UnitedCardists.com - The forum for Cardistry, Magic, Custom Decks and All Things Playing Cards.

4.of.Clubs wrote:Still a bit unsure how the search is working...? Was looking for the old black tiger decks but "tiger" didn't return the ones I was looking for. Searching "black tiger" did but a bunch of random decks were listed first, had to scroll down a lot to find them. Any idea peeps?

I just tried it the way you did, same results.
All old versions of black tiger decks are registered as "Black Deck Tigers"
If you search for Tigers you get the result you want

Seems that the search engine is only looking for the exact term and not for words that include this term.

Azid wrote:

4.of.Clubs wrote:Still a bit unsure how the search is working...? Was looking for the old black tiger decks but "tiger" didn't return the ones I was looking for. Searching "black tiger" did but a bunch of random decks were listed first, had to scroll down a lot to find them. Any idea peeps?

I just tried it the way you did, same results.
All old versions of black tiger decks are registered as "Black Deck Tigers"
If you search for Tigers you get the result you want

Seems that the search engine is only looking for the exact term and not for words that include this term.

Good catch! Thanks! I'll search more carefully going forward. Interesting thing is the new legacy black tiger doesn't have the "s".

So here is an example of a deck that was just added - not sure if the person adding has contributor access or not, but if they do I have to question it.

http://www.portfolio52.com/deck/4550/view" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Seriously there needs to be better quality pictures than this.

flyers3003 wrote:So here is an example of a deck that was just added - not sure if the person adding has contributor access or not, but if they do I have to question it.

http://www.portfolio52.com/deck/4550/view" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Seriously there needs to be better quality pictures than this.

Yeah, another person taking photos with cell phone instead of with a scanner. I'm not going to start enforcing restrictions for this type of 'violation' since it's lower quality and doesn't harm, unless Alex wants me to, but surprisingly it wasn't the person I was expecting. This person only submitted 4 decks (yes as a contributor), 2 of them had good images and this and another were very poor. I found better images on the internet and replaced. Will leave a note and send contact for awareness as well.

ecNate wrote:

flyers3003 wrote:So here is an example of a deck that was just added - not sure if the person adding has contributor access or not, but if they do I have to question it.

http://www.portfolio52.com/deck/4550/view" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;...

Seriously there needs to be better quality pictures than this.

Yeah, another person taking photos with cell phone instead of with a scanner. I'm not going to start enforcing restrictions for this type of 'violation' since it's lower quality and doesn't harm, unless Alex wants me to, but surprisingly it wasn't the person I was expecting. This person only submitted 4 decks (yes as a contributor), 2 of them had good images and this and another were very poor. I found better images on the internet and replaced. Will leave a note and send contact for awareness as well.

sorry for low quality will notice that for later. also i just want to ask how to access the wishlist and tradelist of other member

crazyfandecks wrote:
sorry for low quality will notice that for later. also i just want to ask how to access the wishlist and tradelist of other member

Thanks for understanding and improving. As mentioned, the problem with poor entries is not all users can edit and improve bad entries, but all could originally submit. The golden rule is if you can't provide quality submissions, wait for somebody who can. FAQs and guidelines have lots more on this.

As for the tradelist question, that's been removed by choice per Alex as listed earlier in this thread:

Azid wrote: 5.Trade Function is missing.
As well if you are on the "Full Page Info" you can't click on "Wishlist" or "Tradelists" to see who wants or who trades this deck.

IAmTheChin wrote:
5) That one is a real one. We used to do that but now that the site is starting to scale there was the issue of privacy that came up that I never even thought of before. This is why we don't have user names discoverable in the search bar either. You can only view with direct links right now. I'll consider opening this one back up though. It was definitely a fun one.

-Alex

Few more with low quality pictures...

http://www.portfolio52.com/deck/4510/view" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.portfolio52.com/deck/4509/view" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.portfolio52.com/deck/4507/view" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.portfolio52.com/deck/4508/view" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

4.of.Clubs wrote:Still a bit unsure how the search is working...? Was looking for the old black tiger decks but "tiger" didn't return the ones I was looking for. Searching "black tiger" did but a bunch of random decks were listed first, had to scroll down a lot to find them. Any idea peeps?

Azid is right about exact terms. We had issues with more flexible search terms. Everything is locked into exactly the title and the fields. Too many people were listing Bicycle in their descriptions and it wasn't filtering properly. I've tried hierarchial search with less than ideal results unfortunately. The search is made for correct searches but hopefully in the future we can expand for "smarter" searches that include misspellings etc.

ecNate wrote: Yeah, another person taking photos with cell phone instead of with a scanner. I'm not going to start enforcing restrictions for this type of 'violation' since it's lower quality and doesn't harm, unless Alex wants me to, but surprisingly it wasn't the person I was expecting. This person only submitted 4 decks (yes as a contributor), 2 of them had good images and this and another were very poor. I found better images on the internet and replaced. Will leave a note and send contact for awareness as well.

The way I saw it playing out was that ANY image was acceptable over the previous beta which had decks with no images at all. That was a problem. I assumed over time Contributors would replace images with better images during the convenience of their browsing. Really what it looks like it's coming down to is that I need to really take the time to create a "Training Guide" on the typical courtesies of adding to the site. There were a lot of assumptions on my part and I just need to have it cleared up a bit since I haven't really touched the learning section. The big thing is that the entire site is from scratch. No modules. That means I take a lot of things for granted and it'll be a lot of iterations to expose all the things missing


Regarding Trade Functionality: That one is something I want to bring back out but I'm holding back until we can sort of get the quality of content a bit more monitored. Trade functionality isn't just matching anymore because of privacy issues. It's a full installation of messaging and notifications. I do plan on adding it with an export function as well late next month. This month I'll hopefully add in the Learning Section to get people more on board and address a few of the outlier bugs. Again if I missed anything message me or e-mail me since there are a lot of balls in the air I just try to address them one at a time.

Just a reminder Alex, there are also a number of Bug Reports and Feature Requests out there, including new ones since the upgrade. I'll try and find time soon to clean up and mark those that are no longer relevant, but there's some other missing features fields as well that are something to consider if you are able to do a new update in the near future.

viewforum.php?f=59
viewforum.php?f=60