Like it or not, many of us have -- and want to keep -- duplicates in our collections, for various reasons. If DVDP is to be an accurate profiler of this reality, duplicates should be accommodated with a minimum of fuss.

I'm thinking of a scenario where in place of the "Stop. This is a duplicate of something already in your collection" I would like to see "Are your sure? This is a duplicate." At which point the user can continue or not. How the program handles such duplicates is outside the purview of this proposal -- but might be as simple as including the Collection item # in the local key.

I call the above a "casual duplicate". I think the scenario of requiring an interaction for each duplicate would tend to prevent commercial use.

To accommodate a commercial application, a new inventory counter field could be included with appropriate enabling license.

Blimey man, slow down some! You've been here for three days and you've already started more feature requests than most people have in YEARS, and now you're making duplicates threads (is that for irony?)? How about spending some time taking part in the forums at large, rather than just pulling holes in the program and telling people how to behave?

This duplicate-thread on duplicates    is a waste of time! One thread was more than enough! 

Ken - please lock (at least one of them) 

Quoting ALL:

Quote:
shut up!

Gosh! I'm sorry if I have expressed too many new ideas in too short a time. Where is that addressed in the forum rules?

re the topic: If you had bothered to read the initial append to this thread, you might see that it is a slightly different take on the subject -- enough different to warrant a separate thread, in my estimation. The key aspect missing from the previous threads: "a minimum of fuss" to accommodate duplicates.

Would it have been better if I had given it a different title?

re "duplicate" thread: That didn't stop one of you from starting another new thread covering duplicates. Something about Manual Profiles?

Quoting dav4is:

Quote:
Quoting ALL:

Quote:
shut up!

Gosh! I'm sorry if I have expressed too many new ideas in too short a time. Where is that addressed in the forum rules?

...

It is not!

Some of the old-timers around here get all bent out of shape if they are not the center of attention.

You have asked for something that most of us could use, that would hurt none of us!

Hang in there, you are a paying user with the same 'rights' as any other.

pdf

Quoting pdf256:

Quote:
Quoting dav4is:

Quote:
Quoting ALL:

Quote:
shut up!

Gosh! I'm sorry if I have expressed too many new ideas in too short a time. Where is that addressed in the forum rules?

...

It is not!

Some of the old-timers around here get all bent out of shape if they are not the center of attention.

You have asked for something that most of us could use, that would hurt none of us!

Hang in there, you are a paying user with the same 'rights' as any other.

pdf

While I agree with your statement, Paul, I do not see the need (or use) of creating an identical thread when the initial thread does not go the way the OP had intended... But hey - keep'em coming...   

 

Skip  

Quoting Nadja:

Quote:
Quoting dav4is:

Quote:
Gosh! I'm sorry if I have expressed too many new ideas in too short a time. Where is that addressed in the forum rules?

See, this is the thing. The state of play (anywhere, not just here) isn't simply "if the rules don't forbid it, I can do it." There's still a responsibility on a new user to adjust to the ways of the existing forum he/she comes to inhabit, not the other way around. Apart from anything else, as has been expressed, the more requests you make in a short period, the less likely Ken is to pay attention to each one. Why not just focus on one thing at a time?

I'll be sure in future to clear all my ideas with you first.