Get Marwood & I

It's arguably more appropriate, as it indicates that she is thinking, which is right in line with the cover scene.

Is it me Frisc, or have they changed the direction of her glance there....?

Yes, the current configuration leads to just that - people switching off when they see the same thing over and over - hence the attempt to improve things.

No, they always used "UK Edition" on both UKPVs and UK published books. It's one of the reasons I went into bat to get them to change it, to cement the distinction.

@CGC Mike last post from me, I don't want to overload you, but the key issue with the Journals is the absence of a filter to show the latest comments. That is why no one reads them as they aren't available to filter. If you look at the three terms in the illustration below (Title / Entry / Comments)...... ....when I create a new journal title, that won't show on either of the two current journal landing page layouts (Organize by Author / All Entries). Only entries are picked up. If I then add an entry, that will then show on the two landing pages, at the top until someone creates a new one to push it down the list. Here is my 'Test' to illustrate: If no one else creates a new entry from this point, then my 'Test' entry will stay at the top until someone does. But in the meantime, as members add comments to their journal entries, those do not register. So the two landing pages should really be reconfigured to show the latest comments, not entries. That could either be the default setting (if possible) or added as a filter option. If neither is possible, then the only way members will become aware of new journal comments is via the 'Recent Journals Activity' side bar block, or if they happen to see them scrolling the forums 'All Activity' page. This is probably why the journals get so little traffic. I'll shut up now! https://invisioncommunity.com/features/blogs/

To further clarify the terminology... Troy's journal umbrella title is "troy division's journal". Under that umbrella title are entries. As you can see below, Troy has made three entries in his journal, which sit under his umbrella title: If we select his first entry, "2022 top 50", we can see that all the subsequent posts within it are called 'comments': We need a 'sort by' / 'filter by' option for comments. Otherwise, as @Troy.Division rightly points out, the latest entry will always be at the top of the landing pages, even though there may have been multiple comments (posts / replies) in other journal's entries elsewhere. And we have no option to filter to see any of them in date order. Is anyone following this?

That's right - both landing pages organise the journals in order of entries (the opening description of each journal entry) not posts. The 'Recent Journal Activity' block picks up activity and posts - we just need a filter option too. There is no filter option at all on the 'All Entries' landing page: And the sort by / filter options on the 'Organize by Author' landing page have next to useless options and, crucially, not one for posts: We don't even use ratings and the 'entry' selection above is in effect the journal itself, not any subsequent posts that follow in it. Why would anyone want to filter to journals without entries! These are 'Entries' within the umbrella journal title: They are not posts. We need a filter for latest posts.

It certainly looks that way Andy, thank you mate. It's the whole point of the thread really - to identify whether books like these could reasonably be called UK Price Variants. The dual indicias are quite interesting, now I've put my glasses on. Two different printers? Cover and guts printed separately...?

Yes, they were migrated in the old format, but the decision was subsequently made to migrate them to the blogs format which was part of the Invision package. I recall some discussion about a legacy platform, that the old journals were somehow connected to, which may have had a bearing on the decision. Dena will know. When the decision was made all those years ago, and the early Invision blogs examples were put up, I pointed out that our 'old style' posting format wouldn't be compatible with them. The opening entry in the new journals, for example, is a completely different configuration and format to the 'standard' post format we are all used to using. I was told that the content could be migrated however, and the expectation was therefore that the journals would migrate to the new software in full. Of course, it wasn't possible and didn't happen, which is why only a single post was migrated (by Scott, manually, if I recall correctly) with a link to the old content which was then blocked. Bottom line Mike, square pegs don't go into round holes. If they can, and all the new journals could be migrated to the standard posting format of the regular forums, with no data / content loss, great - bring it on, if that is what the members would like. I just don't think that they can. If I'm right, all you would be able to do is repeat that destructive action of the past - vandalise the new journals to reinstate them to an old style format. I doubt that would be popular now, after all this time. CGC should have called a halt to the new journals early, before they were utilised too much. We're not the technical experts though Mike - Dena will surely confirm what is and isn't possible, and the history. There is actually a lot to commend the new journals format though. You can do things which you can't do with standard posting. I would now be happy to see them stay if we could only add some meaningful filters (e.g. filter by latest posts), fix the links, eliminate the errors and - crucially - make them more accessible / visible

He worked with the other lot I think, Stephen. I suspect that Black Knight 'UKPV' label designation is a procedural mistake rather than a conscious version choice - they likely meant to select 'UK Edition'.

Most of us would Mike, I suspect, but in the same way that the old journal content couldn't be migrated to the new, I doubt the new could be migrated back to an old style format. And given the time the 'new' journals have now been in place, those that have used them may be as disgruntled as the previous generation were, if there was a decision made to move away from them. Maybe the best we can hope for, if we're staying with Invision, is to improve the current software, navigation and visibility. Good luck.

She's so ugly the staple rusted!

You can't beat it, can you

Expensive hobby, isn't it. I remember a fairly healthy stock at 30th Century in the twenty to thirty quid range that I passed on not so long ago.

Does anyone else find it wonderfully appropriate that the Silver Age Romance Comics thread was started by Kill.Kill.Kill.-migration? "My man..! She took him from me! But I'll get even! Kill! Kill! Kill!"

Not romance? Are you mad! Look at that cover....

Thanks for answering the call, Andy! Who better than The King of Australia to respond on behalf of the Aussie books The purpose of the thread is to gently wander through the pre-1960 era to see if there are any examples of books which could fit the definition of a UKPV. So a book with a UK cover price which came from the same print run, but is junior to, a book priced in the home countries currency. It's not the most robust review, as you can see, and is more of an excuse to look at nice old books and comment on them but in a way, perhaps, that hasn't been commented on before. I'm sure there will be some gold era experts out there who's reaction to all this would be "Ah, bless", but it's something fun to muck about on now that I've exhausted all the post 1960 'what exists' UKPV possibilities. So those two Rangers have the same cover dimensions, but differing, targeted back cover ads? I take it you have them in hand - the AusReprints site has no details on the 6d 'UK' copy - are you able to determine whether the books came from the same print run? A plate change or two for the price slug and ad swap, maybe? Or are there any indicia notes that contradict that possibility (e.g. the words "printed somewhere else" being on one of them )? I agree, that's what I think was going on with many of these books.

We got there in the end

Uncreased is the word (it's the word, it's the word, that you heard) it's got groove it's got meaning. Talking of Tales of Strangeness, I'm trying to encourage my UK board chum @Albert Tatlock to grace this thread with his ST pence collection: He's probably having a pint in the Rovers right now, but if we call to him like he's a pigeon, he may come All together now, Coo-coo....coo-coo...

It's a beauty. Uncreased dark covers are a wonder, aren't they Is uncreased a word?