Discussion Forums - Questions about PaperBackSwap Questions about PaperBackSwap

Topic: Wish List Shenanigans

Club rule - Please, if you cannot be courteous and respectful, do not post in this forum.
  Unlock Forum posting with Annual Membership.
Subject: Wish List Shenanigans
Date Posted: 5/9/2009 9:36 AM ET
Member Since: 10/19/2006
Posts: 136
Back To Top

This one is a head-scratcher:

A couple of times over the last two weeks I searched  Amazon for books that I may want to wishlist here. I found about a dozen books that were either OOP or new books that won't be released until the end of the year. None of these books were in the PBS system so I entered the ISBNs and brought them over. I wishlisted all of them at which point I was wisher #1 of 1 for all twelve. I just checked my wishlist and found that I am now #2 of 2 for about six of them. How could this be?

I don't have any RCs so how could someone jump over me to #1? Even if they previously had their wishlist on hold they wouldn't jump to #1 when  they released the hold because the books were not in the system until I brought them there. Therefore, no one could have put them on their wishlist before I did, yet I am still #2. This is especially aggravating because some of those OOP books will probably only be posted once, if at all.

Date Posted: 5/9/2009 9:54 AM ET
Member Since: 8/23/2007
Posts: 26,510
Back To Top

Sometimes when you put a book on WL hold it temporarily shows you as #1.  Also some could have been on vacation hold. 

Date Posted: 5/9/2009 9:58 AM ET
Member Since: 8/10/2005
Posts: 4,599
Back To Top

If there are a bunch of them that you went back to #2 on, probably someone with a similar taste in books to you had their account on vacation hold. If they had previously been at #1 before you got to #1, when their account was unheld, they would be reinstated at #1 in line then.

Other things that can bump you back further: if someone had gotten that book and it went lost in the mail, they go back at #1 in line. Or if they marked the book RWAP for any reason, they'd be back at #1.

Cheryl

Cathy A. (Cathy) - ,
Date Posted: 5/9/2009 10:28 AM ET
Member Since: 12/27/2005
Posts: 4,124
Back To Top

How do you know they weren't in the database until you "brought them over here"? Most likely some of the books were in the DB and some were not. Some had wishers already and some did not. If you're really concerned about it, you can use the Contact Us link at the bottom of the screen to ask about a specific book or two.

Date Posted: 5/9/2009 12:27 PM ET
Member Since: 10/19/2006
Posts: 136
Back To Top


How do you know they weren't in the database until you "brought them over here"? 

Because I searched for them first (Title, Author...). Nothing came up so I went back to the Amazon site and wrote down the ISBN numbers.

When I entered the ISBNs on the PBS site the book descriptions came up and said the number of wishers was 0. When I put them on my wish list I became #1.

And no, I'm not that overly concerned about it, I don't feel its necessary to contact PBS. I was merely making an observation of what I felt was a strange situation.

Date Posted: 5/9/2009 3:11 PM ET
Member Since: 7/31/2007
Posts: 2,690
Back To Top

Anne there have been some folks that have had difficulties with the search engine on PBS, this may be the cause of you not finding them in the database so, they could have actually been here and someone had them on their WL but, their account was on hold....

Date Posted: 5/9/2009 4:11 PM ET
Member Since: 9/2/2006
Posts: 4,110
Back To Top

I have to second Christy on that, more than once I've tried to search for a new book and had trouble finding book I knew had to be in the system.  Also if it says any number of wishers including 0 that means someone could be ahead of you.  They will show 0 wishers if there are people with their WL on hold, be it 1 or 10, or if the person ahead of you is waiting for it to be mailed/received.  The zero is sort of a place holder.  I figured this out when I indeed did add a book that no one else was waiting for, when the search came up showing no zero and I was (and still am more than a yr later) #1, but when I added a book that said there were 0 wishers, in at least one case I ended up being bumped back to #3 because either those ahead of me had RCs or had items lost in transit.

Date Posted: 5/9/2009 11:07 PM ET
Member Since: 8/9/2007
Posts: 4,058
Back To Top

This struck me as a puzzler too when I first saw it, but I'm with Tammy & Christy; I think it's likely the books you moved back to the #2 spot on were probably in the database, and the #1 person came back from vacation hold, or maybe had a WL request time out & roll over or go lost in one or two cases.  A lot of people do regular Amazon searches for upcoming releases & put them on WL before the wishers start to pile up.  Somebody who was wishing for a lot of the same titles could have put them on their WL and then went on vacation, and when they came back, you got bumped to #2.  It seems like an obscure scenario, but it's possible.  PBS says they don't bump people backward on the WL without good reason & it happens a time or two to everyone.  One time that it happened to me under what I thought were weird circumstances, I messaged them & they got right back to me with an explanation.  I don't think it's that big a thing to message and ask what happened, whether it's a big concern or not.  It never hurts to know these things, and if nothing else, you'll be more knowledgeable about how WL bumping happens, & you can help the next person when they post here and ask what the heck happened:P

Date Posted: 5/9/2009 11:14 PM ET
Member Since: 12/20/2008
Posts: 1,417
Back To Top

What's "OOP"?

Date Posted: 5/9/2009 11:29 PM ET
Member Since: 8/23/2007
Posts: 26,510
Back To Top

Out Of Print

Date Posted: 5/9/2009 11:32 PM ET
Member Since: 4/7/2007
Posts: 663
Back To Top

out of print

 

Date Posted: 5/9/2009 11:40 PM ET
Member Since: 12/20/2008
Posts: 1,417
Back To Top

tyvm

(thank you very much :)

Date Posted: 5/9/2009 11:52 PM ET
Member Since: 1/28/2007
Posts: 765
Back To Top

I thought she just spelled it backwards ;-}