| Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | bb373892  | | Posted: | Jan 23, 2017 19:12 | | Subject: | Re: Auto-ban Users That Request Custom Form Fraud | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, ToddMyers writes:
| | The argument is not to immediately ban a buyer on a first offense. Sure, go
ahead and educate on the first offense. Educate on the second offense. Educate
on the third offense, even. But if a buyer persists in asking sellers to commit
fraud, over and over again, that buyer is not interested in being educated and
you know as well as I do that there will be an unscrupulous seller who takes
them up on it, and that takes a sale away from the honest seller, putting them
at a disadvantage. I would prefer that no sale happen for anyone rather than
allowing a buyer to hunt for sellers willing to commit fraud for them.
This has all be argued before in the forum, and beyond what I've already
said, I'm not gonna rehash it all in this thread. I'm sure a forum search
will provide all arguments that are out there, and from their inaction to date,
it seems that Bricklink has already make a choice to allow buyers to freely request
fraudulent activity.
|
Todd,
You represented my personal observation and what drove me to submit this perfectly,
thank you! I appreciate the good back and forth dialogue I am reading. Nothing
wrong with educating ME here either! 
| | This suggestion is a waste of time not because it's without merit, but because
Bricklink has already chosen to ignore the issue.
|
That would be a sincere bummer. If it's coming up this often and new folks
coming in continue to raise it (such as me), perhaps it will be addressed with
some happy medium at some point..
|
 |
| Author: | bb373892 | | Posted: | Jan 23, 2017 19:04 | | Subject: | Re: Auto-ban Users That Request Custom Form Fraud | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
| | In Suggestions, calibrick writes:
| | Respectfully recommend an auto-ban of any user that requests a seller lie on
customs forms based on a specific criteria (e.g., 5 unique seller complaints
for the same username). Note this in the buyer guide/help context (against the
rules, fraud, account will be auto-banned).
Worse, some buyers are punishing sellers by leaving negative feedback when they
are merely being good, fair-minded citizens that are following federal regulations
and complying with the LAW.
My understanding is that this is not the first time this has been requested.
Seems to me this could be a field appended to the existing database that is populated
by admins based on seller complaints as a regulatory-minded service to the seller
community.
|
How has this been a problem for you if your store shows 0 sales?
Not sure it's necessary to bother BL help desk with something you haven't
had a problem with...
|
I was being community-minded vs. representing a personal issue. I've
seen an awful lot of this raised in the forums over the past several years...
it's clearly a problem. 
|
|
| Author: | terryer_sandbox | | Posted: | Jan 23, 2017 18:59 | | Subject: | API - GET /orders more parameters needed | | Viewed: | 85 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | | Status: | Open | | Vote: | [Yes|No] | |
|
| Hi there,
i'm writing for a customer of mine a few tools which are using your API.
What bothers me currently the most is that there are to few parameters for the
Get /orders call. What we do is that we are asking all orders with the status
shipped to send a feedback and the drive_thru over the API. But since there are
not enough parameters i can provide to the API, the result will be a huge list
of orders, because the least customers are marking their orders as received.
There are several things (filters) you can include to safe server power and bandwidth,
but the easiest one is a date-filter. Let the people give the API an "From-Date"
and a "To-Date". The results are than only these in between. If you only transmit
one of them than every order up or from than will be send. If none is given,
than you do as you do now and give just everything back.
This would be pretty helpful not only for me, but also for your servers.
Other users can write other parameters they wish, like and "feedback given" parameter.
Another solution for our problem would be, if there would be more push-notification-options.
If i could receive a push-notification when the status of an order is changed
(and not only by the buyer).
So i would be really pleased if you could implement a few more parameters to
the GET /orders call as soon as possible.
Best regards
|
|
| Author: | HarryPotter71 | | Posted: | Jan 23, 2017 18:10 | | Subject: | Re: Stop Wanted List Spamming for Minifigs | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, waltzking writes:
| | Of late I am regularly getting spammed through the wanted list feature for minifigures
listed either under the wrong listing or as an incomplete "new" figure.
With the current system all figures are under the same either "new" or "used"
condition heading, but unlike sets can be listed from a few parts (everything
missing but the torso and head) or complete per the correct inventory of that
figure. This not only opens sellers to "acceptably" list wrong items, or worse
in a deceptive manner (such as the new Loki sh033a in the old Loki sh033), by
simply adding a comment like "missing cape" or "new style cape".
Clearly these are not what a buyer wants to be notified of through their wanted
list settings. Such incomplete or incorrect items also have a negative effect
toward useful sales info, or even current items for sale info. WHish is what
leads to my suggestion....
Please, can we have the same "Complete" and "Incomplete" sub-conditions for
figures like we have for sets?
This will effectively require sellers to list items accurately. If they are
not the exact item they must be listed as "Incomplete" and can then either be
excluded from search and history, or reported for misuse. Figures are a large
part of the value of a set, so if a set can't be listed without a sub-condition,
it would follow that figures (which to many are the most collectable items LEGO
makes) should have the same requirement.
Thanks for considering.
Jonathan
waltzking
|
Hi Jonathan, I don't understand why people don't just part the figure
out myself. Listing it without a head, hair or torso? Really? Just part it out
Have a great evening.
|
|
| Author: | mhortar | | Posted: | Jan 23, 2017 17:08 | | Subject: | Re: Stop Wanted List Spamming for Minifigs | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:
| | In Suggestions, tEoS writes:
| | I disagree. There are plenty of instances where someone sold a minifig that
was missing a cape (for example). I've probably bought several figs that
were missing something.
There's a market for these, so why not accommodate it by using complete/incomplete
|
I agree. There is a market for incomplete figures where a piece is missing, which
is why such a feature is good for both buyers and sellers.
|
I just wish there was a way to denote instances such as
[M=sw127] 'incomplete, missing jet pack'
is just
[M=sw126]
or
[M=sw109a] 'incomplete, missing pauldron'
is just
[M=sw036b]
Josh
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
|
USA, California
Germany, Hamburg
