happen?   I'm looking forward to it!

Thanks!

Date Posted: 7/26/2009 12:41 PM ET
Member Since: 6/26/2006
Posts: 6,633
Back To Top

Nope.  It's been an issue for so long that I don't think it will happen (at least not the way it was initially proposed).  It's been a topic of discussion since 2006 or 2007.



Last Edited on: 7/26/09 12:42 PM ET - Total times edited: 1
Date Posted: 7/26/2009 12:44 PM ET
Member Since: 2/25/2008
Posts: 66
Back To Top

Thanks!   I check the forums every couple of months in hope that there will be words of the new, improved wish list.  It's the only thing I would change about PBS!

Date Posted: 7/26/2009 1:35 PM ET
Member Since: 8/23/2007
Posts: 26,510
Back To Top

Twice now I've seen people posting asking why they saw someone with a WL over 200.  And not like 201 either but well over 200. So I think they might be doing a trial run with it with some people and maybe we'll see it soon.

Date Posted: 7/26/2009 1:39 PM ET
Member Since: 2/25/2008
Posts: 66
Back To Top

That would be great.  I would be glad to beta test a bigger Wish List, LOL.  :-)

Date Posted: 7/26/2009 5:10 PM ET
Member Since: 4/25/2007
Posts: 11,516
Back To Top

It's been "coming soon" since I joined 2+ years ago.

Date Posted: 7/26/2009 5:26 PM ET
Member Since: 5/14/2009
Posts: 6,852
Back To Top

They actually have it in the help docs - coming soon the new wish list.

 

Date Posted: 7/26/2009 7:40 PM ET
Member Since: 1/15/2007
Posts: 1,410
Back To Top

Never,  I hope.

Date Posted: 7/26/2009 7:48 PM ET
Member Since: 9/21/2006
Posts: 2,798
Back To Top

i agree NEWRUTH.

hopefully never!

Date Posted: 7/26/2009 8:04 PM ET
Member Since: 6/26/2006
Posts: 6,633
Back To Top

jubead, it's been in the help docs for at least a year and was mentioned in a newsletter around the same time.  It still has yet to happen.

Date Posted: 7/26/2009 8:29 PM ET
Member Since: 8/13/2008
Posts: 13,147
Back To Top

I agree Wendy and NewRuth!

Date Posted: 7/26/2009 8:37 PM ET
Member Since: 2/25/2008
Posts: 66
Back To Top

Just curious why you all don't want a new merged Wish List, like the ones at SwapACD and SwapADVD?   I love being able to put more than 200 items on a list, and also like prioritizing the wishes at those sites.   I get far more matches on my wish lists at the other two sites.  (Again, the one and only suggestion I have about Paperbackswap).

Date Posted: 7/26/2009 8:52 PM ET
Member Since: 1/8/2009
Posts: 2,016
Back To Top

My understanding is that every once in a while a heated discussion about the new WL pops up. The following is a link to the reasons why.

My own interpretation of the thread is that some people think it's too hard to understand, it's unfair because it lets people get bypassed on some books (albeit very slowly), and some people like separate WL and RLs.

http://www.paperbackswap.com/forum/topic.php?t=162059

Date Posted: 7/26/2009 9:03 PM ET
Member Since: 2/25/2008
Posts: 66
Back To Top

Thanks, Sophia, I'll read the link.

Date Posted: 7/26/2009 9:41 PM ET
Member Since: 2/26/2009
Posts: 36,016
Back To Top

I like it the way it is because I like having the separate RL.

Date Posted: 7/26/2009 10:03 PM ET
Member Since: 11/14/2006
Posts: 2,552
Back To Top

I



Last Edited on: 11/18/15 10:16 AM ET - Total times edited: 2
Date Posted: 7/26/2009 11:42 PM ET
Member Since: 8/16/2007
Posts: 15,194
Back To Top

Anda nyway, seriously, do you REALLY need more than 200 books on a WL at one time?

With the ability to find ISBNs well in advance of pub dates it is becoming more and more of a need to have longer WLs IMO. The paranormal WL lines are 100s of people long months and months before the release date ever gets here. Many of those lines do not move super fast either so you have to get in the lines early. My WL is a large portion of books that will probably never get here and a large portion of books not yet released, I don't think it produces 40 books a month and they are all for me.

I hope it does get here soon because a lot of the features coming with it will be nice. Although the WL max is keeping people out of the WL lines that might have gotten there in front of me if they could have more ;-)

Date Posted: 7/27/2009 12:55 AM ET
Member Since: 7/8/2008
Posts: 70
Back To Top

I personally would love to have more than 200 allowed on my WL. The lines are so long for most of the books that I won't get them for years! My WL is currently over 200, but that is because I have had a run of bad luck lately with my requests timing out and PBS adding them to my WL (already at 200) for me because they timed out. This means that when I do receive a WL book - I can't just add one from my RL - I will still have over 200. I also think it would be GREAT if my WL could produce 40 of the books in a month! Woo Hoo I would be in heaven, but truth be told I haven't received a WL book in quite some time.

Date Posted: 7/27/2009 2:17 AM ET
Member Since: 1/12/2009
Posts: 387
Back To Top

If the reminder list is combined with the wishlist, how will I check how many books are in they system? I use my RL list to see how many copies there are of books I have posted.    I have yet to top off my wishlist with 200 books, but it does seem like the more I add the less frequently I get any wishes fulfilled.

In the CMT forum, someone mentioned how she forgot to rank a wish for the Coraline DVD and dropped from 4th to 144th, so I am not sure if I want that feature.

Date Posted: 7/27/2009 2:22 AM ET
Member Since: 1/12/2009
Posts: 262
Back To Top

No, no, no!  I do NOT want to prioritize any list!  If it's on my WL, that is b/c is isn't available in the system.  And I'd be interested in reading it when I get the chance.  But when it's in my Reminder List, then it is just that:  to remind me that I think that would be a good book to read some day.  Then when I look at it, I check to see how many copies are in the system.  If it is only 1 - 5, then I might request it before they are all gone.  Other than that, it is a holding place for those books I've become interested in, but do not necessarily want to have right now.  This allows me to request them as I have enough credits.  And my priorities change occasionally, depending on what I've been reading lately.  Maybe I have read enough historical fiction and want to go to something else for awhile.  Does any of this make sense???  It's late....    :)   D.

Date Posted: 7/27/2009 2:24 AM ET
Member Since: 1/20/2009
Posts: 2,680
Back To Top

I'm strongly against the ranking system, but strongly in favor of the unlimited wishlist, as well as the talked about ability to put just the wishlist on hold, so that if you don't have credits you can still preserve your place in the WL lines (well, assuming you don't lose position from a lesser number of 'points').

Books aren't the same as DVDs and CDs to me. I don't think we should have to rank how much we want them. The FIFO WL works best for the books. After all, what order do you rank them in? The highly wished for ones first, or the rarely posted ones you don't want to lose a chance at? Also, how do you choose preference for certain books over others you want just as much? If you have fifty books with a really long WL line, it's safe to say that the only one you may see anytime soon is the one you put in first place. That's complete bull. Because then you likely fall back in position on any ranked lower than number one. At that rate, what is a year long wait in the FIFO system could turn into several years before you get them all. It's stupid to let people cut in line, not to mention completely unfair to everyone who has been waiting longer.

Date Posted: 7/27/2009 2:32 AM ET
Member Since: 12/9/2007
Posts: 9,601
Back To Top

The New WL vs. The Current WL debate happens regularly.  Most of those who don't want the new one (includes me) don't want to have to rate books over and over and have to strategize or keep close eyes on their WL's.  They want to keep the RL in it's present incarnation and not necessarily because that's how they see how many copies are in the system (that might be done on the book's listing page at some point).

The basic argument for me is to Keep It Simple (i.e., as it currently exists) because it works.  The length of a WL could be changed without implementing a new system (like the proposed new WL).   It runs simply here, and it's fairly reliable as well as being as fair a system as I can imagine.  Many members don't have time to manage a ratings WL, and it would go to automatic management by the computer in PBS's system.  Also not something I favor.  If it means keeping a 200 book limit over the currently proposed new WL, I'll stick with the 200 limit.

Ruth

Date Posted: 7/27/2009 4:27 AM ET
Member Since: 4/25/2009
Posts: 337
Back To Top

I do not want to have to start prioritizing my WL.  FIFO is working fine: its simple, and fair.  I don't have the time to go through the WL everytime I add something and have to rank them again:  I put books on my WL because they look promising and I'll read them when I get them.  It would be good to have more than 200 book limit but I can live with only 200 if that's the tradeoff

Date Posted: 7/27/2009 5:35 AM ET
Member Since: 12/28/2006
Posts: 14,177
Back To Top

Hopefully never.  Like others, I'm not interested in the time drain of prioritizing and strategy...I'm happy waiting my turn.  If FIFO is replaced by a system where members can 'bypass' or 'line-jump' I fear loosing the friendly atmosphere here at PBS.  For example, there are currently several threads where members share ISBN's of future releases, so fellow members may add them to our wishlist.  If it becomes adventageous to add days, weeks, or months between yourself and other members so as to limit 'line'jumping' in front of you...well, I suspect we'll see an end to the willingness to share new release information. 

With increased competition comes frustration and hurt feelings...isn't that (at least in part) why PBS doesn't allow auctions or bids?

Although 200 would seem to be a large number of wishlisted books, I will agree that increased availability of pre-release information has taken it's toll on my wishlist also.  Larger wishlists are a double edged sword, and sure to increase wait time :-( 



Last Edited on: 7/27/09 5:40 AM ET - Total times edited: 2
Date Posted: 7/27/2009 9:11 AM ET
Member Since: 1/15/2007
Posts: 1,410
Back To Top

Once people figure out that there is no downside to wishing for a book  that they maybe, sorta, might want to have someday, the wishlist lines will get very, very long.   You may be only earning a tiny, tiny fraction of a point each day, but .00000000000000000001 is more than zero.  That tiny, tiny fraction of a point could be the difference between getting that book that's posted once every 2 years or not. 

If I'm not ready for the book or am the only wisher, I can put it on hold, and it's still accumulating points, right?

I know that on the first day the new WL is in place, I'm LOADING my WL! 

One of the reasons for having a private WL is that decreases the possibility of people wishing behind you.

 



Last Edited on: 7/27/09 9:17 AM ET - Total times edited: 3
Page: