[AgainstMeAgainstYou]

So before I begin, let me firstly apologize for how vague the title is, it's the best I could manage with the character limit. Secondly, what I'm proposing is rather complex, and maybe not possible? I know next to nothing about coding and such. But I figured I would put this idea forward anyway, if for no other reason than to open a dialogue amongst the forum.

So. Many people (myself included) on here, have of course listened to a lot of albums. I mean... a LOT. Way more than 100, anyway. And some users on here who have reached Level... 7, I think?... have decided to incorporate those albums into custom charts labeled, say, "#101-200", "201-300", etc. Now, obviously it's no small task just to make those charts. But organizing them afterwards? Yikes. Imagine someone has ten of these, and they decide they really don't like, say, album #103 as much as they used to, and it drops all the way down to #697. That's extreme, but not impossible. Here's a much more plausible scenario: same person adds one album to their top 100. Just one. Now the entire list drops down one to compensate. And generally, adjustments like that are made in bulk, not just one album at a time. So of course, this can get real tedious real quick. For someone with OCD, like me... my stuff's gotta be in line, so to speak.

But here's an idea: what if we could automate these changes? What if we could make it so that, if someone has these charts that are sort of continuations of one another, they could be linked together? Have a checkbox, maybe, that just says "link chart to...", where say, in the "1-100" chart, you check it off and link it to the "101-200" chart, either by pasting the URL or picking it from a dropdown. And how it works is that you would make the links go in descending order. That way, the links are reciprocal; by linking 1-100 to 101-200, automatically that makes the link go in both directions; you can affect the first chart with the second, and vice versa. This then allows you to link 101-200 and 201-300, and so on and so forth.

So you make a change. You insert an album into your top 100. Instead of having to delete album #100, instead you have an option to push that album into the top slot of the NEXT chart. And then if that chart is full, as long as you've got your chain going, you can make that happen down the line with the click of a button. A prompt comes up asking if you would like to do this, and boom. You've instantly edited, for example, your entire top 1000 albums. And if it comes down to a point where your chain ends with a full chart, you have two options: remove the bottom album, or "would you like to start a new chart on the chain?"

So, that's it. That's what I've got. Again, not a simple implementation and maybe impossible. The only alternative would be allowing charts to be longer than 100 albums, but I think that would just make indexing and reading charts tedious if there are, say, 1,576 albums in a chart. Now, I'm not always the best at articulating my thoughts, so I hope nobody reading this is confused. But I would love to chat about the idea. Like I said; just opening a dialogue.

[albummaster]

Hi, thanks for the suggestion. I like the idea of linked charts to allow you to grow your chart beyond 100 entries, but the problem would probably be implementation as you say. I think it could be quite tricky to build in all of the validation that you'd need to do this in a seamless way. An easier change might be just to allow you to add a link to the previous/next chart to allow people to step through each chart without having to build a big system to do this (but this still leaves you the original problem of having resequence your other charts if you move an album outside of a 100 chunk).

An easier thing to do would be to allow you to create a chart of, say, 1000 entries, and at the point of saving split the chart into chunks of 100 to make them easier for people to browse. But, this might also lead to other issues, e.g. trying to keep up with data moderation when somebody (inevitably) adds a chart of 1000 and floods the system leading to a massive backlog in the data admin area of the site. It's a difficult issue to get around but the site needs to have a reliable database underneath as really that's the whole essence of the site.