| Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | mfav  | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2020 14:07 | | Subject: | Re: Have A Heart | | Viewed: | 62 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In General, BLUSER13161 writes:
| | Forgot to mention: I would like to be identified only by a completely random
number in future comic strips and not by a cleverly brick-built LEGO tornado.
|
Ok. After tomorrow.
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2020 14:02 | | Subject: | Re: Have A Heart | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In General, mfav writes:
| | Now go ahead and point out where I'm wrong, and I'll make another comic
strip
|
Forgot to mention: I would like to be identified only by a completely random
number in future comic strips and not by a cleverly brick-built LEGO tornado.
|
 |
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2020 13:57 | | Subject: | Re: Have A Heart | | Viewed: | 47 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In General, mfav writes:
| | You know, sometimes you seem to misinterpret the stuff I put in the comics as
a personal point of view. That is not the case.
|
Perhaps. And I shouldn't. I apologize.
| | If you want my personal point of view, it is that it is the individual in question
who should decide whether or not their feces is public. Not you. Not I.
|
I agree. But I will qualify that by saying that once you make some contribution
to the world, you may have to trade a little privacy for that. And BrickLink
has made no secret of the fact that contributions are credited to users. Everyone
should know the deal going in when they choose to contribute.
There is such a thing as later changing your mind and asking to be removed from
public/private records, but I don't believe that these contributors did so.
| | Bricklink in this instance is presumably attempting to meet compliance with these
new privacy laws.
|
Maybe. This is the general consensus. I think it was more of a case of a poorly-researched
law and an over-reaction.
| | The law is the law and the affected bodies must be in compliance or in violation.
|
Yes, but companies and individuals have the ability to challenge unjust laws.
Some have.
| | Now go ahead and point out where I'm wrong, and I'll make another comic
strip
|
It is good to have a plan and it seems like we have one. 
|
|
| Author: | mfav | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2020 13:30 | | Subject: | Re: Have A Heart | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In General, BLUSER13161 writes:
| | mfav makes the point that these contributors didn't contribute much and it
was a long time ago. He's saying that it therefore doesn't matter how
we treat them.
|
You know, sometimes you seem to misinterpret the stuff I put in the comics as
a personal point of view. That is not the case. The comics stuff is made to be
funny...well hopefully funny...not to be anything else.
If you want my personal point of view, it is that it is the individual in question
who should decide whether or not their sh*t is public. Not you. Not I.
Bricklink in this instance is presumably attempting to meet compliance with these
new privacy laws. I'm not debating the efficacy of the laws, or the aesthetics,
or morality or anything else, because it's irrelevant. The law is the law
and the affected bodies must be in compliance or in violation.
Given that there are a number of users X whom, presumably Bricklink cannot contact
to affirm their willingness to allow their sh*t to be displayed on the site,
BL likely doesn't have a choice but to anonymize them. Well, they have the
choice to be in violation of the law, but I assume that isn't the choice
that has been made.
Melville and Shakespeare are long dead. You can't cyberpunk them and steal
their identities. The cases with the anonymized users are likely unknown.
I don't necessarily disagree with your general sentiments. But your sentiments
are not the law. BL doesn't have to disagree with your sentiments either,
but not being in compliance with the law is a whole different deal.
Apples and oranges.
Now go ahead and point out where I'm wrong, and I'll make another comic
strip, and tomorrow will be another day.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2020 13:27 | | Subject: | Re: Have A Heart | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In General, BLUSER13161 writes:
| | So: there is a somewhat recent trend in society of erasing people from history.
A number of different reasons are used to justify this. In this instance, privacy
appears to have been the reason.
|
Correction: perhaps the trend is not so recent. There was another time and place
in history when people were reduced to numbers by those in power.
Should I bring that up? No.
Is it in any way comparable to what BrickLink has done? No, there is no comparison.
I only mention it to illustrate the thought process that goes into disrespecting
people enough to reduce them to anonymous numbers.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2020 13:04 | | Subject: | Re: Have A Heart | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In General, BLUSER13161 writes:
| | A username is not (and correct me if I'm wrong) PII.
|
Correction: it is PII of an extremely limited sort, but not the kind intended
to be protected by law so far as I'm aware.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2020 12:57 | | Subject: | Re: Have A Heart | | Viewed: | 65 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In General, Legolibrarian2 writes:
| | This may be in response to a new law that took effect in California this month.
It has to do with personal information in an online environment. BL headquarters
is in California, so I guess they have to abide by the law.
|
No, from what I can tell by reading a summary of that law it would not be applicable
in this situation.
The following is not directed to you, but to several readers who really don't
seem to get it. I understand getting it and disagreeing, but some people really
aren't getting it.
So: there is a somewhat recent trend in society of erasing people from history.
A number of different reasons are used to justify this. In this instance, privacy
appears to have been the reason. Obviously I disagree with that trend.
BrickLink assigns each person a unique identifying number upon sign-up. This
is necessary for their database of members. Now it has reduced certain users
to that number, even though the vast majority (probably all) of them did not
request it.
I will present a couple of situations that may be somewhat analogous depending
on perspective.
Imagine a graveyard where the company that owns the graveyard has assigned each
gravesite a number. One day the company goes through and erases the name from
every headstone (or most of them) and replaces those names with the numbers they
have assigned to the plots. The reasons why they did so are irrelevant - it
should be obvious that this is not a wise decision on the part of the company.
Here's another: imagine that someone comes up with a numbering system for
authors and assigns every author throughout history a unique identifying number.
Then, one day, they have the power and ability to replace each author's
name with a number in all records kept by humans. So they do it.
And then we have Hamlet by Author_291763. Moby Dick by Author_9182772. 1984
by Author_3177634. I could continue, of course.
mfav makes the point that these contributors didn't contribute much and it
was a long time ago. He's saying that it therefore doesn't matter how
we treat them. Using the analogy above, then, if an author hasn't contributed
much to the collective human store of literature, then it's okay to erase
them. But Shakespeare, much as he desired anonymity, won't get it because
he contributed too much.
Of course, the logical response is that catalog contributions are not works of
art. That is fair, but they are still effort someone put forth with the understanding
and promise that they would receive perpetual credit for the volunteer work they
did. BrickLink has broken that promise and there is no way to justify that.
A username is not (and correct me if I'm wrong) PII.
It amazes me that I'm putting so much effort into explaining the effects
of erasing history. I think I may know the reason: nearly everyone alive today
grew up in cultures where everything is disposable. It is a logical extension
to see humans in the same way. I'm arguing against that way of looking at
the past. I'm arguing for treating people with the respect they deserve
and keeping promises. I'm arguing against erasure.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2020 12:07 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 75022-1 | | Viewed: | 22 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
| In Inventories Requests, teraith writes:
| | Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Add 2 Part 64802 Dark Bluish Gray Minifigure, Jet Pack with Nozzles
Comments from Submitter:
The deathwatch command have them as per the instructions.
|
Those items are already included in the inventory of the set. They exist in
the sub-inventories of these figures:
If you click on the Break Minifigs link at the top of the inventory page
the jet packs will be shown in the complete inventory.
The packs, by the way, are pearl dark gray, not dark bluish gray.
|
|
| Author: | MocFodder | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2020 10:54 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 75022-1 | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Add 2 Part 64802 Dark Bluish Gray Minifigure, Jet Pack with Nozzles
Comments from Submitter:
The deathwatch command have them as per the instructions.
|
|
| Author: | Turez | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2020 10:19 | | Subject: | Re: Question about flags (parts 4495a and 4495b) | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
| In Inventories, WilliamRaine writes:
| | In Inventories, BLUSER13161 writes:
| | In Inventories, WilliamRaine writes:
| | I am replacing a few parts on set 7038-1 Troll Assault Wagon and noticed the
two flags included are listed as different variants....the dark blue is lefted
as "wave left" and the pearl gold as "wave right"
My set has the opposite style flags, and the instructions clearly show both flags
as the "wave left" variant.
|
If you scroll all the way to the bottom of the inventory page:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogItemInv.asp?S=7038-1
you will see the following sentence:
View a log of completed changes made to this inventory.
Clicking there will display the history of changes made to this set's inventory.
| | Is this a mistake in the inventory, or did the set
really come with both flags pointing in different directions?
|
According to BrickLink's timeline the flag change happened roughly around
2008, which is the year this set was released. So it's quite possible that
some 7038-1 sets came with left flags, some came with right flags, and some came
with both.
|
I see, I see. Thank you for the information. Since the flag change happened that
year, would it be correct to submit a change request for the flags and list the
"wave left" variant as the regular part since it appears that way in the instructions
and part list, and the "wave right" variant as an alternate item, do you think?
|
The inventory should indeed include the "a" type as regular part and the "b"
type as alternate part for both colors. I have submitted the change requests:
https://www.bricklink.com/messageThread.asp?ID=262880&nID=1176544
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
|
