Posted February 4, 200916 yr Has anyone else received this yet? I only ask, because for the previous several weeks, the back issue has arrived on Monday night, but this week nothing seem to have turned up by early Weds morning? Edited February 4, 200916 yr by vidcapper
February 4, 200916 yr Author Probably just a technical hitch, due to the weather :unsure: Per Kingofskiffle on another forum, it's not quite ready yet.
February 4, 200916 yr Yes, we do try and get the Back Issues out as quickly as possible - it's just that we are checking, each week, over 600 positions for the current issue and so to double that for the back issues - and to do the same for adding in the Year End sets as well means that things must be prioritized with the result that we can't really have a set day for issuing the back issues. We try, but the current issue takes priority. And I know nobody was complaining, so please don't read the above as any more than comments rather than an irritated comment! It's not meant to sound irritated!
February 5, 200916 yr Author Yes, we do try and get the Back Issues out as quickly as possible - it's just that we are checking, each week, over 600 positions for the current issue and so to double that for the back issues - and to do the same for adding in the Year End sets as well means that things must be prioritized with the result that we can't really have a set day for issuing the back issues. We try, but the current issue takes priority. And I know nobody was complaining, so please don't read the above as any more than comments rather than an irritated comment! It's not meant to sound irritated! I can guess how hard putting together is - so much so that I feel guilty for mentioning any errors I spot. :P
February 5, 200916 yr I can guess how hard putting together is - so much so that I feel guilty for mentioning any errors I spot. :P Don't! Errors are easy to check!
February 5, 200916 yr Author Don't! Errors are easy to check! Remember the last lot though... Most of what I saw as 'errors', were merely differences in peak positions caused by downloads of oldies not being linked with their original releases. :) I will always make that link (as with those Smiths re-releases in the issue this thread refers to in the title) in my records. Recording media & catalogue numbers are totally irrelevant to me - if it's the same song & artist, I link them. Regards,
February 6, 200916 yr Author Edit: Arrived at 10 to 1 :) And includes the return of Jon Frewin's much-missed chart commentary! :cheer: :yahoo:
February 6, 200916 yr And includes the return of Jon Frewin's much-missed chart commentary! :cheer: :yahoo: Well, just a stats section!
February 6, 200916 yr Author Well, just a stats section! BTW, watch out - there are some errors on the way to check... :)
Create an account or sign in to comment