Statistics show no more than 50 collectors

When I will check collectors on an release then the Statistics page show not more than 50 collectors (when they are more).

Example:
https://discogs.versitio.com/release/stats/25940#collection
285 have this
235 more not shown

or
https://discogs.versitio.com/release/stats/373714#wantlist
118 Ratings / 68 more not shown
878 have this / 828 more not shown
95 want this / 45 more not shown

Have checked more release pages with the same result!

Why?

Can anyone look in to this?

Also interested to see what the word is on this!

noticed this recently when at a record shop hoping to confirm that i didnt already own a copy of the record i found there. asked the shopkeeper (who already had the release page up) to check owners and see if my name appeared under the collection stats, saw the owners list had been truncated.
as i'm not always at my computer, and know many other discoggers, checking out if my name appears on the collection page while others are logged in is a common occurance for me.
kinda shitty for those of us whose name starts with a later letter in the alphabet. don't make me open a new named ***** just to find myself under stats pages now.

I've send an SR

Hi,

Sorry for the confusion! The results on that page were recently capped to display only 50 (IIRC) results for each category. This was due to timeouts on this page on larger releases with thousands of `wants`, `haves`, etc.

Please feel free to send us a Request if you have any questions or concerns:

https://discogs.versitio.com/

jcooke
The results on that page were recently capped to display only 50 (IIRC) results for each category. This was due to timeouts on this page on larger releases with thousands of `wants`, `haves`, etc.

There are no solutions for this? It has work for times.

jcooke
Please feel free to send us a Request

I have.
Thanks

You have to wonder why have a 'feature' and only implement it a little bit. Like finding a bowl of peanuts on the bar with a little sign next to it saying 'limited to one per customer'...

jcooke
This was due to timeouts on this page on larger releases with thousands of `wants`, `haves`, etc.

You could stop ing Gravatar, that would speed up everything.

That's not a feature as much as a quick-fix. :)

How about there being a separate link for "full list"?

first 50 sucks completely. it's alphabetical. so I cannot find out anymore if a release is in teninchfans collection, other then going to his collection. which is useless.

How do you manage to display all 250 entries on a label page without timeout?

jcooke
thousands of `wants`, `haves`, etc.

so if thousands causes a problem you think it's a good idea to cap it to 50? you do know the difference? ;) Just kidding. But I'd wish I could exchange 50USD for half a thousand.

Please bring it back. I'm making many changes in Depeche Mode releases. I've got several friends who are always very helpful with additions to database, adding images of releases. Now, I've to check their entire collections if they have release which needs changes - lot of time. Earlier, release was shown or not in their collection. Much easier and faster. 50 alphabetical collectors and no more? Doesn't make any sense...

jcooke
This was due to timeouts on this page on larger releases with thousands of `wants`, `haves`, etc.

but this isnt the best solution to that issue though, as mentioned:

AbsoluteBodyControl
You could stop ing Gravatar

with discogs hosting avatars now, there is no reason to continue to Gravatar, is there?

DarreLP
How about there being a separate link for "full list"?

this is a good solution, where the collection or wantlist name lists appears as text only if the gravatars are being the issue. or a link to display the next 50 and each cell loads dynamically and independently from the rest of the page, so you are only loading a small chunk.

so many other sites can manage to implement such code into their nodes and such, why can't discogs? why can't we strive for a feature that does not fully handicap s and how they use this website?

Thanks for the so far! As jcooke mentioned earlier, we capped these lists at 50 to ensure quality page load time when trying to view additional statistics around a release.

If anyone could provide more information on how you were using the feature before our change, that will be helpful and could inform potential future development on Discogs. To those of you who have already elaborated, thanks! This is greatly helpful.

NessFan
If anyone could provide more information on how you were using the feature before our change

I've used this to find collectors to ask them via PM if they still own this release because to check any different or non on his/her version. That was very helpful.

NessFan
If anyone could provide more information on how you were using the feature before our change

If I wanted to see if a friend had a particular item, I could go to the release page and find if they have it much quicker than looking through their collection.

kraftberg
NessFanIf anyone could provide more information on how you were using the feature before our change
I've used this to find collectors to ask them via PM if they still own this release because to check any different or non on his/her version. That was very helpful.

Yes, it was very helpful with merging releases. First asking collectors which are active and willing to help and answer questions and then decision to merge or not. Now, from 50 collectors on list some will not answer any questions, some are not active for a long time and those who can help are not shown.

NessFan
If anyone could provide more information on how you were using the feature before our change, that will be helpful and could inform potential future development on Discogs.

Sometimes, I look at the people who rate/own/want a release, and if I see s I know and trust, it could lead to a purchase. Or, I might click on a name of a in rated/owned/wanted and browse their collection and sometimes find other things that I might purchase. In other words, truncating these lists is affecting the marketplace!

disneyfacts
If I wanted to see if a friend had a particular item, I could go to the release page and find if they have it much quicker than looking through their collection.

I do this, too.

0bleak
Sometimes, I look at the people who rate/own/want a release, and if I see s I know and trust, it could lead to a purchase. Or, I might click on a name of a in rated/owned/wanted and browse their collection and sometimes find other things that I might purchase. In other words, truncating these lists is affecting the marketplace!

+1

How about placing a cap in the MR lists only and keep the full rated/owned/wanted stats of the contained releases?

el_duro
How about placing a cap in the MR lists only and keep the full rated/owned/wanted stats of the contained releases?

+1

I look anyway just for the individual versions.

el_duro
How about placing a cap in the MR lists only and keep the full rated/owned/wanted stats of the contained releases?

Or display just 50 by default and have an additional link "Show all"?

tarantoga
Or display just 50 by default and have an additional link "Show all"?

DarreLP
How about there being a separate link for "full list"?

That would be another good alternative.

Why do you even bother having statistics, if you don't want them to be accurate?

not wanting to appear bloody-minded but, to me, this also looks as a first disguised step to prevent any trading happening between s.

with the convenient "time-out" excuse

la-voie-du-sabre
not wanting to appear bloody-minded but, to me, this also looks as a first disguised step to prevent any trading happening between s.

I use this to see if an item is also in the wantlist or collection of my brother and/or friends.
It encourages me to buy extra! ;)
(on and off discogs)

streppe
I use this to see if an item is also in the wantlist or collection of my brother and/or friends.

+1

0bleak
NessFanIf anyone could provide more information on how you were using the feature before our change, that will be helpful and could inform potential future development on Discogs.

Sometimes, I look at the people who rate/own/want a release, and if I see s I know and trust, it could lead to a purchase. Or, I might click on a name of a in rated/owned/wanted and browse their collection and sometimes find other things that I might purchase. In other words, truncating these lists is affecting the marketplace!

Agreed.

There are s whose taste I trust when deciding to buy a release and if they own it/rate it that will affect my decision to purchase a record.

There are many ways to program a fix for the "time-out" if that is really the cause of this change. Is there a position open at Discogs? :p

StaticGuru
Why do you even bother having statistics, if you don't want them to be accurate?

+1

If this change remains in effect, you might as well get rid of the stats pages as a whole because it is completely useless now.

jcooke
Hi,

Sorry for the confusion! The results on that page were recently capped to display only 50 (IIRC) results for each category. This was due to timeouts on this page on larger releases with thousands of `wants`, `haves`, etc.

Please feel free to send us a Request if you have any questions or concerns:

https://discogs.versitio.com/

I will do that! We need that statistics!

IKBENOLDSCHOOLFANAAT
I will do that! We need that statistics!

+1

Edit sorry forgot my post,
it is not helpfull to show only the first 50 s in the list, cause so is it in the most causes only "A"
regards

kraftberg
I've used this to find collectors to ask them via PM if they still own this release because to check any different or non on his/her version. That was very helpful.

Miki242
Yes, it was very helpful with merging releases. First asking collectors which are active and willing to help and answer questions and then decision to merge or not. Now, from 50 collectors on list some will not answer any questions, some are not active for a long time and those who can help are not shown.

yes, that list of owners was very helpful when you needed to an owner for database maintenance. the full list would allow you to find an active community member amongst the owners which would ensure a response and some action.
with the truncated list you are really limited in finding an active member to help in those actions.

tarantoga
Or display just 50 by default and have an additional link "Show all"?

el_duro
That would be another good alternative.

+1

tarantoga
Or display just 50 by default and have an additional link "Show all"?

yes!

jcooke
Sorry for the confusion! The results on that page were recently capped to display only 50 (IIRC) results for each category. This was due to timeouts on this page on larger releases with thousands of `wants`, `haves`, etc.

I have never had a timeout on a release page...
as a label owner this info is important, please restore it!

Thanks for the continued folks!

hysteric
as a label owner this info is important

I'd like to know why it is important for you. We need to know the use cases so we can for them with future developments. Thanks!

punkergott
it is not helpfull to show only the first 50 s in the list, cause so is it in the most causes only "A"

On releases with a lot of people in the list, yes. But how is it useful to scroll through a list of thousands of names? How do you use that?

VasiliKochura
There are many ways to program a fix for the "time-out"

Correct, but this page isn't high usage compared to a lot of other pages on the site, and we have to make decisions on how we spend development resources etc. That doesn't mean we are not going to take your use cases into and try to accommodate them, though!

nik
I'd like to know why it is important for you. We need to know the use cases so we can for them with future developments. Thanks!

my label (or example purposes) is focused on italo-disco.
over time, you know from the stats whether s collecting this genre are buying (and rating high / low) the label releases.

there is also a small percentage of s who use ratings in unusual (or malicious) ways.. so with the full stats visible you can disregard these.

You can't just show a percentage of 's ratings, it makes no sense. You show the full list or you don't show it at all.

Personally, I rate every release I own and like from 4 to 5 stars. I won't rate something I don't like. I do this not only for myself but also for others to show that I like a specific release.

Following some ' stats help me to discover new and interesting releases. I was using this functionality the same way I follow an artist or label to discover new stuff. I know plenty of others do the same. It's just like on Juno or other web shops when you see : 'played by…'.

Finally, knowing well producers, it's always rewarding for them to see that an important member left a rating on his work.

disneyfacts
If I wanted to see if a friend had a particular item, I could go to the release page and find if they have it much quicker than looking through their collection.

Same here

nik
I'd like to know why it is important for you.

This.

kraftberg
I've used this to find collectors to ask them via PM if they still own this release because to check any different or non on his/her version. That was very helpful.

I find here in the thread no one they doesn't need it.

Is there a possibility to revert this change or find a better way to solve the timeout problem? By the way, I never had any issues with timeouts when viewing statistics throughout the years I have been using Discogs.

kraftberg
I've used this to find collectors to ask them via PM if they still own this release because to check any different or non on his/her version. That was very helpful.

Miki242
Yes, it was very helpful with merging releases. First asking collectors which are active and willing to help and answer questions and then decision to merge or not. Now, from 50 collectors on list some will not answer any questions, some are not active for a long time and those who can help are not shown.

PabloPlato
yes, that list of owners was very helpful when you needed to an owner for database maintenance. the full list would allow you to find an active community member amongst the owners which would ensure a response and some action.
with the truncated list you are really limited in finding an active member to help in those actions.

I agree with the above that it was very helpful to have access to a full list of s who have a certain release in their collection in order to solve various database problems. How are s supposed to message all s who have a release in their collection for confirmation purposes now? In the past I used to message every who owns a release when one release needs to be split into another version or more, just like in these examples:

https://discogs.versitio.com/help/forums/topic/214342

Solving certain database problems became more difficult when the CAPTCHA device was implemented to send messages to s and now with the truncated lists some database problems may be impossible to solve.

tarantoga
Or display just 50 by default and have an additional link "Show all"?

Great idea! Is this option able to be considered by the developers?

nik
I'd like to know why it is important for you.

for several reasons already mentioned prior it is important to me and seems important to many others

StaticGuru
Why do you even bother having statistics, if you don't want them to be accurate?

+1

Electro-Magnetic
I never had any issues with timeouts when viewing statistics

I never had problems with it, too!

I would like to be able to see all s wanting an item I have to them and try to make a trade.
Please make it possible somehow to see full lists again!

I also wonder why list any s on this statisticspage at all then, if only 50 is showing?! Makes no sense.

nik
I'd like to know why it is important for you

Sometimes it is necessary to an owner to ask a question about the release.
If needed, I look down the list of owners to find a whom I know interacts with the db.

TheRavingPsycHo
I also wonder why list any s on this statisticspage at all then, if only 50 is showing?!

Yeh. Might as well just have the stats and hide the (full) s list behind a capchta. If it's about server load that should keep it way down, only for crucial references.

At the developers, no ideas?

la-voie-du-sabre
not wanting to appear bloody-minded but, to me, this also looks as a first disguised step to prevent any trading happening between s.

with the convenient "time-out" excuse

yeah the time-out must be the lastest joke. lol.

i think the exponential influx of non-paying buyers, time-wasters, rude and ignorant newbies/clowns are causing waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more time-outs on this site.

TheRavingPsycHo
I also wonder why list any s on this statisticspage at all then, if only 50 is showing?! Makes no sense.

making sense is not a priority in E-commerce. making money is ;-)

andygrayrecords
Sometimes it is necessary to an owner to ask a question about the release.
If needed, I look down the list of owners to find a whom I know interacts with the db.

+1

And, also. it can be of value who rates what. Sometimes I do trust other 's taste as a hint/guidance.

I mean also it's nice to maybe have a complete list of owners for a rarer record you're having trouble finding because it never comes up for sale! Especially if the owner doesn't really rate it high or actually doesn't mind parting with it he can sometimes be convinced to list it for sale. I know I've successfully done this before and got a message back "I've listed it jump on it before it's gone!"

Bumping, any hope this can be fixed in a better way?

TheRavingPsycHo
Bumping, any hope this can be fixed in a better way?

+1

el_duro
How about placing a cap in the MR lists only and keep the full rated/owned/wanted stats of the contained releases?

Have Discogs staff ( nik) got any further comments about the truncated statistics and the given here so far? Is a "Show all" option in order to view a full list of statistics being considered by the developers?

Does anybody have further comments about this?

I would also like to know what the maximum amount or percentage of names that are able to be displayed in the statistics before the list become truncated. At the moment releases with very few names listed are also truncated, for example:

https://discogs.versitio.com/release/stats/260923

7 have this
----------------------------------------
name1
name2
name3
name4
3 more not shown
----------------------------------------

Will displaying 3 more names really cause a timeout? Again, I never had any issues with timeouts when viewing statistics throughout the years I have been using Discogs.

Again, having access to a full list of s who have a certain release in their collection can be very useful for solving various database problems as you are able to message those s to check and confirm information on their releases, for example:

https://discogs.versitio.com/help/forums/topic/214342

Electro-Magnetic
7 have this
----------------------------------------
name1
name2
name3
name4
3 more not shown
----------------------------------------

3 s with collection set "private"?

Electro-Magnetic
Have Discogs staff ( jcooke / NessFan / nik) got any further comments about the truncated statistics and the given here so far? Is a "Show all" option in order to view a full list of statistics being considered by the developers?

+1

el_duro
3 s with collection set "private"?

Oh yeah, I somehow totally forgot about that! Thanks! I also just re-read this which answers my question too:

jcooke
The results on that page were recently capped to display only 50 (IIRC) results for each category.

However some more response from staff about all of this will still be good.

This is a huge problem that needs to be fixed immediately. Does Discogs require funds to fix this problem?

This is a very big problem that has been causing me a headache for the past few months. I know several dozen people on discogs and I like to ask about artwork, label stamps, and other variations of records before I buy from a seller who I might not trust. I collect white labels, and sometimes I will ask other s if their copy has a certain characteristic so that I can validate information from sellers. Not being able to see the full list causes a headache, because I have to look at people's collections manually, and look for the record among sometimes several thousand items!!! Is there anyway you guys can fix this? Perhaps allow a to look at the 51st and beyond by clicking on an link that shows them s 51-100, and so on?

nik
But how is it useful to scroll through a list of thousands of names? How do you use that?

Ctrl+F?

StaticGuru
Why do you even bother having statistics, if you don't want them to be accurate?

+1

Electro-Magnetic
Have Discogs staff ( jcooke / NessFan / nik) got any further comments about the truncated statistics and the given here so far? Is a "Show all" option in order to view a full list of statistics being considered by the developers?

+1

This really should be a non-issue I can't see why it would be so difficult to solve. The % of s who view the full statistics is probably very small; would access to this information really slow the site down in any significant way?

This thread has provided staff with loads of sensible reasons why a full list of statistics is relevant and useful.

coopzilla
This thread has provided staff with loads of sensible reasons why a full list of statistics is relevant and useful.

And nobody from staff hasn't answered for 2 months...

coopzilla
This thread has provided staff with loads of sensible reasons why a full list of statistics is relevant and usefu

+1

coopzilla
This thread has provided staff with loads of sensible reasons why a full list of statistics is relevant and useful.

+1

What is the best way to the development team directly?

Display just 50 by default and have an additional link "Show all"
+1

nonsentence
What is the best way to the development team directly?

I guess with a Request.

I will complete a request for this matter. I hope they add an optional "show all" for those of us who really need to see that info.

A 'show all' option is needed for the above reasons.

Adding my +1.

http://i.imgur.com/IpMTs4o.jpg

VODAR
http://i.imgur.com/IpMTs4o.jpg

Love it

ahr2nd
A 'show all' option is needed for the above reasons.

Adding my +1.

+1 from me too.

"Show all" option sounds great
+1

DiNer0
"Show all" option sounds great
+1

+1

VODAR
http://i.imgur.com/IpMTs4o.jpg

...is one reason why..

And/or a "Show friends" option

Trying to do a load of research and fixing duff releases on the database and this is proving to be a massive hindrance. :(

Bumping. If not a solution, it'd be nice to at least know if the staff are exploring some way of addressing s' concerns about this. I don't imagine a 'show all' option--or one with pages--would be taxing on the database, though maybe I'm wrong.

Pheenixx
Trying to do a load of research and fixing duff releases on the database and this is proving to be a massive hindrance. :(

Indeed. I also recently identified a possible duplicate release and it would be useful to message various s like I used to before to ask them to double-check information on their releases to determine if any merge needs to take place. It's good to perform proper research beforehand especially when every few days I see an incorrect merge being applied to releases in my collection. The latest one was today: https://discogs.versitio.com/release/38600-Crash-Course/history#latest

The supposed timeout issues should have been solved without permanently truncating the lists.

ahr2nd
Bumping. If not a solution, it'd be nice to at least know if the staff are exploring some way of addressing s' concerns about this. I don't imagine a 'show all' option--or one with pages--would be taxing on the database, though maybe I'm wrong.

Staff have not replied for 3 months now even though they asked for our opinions on why we think a full list would be useful.

Bumping...

It becomes more and more ridiculous … I wanted to check a release today and what's there?
2 owners … 1 not shown … yeah, that would have caused the site to crash …

Perhaps Diognes_The_Fox could ask the question on our behalf? :)

typoman2
2 owners … 1 not shown …

Most likely because the other 's collection is set to "private" ;)

el_duro
Most likely because the other 's collection is set to "private" ;)

Well, I don't think so … the text was then 1 private AFAIR …
But maybe they have changed that as well … possible.

typoman2
the text was then 1 private AFAIR …

The cut does not effect stats with less than 50 (?) s but def. not a 2 listing.

typoman2
It becomes more and more ridiculous … I wanted to check a release today and what's there?
2 owners … 1 not shown … yeah, that would have caused the site to crash …

In this case, you are seeing "1 not shown", because 1 has the item in a private Collection.

What Nik stated earlier is still true:

nik
this page isn't high usage compared to a lot of other pages on the site, and we have to make decisions on how we spend development resources etc. That doesn't mean we are not going to take your use cases into and try to accommodate them, though!

We are neither losing track of your , nor are we discounting it, even if we cannot respond to this forum thread frequently. We are recording your to help prioritize possible future development efforts on Discogs!

It would be nice to have the option to show more than the first 50.

How is it going on this feature? For me it would be extremely helpful to se more than the 50 first s in alpabetical order which owns a release.
Only yesterday I got very friendly response from being able to owners of a certain record I'm interested in.

soon they'll cut it in half again to only 25.............

karjala
How is it going on this feature? For me it would be extremely helpful to se more than the 50 first s in alpabetical order which owns a release.
Only yesterday I got very friendly response from being able to owners of a certain record I'm interested in.

ing s is indeed valuable and sometimes necessary to confirm uncertain details. As far as that goes, the more s we're able to see the merrier.

also, there is the same problem for ratings. It's useful to see who loves or who dislike some releases, currently many appears as "x more not shown"

NessFan
load time

jcooke
This was due to timeouts on this page

do you wan't to know what causes "timeouts"or stretch unnessesary "load time"?

the embedded youtube videos ...
(and it's not possible to make a permanent seting to keep the videos away from the releases page...)

we should have Browing Options:
https://discogs.versitio.com/forum/thread/727294

load time was NEVER ever an issue for pages that i browsed - unless it was many thousands of people in the stats... why then such a drastic cut to only now display 50?? surely put this to 200 at least. this is beyond a joke now. discogs have completely destroyed a major use of the system. please - you have to do something about this, it is unusable as is.

please increase the shown wants + collection to 200, while you figure out how to deal with the entire issue. this at least gives us all ability to see stats complete for most of the database. PLEASE

NessFan
In this case, you are seeing "1 not shown", because 1 has the item in a private Collection.

Well, then don't show the "In Private" collectors but at least show all "public" collectors. Good reasons have been brought forward to scrap the 50's limit again.

Its absolutely silly and uncalled for. There is no legitimate reason for doing this. Also it seems the 50 picked are not random. For example my name comes up often on releases where less than 200 people own it (not saying just rare records- records in general) because my handle starts with "L". So it's alphabetical.

While you're fixing this how about a way to change the default display on artist or record label pages to beyond 25 in stead of always having it revert to that. I constantly have to adjust this to 250-500 every time I visit the site.

Surely you guys have hired some engineers that can do this?

This needs to be fixed. Displaying only 50 makes no sense whatsoever.

+1 Discogs, we need this. Too many people asking to fix this in your system, it will be more -friendly

It would be very helpful if discogs gave s the option to display more results under "collected" in increments of 50.

Yes, please give s the option to display all the names.

Any updates?