LEGO Ideas Discussion

[Blondie-Wan]

9 hours ago, MAB said:

I don't see any problem with that at all. If the other person (B) designs a project they (A) like, then they (A) should support it. However, A supporting something that they don't like just because B supported their entry seems wrong.

 

It also seems a logistical nightmare. Someone has to keep the list of projects that everyone has to support up to date, and contact the members whenever a new one is added to ensure they vote and keep their end of the bargain.

 

 

I think you’re misunderstanding the endeavor (well, either that, or I am, which I fully concede is possible). I don’t think the purpose is to get one another to support projects they outright dislike and would refuse to support otherwise; I think there’s an underlying assumption on the part of these participants that most or all of them will find most or all of the projects worth supporting, and this group is merely a way to ensure that they all know of one another’s projects, since it can be hard to find everything worthwhile on the site. It is a mutual support group for EBers’ projects, to be sure, but just something to ensure worthwhile projects don’t slip through the cracks and go unnoticed (as many have before), rather than a means of filling the review batch with undeserving garbage (which would be pointless, since the hope is to get something ultimately approved to become a set, and obviously that means getting support for projects that LEGO will hopefully consider genuinely good, not just dreck that got inexplicably lucky).

And I don’t think anyone is intent on policing the group and ensuring everyone in it votes for everything. Oh, I’m sure some posters will check, but I don’t think it’s that kind of group.

[MAB]

On 9/7/2018 at 10:30 PM, Graupensuppe said:

I'm kind of surprised that no "mutual aid threads" seem to have formed yet, where everyone would be allowed to post his best project and in turn pledges to support all other projects in the thread.

 

 

5 hours ago, Blondie-Wan said:

I think you’re misunderstanding the endeavor (well, either that, or I am, which I fully concede is possible).

1

I've copied the post that was suggesting it above. I think the part I bolded makes it clear that you sign up a project and by doing so you have to vote for all other projects that are in the thread.

 

If it was a "this is my submission, please vote for it if you like it", then I see no problem (at least from the Ideas side) although of course EB prefers any such posts to be mainly a discussion of the MOC with a discreet link to the ideas project.

 

[Artanis I]

Yeah I thought it was pretty clear that it was a "sign up to our clan where everyone will vote for each others' projects no matter how good, bad or indifferent they are" thing...

[Graupensuppe]

It looks like no-one wants to use the mutual support thread anyway, so... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

In other news, since the site was updated my project has been getting on average 1.4 new votes per day. Before that I remember it being 8-10 per day. Have your projects recovered from the drop in votes that people were reporting after the update?

[Bricked1980]

12 minutes ago, Graupensuppe said:

It looks like no-one wants to use the mutual support thread anyway, so... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

In other news, since the site was updated my project has been getting on average 1.4 new votes per day. Before that I remember it being 8-10 per day. Have your projects recovered from the drop in votes that people were reporting after the update?

Prior to the site refresh I used to get roughly 12 - 15 each day. Since the site was relaunched though I've been averaging between 2 to 5 votes each day. On Friday I had none at all. Then on Saturday when my model was featured in the newspaper I had a sudden spike of over 100 votes. Yesterday I was back to just 5 though and today none so far.  

I personally think they should change the way the models are shown on the home page. The same few models have been sitting at the top of the page for a while now and the Gravity Falls house has been at the top of the list for about 2 weeks. I've not got a problem with this as I really like that model, but surely it would be more fair to mix the list up every few days and give some of the other entries a chance of being seen.

[parsom]

19 minutes ago, Graupensuppe said:

In other news, since the site was updated my project has been getting on average 1.4 new votes per day. Before that I remember it being 8-10 per day. Have your projects recovered from the drop in votes that people were reporting after the update?

Its exact the same for me. More to say, as I posted earlier - I have information from potential supporters, that they still have trouble with login at Ideas webpage. I contacted the Lego Ideas team. They answered: "Our developers are currently looking into the issue. They pushed a fix last week Tuesday which resolved issues with activation codes for many users, but it's come to our attention over the last few days that it appears some are still having some issues. So this is definitely being looked at as we speak."

Maybe they were too much looking, and too little fixing...

 

8 minutes ago, Bricked1980 said:

Prior to the site refresh I used to get roughly 12 - 15 each day. Since the site was relaunched though I've been averaging between 2 to 5 votes each day. On Friday I had none at all. Then on Saturday when my model was featured in the newspaper I had a sudden spike of over 100 votes. Yesterday I was back to just 5 though and today none so far.  

I personally think they should change the way the models are shown on the home page. The same few models have been sitting at the top of the page for a while now and the Gravity Falls house has been at the top of the list for about 2 weeks. I've not got a problem with this as I really like that model, but surely it would be more fair to mix the list up every few days and give some of the other entries a chance of being seen.

Exactly, Ideas main page looks like a garbage bin. Ideas projects mixed with Rebrick entries. And the frosting on the cake - expired project at one of more exposed places.

By the way - congratulations! I was so frustrated about login issues, that I missed this paper post.

My project gained only web page article at narniafans.com (https://narniafans.com/2018/09/open-the-wardrobe-to-lego-narnia/). It's brought to me hundreds of FB likes and shares, but only a few dozens of votes...

 

[Bricked1980]

5 minutes ago, parsom said:

By the way - congratulations! I was so frustrated about login issues, that I missed this paper post.

My project gained only web page article at narniafans.com (https://narniafans.com/2018/09/open-the-wardrobe-to-lego-narnia/). It's brought to me hundreds of FB likes and shares, but only a few dozens of votes...

Thanks very much and congratulations to you too with having your project featured on that Narnia site. There must be dozens of Nania fan sites and organisations connected with C S Lewis and his stories. You should email some of these and try and get them to post your model on their websites and social media.

I've been trying a similar tactic myself and have written to loads of organisations related to steam heritage and traction engines. It can be quite frustrating when they don't get back to you but I have received some positive feedback from some of these and several of them have posted about my model on facebook and twitter.

Here's another useful tactic. When you post about your model on different sites try using a URL shortening service like Bitly or Tiny URL. You can create shortened versions of your Lego Ideas link which look more attractive and are easier for people to remember. The main advantage though is that you can use these services to track how many page clicks the link has brought in and from which websites they've originated. Using this system I was able to tell that my Ideas pages received 746 clicks on Saturday via the Leicester Merucry website I'd been featured on. I reckon roughly 10% of those people went on to actually vote for the model.

[Blondie-Wan]

6 hours ago, MAB said:

 

I've copied the post that was suggesting it above. I think the part I bolded makes it clear that you sign up a project and by doing so you have to vote for all other projects that are in the thread.

 

If it was a "this is my submission, please vote for it if you like it", then I see no problem (at least from the Ideas side) although of course EB prefers any such posts to be mainly a discussion of the MOC with a discreet link to the ideas project.

 

That still gives anyone posting in the thread the opportunity to see what’s been posted already and choose whether or not to support it. Moreover, here’s what’s posted in the actual thread, which is a bit different:

Quote

I've noticed that some LEGO Ideas projects tend to do well, get to about 1,000 supporters, and start to falter. I'd like to humbly suggest that we cooperate to help others get their best projects moving more. Here is a thread to do so, hopefully it's OK. Thanks to Graupensuppe for the suggestion.

As you can see, the final realization isn’t so rigid.

Beyond that, I’m still mystified as to why you think it’s somehow bad for people to pledge to support one another’s projects. Yes, obviously getting a project fully supported and into review carries an implicit assumption of worthiness, but it’s also a given (if unstated) that folks will corral support from wherever they can. For example, I think it’s expected that project creators will try to elicit support from friends and family, even though in most cases that means people who would otherwise have zero interest in LEGO and would never look at the Ideas site will set up accounts and give support to their loved ones. Is that wrong?

(Apologies for the weird shifts in text size.)

Edited September 18, 2018 by Blondie-Wan

[Bricked1980]

4 hours ago, parsom said:

Exactly, Ideas main page looks like a garbage bin. Ideas projects mixed with Rebrick entries.

Am I missing something or is there an option to sort the view so that it filters out the contest entries and only shows the Ideas submissions? I can't find the option but it would certainly help if there was an one.

I do wonder if Lego are putting all their energy in to the contests at the minute and getting that fully integrated in to the Ideas site. Maybe that's why there are all these bugs and issues with Lego Ideas at the minute. Also I notice they don't seem to be making staff picks as often as they used to. We had a couple over the past week but now that seems to have stopped again.

I do hope they don't gradually phase out Lego Ideas and eventually replace the whole thing with just Rebrick contests. 

[Blondie-Wan]

Oh, and with another Monday comes another 10K Club interview, this time with the creator of the Mystery Science Theater 3000 project.

[Modeltrainman]

@Blondie-Wan Did I do something wrong by setting up the mutual support thread? I thought it was a great idea, now we're seeing pushback...

[Blondie-Wan]

Well, I don’t think so, but MAB and Artanis I seem to disagree.

Actually, I think the ones to ask would be the LEGO Ideas team, who can offer a definitive ruling on whether it’s acceptable, and the staff of EB, who can offer a definitive ruling on whether it’s acceptable here.

Edited September 18, 2018 by Blondie-Wan

[JGuy]

4 hours ago, Bricked1980 said:

Am I missing something or is there an option to sort the view so that it filters out the contest entries and only shows the Ideas submissions? I can't find the option but it would certainly help if there was an one.

It's not particularly clear, but if you refine the results on the discover page to "Gathering Support" then it displays only the ideas submissions! :)

[Bricked1980]

14 hours ago, JGuy said:

It's not particularly clear, but if you refine the results on the discover page to "Gathering Support" then it displays only the ideas submissions! :)

Ah yes I see what you mean, thanks for that.

All I was really wanting to do was view all the newest entries on the homepage so I could check out all the most recent Ideas submissions. Problem is when you filter by "New" on the homepage it jumbles them all up with the contest entries. 

[MAB]

22 hours ago, Blondie-Wan said:

Beyond that, I’m still mystified as to why you think it’s somehow bad for people to pledge to support one another’s projects.

 

Not that it matters, but it comes down to what you interpret this means: pledges to support all other projects in the thread. To me, if you pledge to do something then you have to do it or you have broken the pledge. Here, the pledge is to support all projects that are added. That is not all projects you like, but all projects. To me, that is essentially buying / selling support.

 

 

[Blondie-Wan]

1 hour ago, MAB said:

Not that it matters, but it comes down to what you interpret this means: pledges to support all other projects in the thread. To me, if you pledge to do something then you have to do it or you have broken the pledge. Here, the pledge is to support all projects that are added. That is not all projects you like, but all projects. To me, that is essentially buying / selling support.

 

 

And supporting other people’s projects is bad because...

...

???

[MAB]

1 hour ago, Blondie-Wan said:

And supporting other people’s projects is bad because...

...

???

Read the last two pages. Supporting other people's projects not because you think they are any good, like them or would buy them but because you made a pledge to do it in return for votes for your project is bad because it does not raise "good" projects - that is, ones that people actually like. It raises all projects that join the thread. If 1000 (well 1001) people join the thread, they should all get 1000 votes. There is no selection between them based on merit. They all get 1000 as they pledged to vote for each other. What good is that?

[Blondie-Wan]

 

1 hour ago, MAB said:

Read the last two pages.

I am the last two pages.  

Quote

Supporting other people's projects not because you think they are any good, like them or would buy them but because you made a pledge to do it in return for votes for your project is bad because it does not raise "good" projects - that is, ones that people actually like.

That presupposes no one likes those projects, and that a project in that thread can not be one anyone would consider good otherwise, which is not the case. I think what you mean to say is that it doesn’t raise projects specifically because they’re good. That is true, but that’s not the same thing as it raising projects that are inherently, automatically not good.

Moreover, I hardly need point out (but will anyway) that goodness (of an Ideas project) is in the eye of the beholder. Furthermore, there are actually a number of perfectly valid, legitimate reasons for supporting a project, some of which transcend whether it’s “good” or not.

Quote

It raises all projects that join the thread. If 1000 (well 1001) people join the thread, they should all get 1000 votes. There is no selection between them based on merit. They all get 1000 as they pledged to vote for each other. What good is that?

As you yourself pointed out previously, this thread alone isn’t going to get anyone to 10k; at most, if say 1000 people sign up (which is wildly unlikely), it’ll get everyone 1000 supports. That’s not nearly enough to get to review (though it was in the earliest, Japan-only era of LEGO CUUSOO)...

... but it can be enough to get a project’s “foot in the door”, so to speak - and if nothing else, help it past the initial deadline hurdle, so that it has enough time to be more fully evaluated by the teeming multitudes. This can be crucial. I have seen more than a few projects I considered not merely good but outright great, yet which never made it to 10k, given how difficult it can be to attract attention; some I consider outstanding never even made it to a thousand. Getting to ten times that is clearly difficult enough that it just doesn’t happen unless a lot of people really like a project; the initial boost merely increases a product idea’s chances of surviving long enough to be noticed.

At least, that’s my thinking. Certainly I don’t see anything wrong with a mutual support thread to increase support for all participants. But perhaps I’m wrong, and the Ideas team would indeed see it your way. I’ve therefore gone ahead and asked them for a ruling.

Edited September 19, 2018 by Blondie-Wan

[fred67]

5 hours ago, Blondie-Wan said:

That presupposes no one likes those projects, and that a project in that thread can not be one anyone would consider good otherwise, which is not the case. I think what you mean to say is that it doesn’t raise projects specifically because they’re good. That is true, but that’s not the same thing as it raising projects that are inherently, automatically not good.

Moreover, I hardly need point out (but will anyway) that goodness (of an Ideas project) is in the eye of the beholder. Furthermore, there are actually a number of perfectly valid, legitimate reasons for supporting a project, some of which transcend whether it’s “good” or not.

You're being pedantic.  It's clear that he meant that it's not raising projects because they are good.

And I completely disagree with you on your last sentence.  It's true that the worthiness of a project is in the eye of the beholder, and that beholder may have varied reasons for feeling a project is worthy, but supporting a project you don't think is "good" and wouldn't even buy is just plain counter to the objective of Ideas.  That doesn't mean we can't disagree on the worth of a submission, it just means you should support projects that actually make you want to buy it.  After all - are you then lying when it asks how many you would buy or how much you would pay for this set?  It's not asking what you think the set is worth, it's asking how much YOU would pay for it.  If you wouldn't buy it, the answer is zero.

 

[icm]

9 minutes ago, fred67 said:

Supporting a project you don't think is "good" and wouldn't even buy is just plain counter to the objective of Ideas.  That doesn't mean we can't disagree on the worth of a submission, it just means you should support projects that actually make you want to buy it.  After all - are you then lying when it asks how many you would buy or how much you would pay for this set?  It's not asking what you think the set is worth, it's asking how much YOU would pay for it.  If you wouldn't buy it, the answer is zero.

That's true to a point, but - 

The Ideas forms specifically say that there is no obligation to buy.  If I were only to support projects that I personally would buy, considering my tastes and budget, I could only support four or five a year.  More to the point, I often support projects that I personally am not terribly interested in because I see that they are well done and interesting to many people.  My vote for a project like that, especially if it doesn't have a lot of support yet, is intended to make the project more visible to people who are more interested.  For example, would I buy a set of four Lego dinosaur skeletons?  Probably not, but I know a lot of people would, so I supported that idea so that the people who are interested in it can at least see it get to the review stage.  That's my main criterion in supporting a project: do I want to see it get to the review stage?  Not do I want this on my shelf.  That means I will sometimes support a large group of projects of varying quality and similar subject matter or even a project that's objectively pretty bad, because I want something of that kind to get to the review stage.  That means supporting every halfway-decent rocket or airplane and some very primitive builds based on an IP I like.  As another example, I would absolutely not have bought the initial Saturn V submission.  It was clumsy and ugly.  But the set is fantastic.

I don't know how I feel about a "mutual support group" for Ideas, because it does raise obvious issues of supporting projects simply because they've joined the group regardless of their quality.  But I sure wouldn't call it a lie to support a project in that group that I wouldn't actually buy.

Edited September 19, 2018 by icm
Added a phrase.

[Blondie-Wan]

51 minutes ago, fred67 said:

You're being pedantic.  It's clear that he meant that it's not raising projects because they are good.

And I completely disagree with you on your last sentence.  It's true that the worthiness of a project is in the eye of the beholder, and that beholder may have varied reasons for feeling a project is worthy, but supporting a project you don't think is "good" and wouldn't even buy is just plain counter to the objective of Ideas.  That doesn't mean we can't disagree on the worth of a submission, it just means you should support projects that actually make you want to buy it.  After all - are you then lying when it asks how many you would buy or how much you would pay for this set?  It's not asking what you think the set is worth, it's asking how much YOU would pay for it.  If you wouldn't buy it, the answer is zero.

 

Except that it is possible to want to buy a set without thinking it's good, simply for the parts it offers. I’m sure many of us have bought sets specifically for the parts assortment, not because we were particularly interested in the model. I’m not sure I’ve supported any projects that interested me only because of the parts, but the parts that would likely be included have been a factor in at least some of my support selections, and I can easily envision cases in which they’d be the whole grounds (for example, someone who misses the old single-color bulk parts pack LEGO used to offer, who chose to support Nathan Sawaya’s Small Yellow from a few years ago hoping it would be a more economical way of getting lots of yellow bricks than a trip to Pick-a-Brick or Bricklink).

More importantly, the support questions actually don’t ask how many you would buy; they ask how many you think “most people” would buy (with the obvious assumption it refers only to people who would get it at all, since even the most popular LEGO sets surely sell to a small minority of the world population), and how much you would expect to pay - and yes, I get the wording of that, but it’s clearly meant as a way of asking what we think the price would be (or should be), as opposed to how much we personally anticipate paying.

And as icm notes, the overall Ideas experience takes some pains to note there’s no requirement or obligation to buy (honestly, it’s hard enough gathering support without it; the whole endeavor would probably be unworkable with it in place). While I’m not sure whether I’ve supported projects that interested me only because of the parts, I can say I’ve supported lots of projects that weren’t necessarily something that interested me at all, but which I thought had commercial potential and large followings, or which were so well-done I wanted to reward them (for example, I know I at least once supported a Harry Potter project even though I’m not really a Harry Potter fan, simply because I thought it was a really beautiful build).

[fred67]

4 hours ago, Blondie-Wan said:

Except that it is possible to want to buy a set without thinking it's good, simply for the parts it offers

...

and how much you would expect to pay - and yes, I get the wording of that, but it’s clearly meant as a way of asking what we think the price would be (or should be), as opposed to how much we personally anticipate paying.

Of course there's no obligation to buy - you might think it's worth $50 and it ends up being $100, then it's not worth it to you.  And I like how you get to be pedantic, and I don't... the wording is the wording, and unlike @MAB, they've got plenty of lawyers double checking every word they put on that site.

And for the record, if you think it's a good parts pack and, for the right price, would be worth it just for that, then you think it's a good idea... like I said, we all have different reasons for thing the submission is good, we all look for different things, and some people look for things like parts packs.  "Hey, I like that Idea submission!  It would be a great parts pack!"  It's a valid reason.

But clearly they are gauging interest in sets, and if you vote for something you have no interest in, then it's skewing the results (and it's the reason they kept jacking up the required number of votes).  If you think it's worthy for other people, then let them vote for it.

And really, what we're discussing here is a "mutual vote" club, which simply isn't justifiable.

Honestly - there was suggestion floating around that, instead of this bricklink AFOL nonsense they are doing, TLG should make Ideas more like Kickstarter.  They get a tight estimate of what X number of copies of the set would cost to produce and be profitable, then your vote is a requirement to buy (but you'd know the cost up front).  Then you'd get rid of this mutual-votes idiocy, and the bar for number of supporters could be much lower.

Edited September 20, 2018 by fred67

[MAB]

15 hours ago, Blondie-Wan said:

As you yourself pointed out previously, this thread alone isn’t going to get anyone to 10k; at most, if say 1000 people sign up (which is wildly unlikely), it’ll get everyone 1000 supports. That’s not nearly enough to get to review (though it was in the earliest, Japan-only era of LEGO CUUSOO)...

... but it can be enough to get a project’s “foot in the door”, so to speak - and if nothing else, help it past the initial deadline hurdle, so that it has enough time to be more fully evaluated by the teeming multitudes. This can be crucial. I have seen more than a few projects I considered not merely good but outright great, yet which never made it to 10k, given how difficult it can be to attract attention; some I consider outstanding never even made it to a thousand. Getting to ten times that is clearly difficult enough that it just doesn’t happen unless a lot of people really like a project; the initial boost merely increases a product idea’s chances of surviving long enough to be noticed.

 

2

And the other point here is that it doesn't help get a foot in the door if everyone else's foot is already in the door. If 1000 people get to 1000 votes, each of their submissions is still buried in with the 1000 other projects with 1000 votes.

[Blondie-Wan]

8 hours ago, fred67 said:

Of course there's no obligation to buy - you might think it's worth $50 and it ends up being $100, then it's not worth it to you.  And I like how you get to be pedantic, and I don't...

I never said anything about you being pedantic. You can be as pedantic as you like; I’m not going to stop you.

8 hours ago, fred67 said:

the wording is the wording, and unlike @MAB, they've got plenty of lawyers double checking every word they put on that site.

And for the record, if you think it's a good parts pack and, for the right price, would be worth it just for that, then you think it's a good idea... like I said, we all have different reasons for thing the submission is good, we all look for different things, and some people look for things like parts packs.  "Hey, I like that Idea submission!  It would be a great parts pack!"  It's a valid reason.

But clearly they are gauging interest in sets, and if you vote for something you have no interest in, then it's skewing the results (and it's the reason they kept jacking up the required number of votes).  If you think it's worthy for other people, then let them vote for it.

So by the same token, submitters shouldn’t get their friends and family to vote for them? I mean, presumably even most AFOLs have plenty of folks in their lives who aren’t AFOLs, and do not buy LEGO, but it seems frankly inconceivable that someone might toil over a project and submit it, and begin gathering votes, yet not solicit support from the closest people in one’s life.

Moreover, my lack of interest in a set concept is hardly any more an indicator I won’t buy a set than my interest in it is an indicator that I will. I buy sets all the time, for numerous reasons, even when they weren’t initially of any particular interest, and at the same time, I often miss sets I really, really want. It happens. The upshot is that there’s a certain amount of chaos and unpredictability - and not just for me, but to some extent for everyone. If we all supported only those projects we’re absolutely sure we’d get, hardly anyone would support anything, and the whole endeavor would collapse.

General interest in and support for an Ideas project is still a useful (imperfect, but useful) indicator of the likely commercial interest in a resulting set. If I support a project, there is something about it I like that increases the likelihood I’d buy a set from it over one I didn’t support, and I’m sure that’s true for most people. They look at the results in aggregate, and make decisions based (in part) upon that.

8 hours ago, fred67 said:

And really, what we're discussing here is a "mutual vote" club, which simply isn't justifiable.

How? Why?

8 hours ago, fred67 said:

Honestly - there was suggestion floating around that, instead of this bricklink AFOL nonsense they are doing, TLG should make Ideas more like Kickstarter.  They get a tight estimate of what X number of copies of the set would cost to produce and be profitable, then your vote is a requirement to buy (but you'd know the cost up front).  Then you'd get rid of this mutual-votes idiocy, and the bar for number of supporters could be much lower.

Kickstarter is likely a non-starter for LEGO (at least as a replacement for Ideas goes), as the business case is just one consideration out of several that go into determining whether an Ideas product idea can be made into a set. There’s licensing. There’s safety. They’re not going to take money in advance for a set it turns out they can’t produce. Heck, even the build difference between a product idea and a final set could be a problem if backers don’t like how a set turns out. To be honest, I think this solution causes vastly more problems than the “issue” it seeks to remedy.

Just my opinion, of course.

4 hours ago, MAB said:

And the other point here is that it doesn't help get a foot in the door if everyone else's foot is already in the door. If 1000 people get to 1000 votes, each of their submissions is still buried in with the 1000 other projects with 1000 votes.

Right, but it does elevate them above the 10,000 or 20,000 projects with a hundred votes or fewer. At that point, it becomes much easier for others to sift through them and decide which ones they want to support.

(Note also that the actual numbers aren’t nearly as high as in your example, or in my response to it, which for the sake of argument takes your numbers as given. There are, as of this writing, just 1724 product ideas currently gathering support; that includes everything, from things with over 9000 supports that might cross the finish line any day now, to things that were just posted and have single-digit numbers of posts. There aren’t, and almost certainly will never be, anywhere close to 1000 people in the mutual support thread. It’s not out of the question, though, that it might get a hundred, which is enough to get that initial deadline extension that’s pretty important.)

[Bricked1980]

Really pleased to say my Lego Ideas model is featured in another publication in stores from today. I have made it in to Blocks magazine featuring a double page spread and interview with me.  

This issue of the magazine is also a good one for Lego Ideas fans, featuring Voltron on the front cover and a big review of the set.

 

Edited September 20, 2018 by Bricked1980