Old ER offerings showing as currently available on work pages
Join LibraryThing to post.
I was looking over some of my old Early Reviewer wins and noticed that there is a box in the upper right saying they are available in the current batch of books.
It's also happening on author pages.
The Skeleton Tree has the same note in the upper right corner, as well as a second note saying that it "was" available. Is one meant to replace the other at the appropriate time?
I see the problem. I am asking Loranne about it, because it seems these batches were not officially "closed" and she may know why.
That fits with >3 WeeTurtle: as that has two copies in the ER account. One is tagged January 16, the other April 2017.
Okay, after poking around, I've found a fix for individual batches, but it doesn't really address why it's happening in the first place. Some details:
>7 amanda4242: is right, the March 2017 batch was the first affected, and all batches after that point were showing the same behavior, for every title I checked. This goes all the way up to the most recent closed batch, September 2018.
I can't figure out what changed that made this start happening—the last major change I made to the Early Reviewers process was well before March 2017. It's possible this change caused it—due to the way the system is set up, I have the final step in ER pretend to automatically send winner lists to publishers. Because I do a fair amount of hand processing winner lists, I need it to skip this step. However, closing an Early Reviewers batch properly should, as far as I know, happen before that point (before I even pick winners).
The fix I've found lies in archiving the batches. Typically, I leave them unarchived for a full calendar year, in case I need to go back and get winner list details again for publishers who've missed their deadline. I hadn't been archiving them lately because I wanted to get this bug nailed down. I'll go ahead and archive through July 2017 now, leaving us a couple extra test months to play with if we need them.
I haven't requested ER books for a while now, but I must say I'm quite discouraged by the fact that it's not, in fact, the objective, algorithmic process we've been promised, but is something involving "hand-processing" and a human "picking winners". There's nothing wrong with having a person, rather than an algorithm, do the selection, but it's quite different from how the process once worked (or how we were told it once worked, I suppose), and a sufficient change that I think it should have been communicated.
>10 lorax: I think you're waaay misreading what lorannen wrote there.
"Hand-processing" is referring to the list of winners (after they've been picked) and there's nothing about the phrase "picking winners" that has to imply a manual (as opposed to automated) process.
>11 saltmanz: is correct. Essentially, I click a button (for each script) to run the scripts that pick winners. There are a handful of them. I don't do anything with the inner workings there, and I have exactly zero say over who gets what book—that's all down to the algorithm, as has been the case since well before my time here. The hand-processing is, in fact, simply formatting the lists of (already picked!) winners prior to sending off to publishers.
Believe me, if Loranne were hand-picking winners, she'd do little else!
This topic is part of LibraryThing's in-talk bug tracking.
Join or watch Bug Collectors to get "Bug Tracking" under "The World" in Talk all the time.
Category: Work pages
Assigned to all
Reported by amanda4242
May 8, 2018, 8:47pm
1 years since last change
Reported. amanda4242 (May 8, 2018, 8:47pm)
This topic is not marked as primarily about any work, author or other topic.