Lists: Maintain sort order in edit mode

  • 4
  • Idea
  • Updated 9 months ago
  • (Edited)
Another suggestion for the LIST section... Would it be possible to add all of the other "Sort by:" options added to the EDIT section of the list section.  I'd like a simple alphabetic listing to edit when I have to add new things (to help remove titles I've added more than one time)
Or another option would be that as you typed in the new title, the list would jump to the page that the new title will be put into (ie: surrounding titles...)
Thank you
Photo of Da Su

Da Su

  • 2 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes

Posted 9 months ago

  • 4
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7189 Posts
  • 9325 Reply Likes
This has been proposed before, but not as a new topic.
Photo of JonDoe

JonDoe

  • 3 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
This was requested by many people over the last couple month, but nothing happened. IMDB doesn't care about the fact, that the usability for editing lists is much worse than before all these changes. Sort by "Date" or "Order" is complete worthless. I don't understand why they not just adding the normal sort options they use everywhere else to the list editing page. Doesn't make any sense.
(Edited)
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7178 Posts
  • 9299 Reply Likes
Right now, it takes time for these things to be implemented. The more complex an operation, the longer it takes to be completed.
Photo of JonDoe

JonDoe

  • 3 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
I have understanding that things take time, but month or even years for simple features? C'mon. I read about small requests supported by a lot of people years ago, and no one from IMDB cared about it till today.

For the list feature, they promised us, that with the whole re-design it will be easier in the future to implement new features, but again they not care about requests. Instead a couple month ago they declared that the list-feature is completed and nothing will be implemented anymore, they as well stopped to maintain the official list thread. 

Adding just the standard sort options to the list-edit page isn't a complex operation, they use these sorting options all over the website just not for the list-edit  page. This should be any easy implementation, people asking for many month now, but IMDB doesn't listen. 
(Edited)
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7178 Posts
  • 9299 Reply Likes
Yes, sometimes it takes years to implement simple features. Currently, not a lot is invested in the ease of amendability of IMDb's proprietary code base. This is probably more common around the Web than we might realize. Right now, patching serious malfunctions is the top priority, and even those may take a week or two to sort out. If it was open source, I'm sure the turnaround time for popular simple feature requests would be like thirty days or so.
Photo of JonDoe

JonDoe

  • 3 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
Don't know why you are trying so hard in defending them. We all know that they don't care. If they give us the possibility to sort lists by ratings, number of votes, years, name and so on, all over the website, just not for the list edit page, than the reason is not that its to complex or something like that. Its just they forget about it during the implementation phase and now the list feature has no priority anymore and we users have to live with it.

IMDB has a long history in ignoring user wishes.   
(Edited)
Photo of Vincent Fournols

Vincent Fournols

  • 2901 Posts
  • 4863 Reply Likes
Maybe like Jeorj, I would not try to defend IMDb, and can be very critical. But I also know about project developments in a big international corporate context (Amazon ...) And therefore I am not oversurprized by what you call ignoring requests.

Even though I would love to have a look at the actual roadmap, so at least we can mitigate our frustration sometime...
Photo of Col Needham

Col Needham, Official Rep

  • 6834 Posts
  • 4812 Reply Likes
Interesting sub-thread, thanks.  Although it is labelled the Contributors' Charter, the document at https://contribute.imdb.com/charter applies to more than just contribution and is always worth re-reading. 

Everything we do at IMDb is driven by our customers. However, we do have fixed time and resources which have to be allocated according to customer need and other practical factors.  It is always a challenge to get the balance right across thousands of IMDb content / features. We are always trying to make the right choices, to do better, and to move faster. I am pleased at where we are now and the progress made across 2018 as we balance the needs of over 250 million customers over a growing number of platforms and in almost every country in the world. 

Unfortunately there are other things ahead of the changes to the list editing interface on the web, however, the issues are known.  As a matter of policy we are unable to share detailed product roadmaps in advance nor promise specific "done by" dates. Updates, bug fixes and new features are being deployed continuously to improve the IMDb customer experience and barely a few hours ever go by without a new software change going live (and barely a few seconds for new data). We know this is not so helpful when you are waiting for a specific change in a specific feature, as is the case here, sorry. 
Photo of Vincent Fournols

Vincent Fournols

  • 2901 Posts
  • 4863 Reply Likes
Thanks for the insight, Col.
Photo of Vincent Fournols

Vincent Fournols

  • 2901 Posts
  • 4863 Reply Likes
JonDoe,

There were decisions which were approved and agreed 8 years ago (I think - I am talking of the new genres) and have not been implemented yet...
Photo of Col Needham

Col Needham, Official Rep

  • 6834 Posts
  • 4812 Reply Likes
Specifically on new genres, plot keywords provide almost all of the functionality of genres with the added bonuses that they scale more easily (new ones can be added trivially) and they cause fewer disagreements (see various public arguments on Get Satisfaction over whether Title A deserves genre B or not; the private arguments at the help desk are often worse).  It is tricky to justify new genres when there are so many less controversial changes with more impact ahead of them, otherwise, by definition, we would have implemented them by now :-)