Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | Rick_S.  | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 16:35 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Suggestions, tEoS writes:
| | Was ShackyShuffle also HoL? I recall them having similar issues.
|
I don’t remember that name.
And, of course, the forum history has been long purged.
Not long ago, HouseOfLogos was still listed as a member (I’m not sure if they
were still registred but their name was searchable: I did search because I never
remember if it was Logo or Logos).
But now these members must have become BLUSERs: can’t buy, can’t sell, no reasons
to log in to accept the new ToS.
“Dust: this is carpet; carpet, this is dust. You’ll spend a long time together.”
|
ShakeyShuffle was a character.
|
 |
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 16:34 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, infinibrix writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| |
problem is it is not just bad buyers but bad sellers, my suggestion here was
made because of a seller who left retaliatory feedback for a deserved negative
they had received from a buyer.
|
But that’s just my point with the ebays feedback system Sellers can’t leave negative
feedback for buyers which means they can’t leave retaliatory feedback in any
shape or form! Meaning the buyer is able to give their honest opinion without
fear of retaliatory feedback!
It’s a change I’ve been calling for some time:-
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1168664
I feel its only important that we understand how a seller performs(Feedback wise!)
because it goes without saying that there will always be a few difficult customers
and its how sellers deal with those tricky customers that’s important and for
those customers that are impossibly unreasonable they can be reported and dealt
with by Bricklink!
|
While I do agree such a system would be useful it could also have drawbacks too.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 16:31 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, tEoS writes:
| | Buyer left neutral feedback = error in what you wrote
| | Actually there is no error, the synopsis is based on available data. but that
is just one incident it still brings up the issue that retaliatory feedback cannot
be removed and in that, it can cause more issues down the road. and it also prevents
buyers from leaving honest feedback in fear they will receive retaliatory feedback
in response.
|
|
Wrong again: it was negative, you notice the negative feedback they left for
Sludgemonster?
https://www.bricklink.com/feedback.asp?fdbType=2&p=mjsheller
and it seems this seller is pretty notorious in not being a great seller and
leaving retaliatory feedback too.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 16:15 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, tEoS writes:
| | Was ShackyShuffle also HoL? I recall them having similar issues.
|
I don’t remember that name.
And, of course, the forum history has been long purged.
Not long ago, HouseOfLogos was still listed as a member (I’m not sure if they
were still registred but their name was searchable: I did search because I never
remember if it was Logo or Logos).
But now these members must have become BLUSERs: can’t buy, can’t sell, no reasons
to log in to accept the new ToS.
“Dust: this is carpet; carpet, this is dust. You’ll spend a long time together.”
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 16:10 | | Subject: | Re: Change Notification: Parts 4623 and 88072 | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | I don't understand why there is a 2 week waiting period.
|
This is to give members time to prepare for and potentially object to any of
the planned changes.
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 16:07 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| |
problem is it is not just bad buyers but bad sellers, my suggestion here was
made because of a seller who left retaliatory feedback for a deserved negative
they had received from a buyer.
|
But that’s just my point with the ebays feedback system Sellers can’t leave negative
feedback for buyers which means they can’t leave retaliatory feedback in any
shape or form! Meaning the buyer is able to give their honest opinion without
fear of retaliatory feedback!
It’s a change I’ve been calling for some time:-
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1168664
I feel its only important that we understand how a seller performs(Feedback wise!)
because it goes without saying that there will always be a few difficult customers
and its how sellers deal with those tricky customers that’s important and for
those customers that are impossibly unreasonable they can be reported and dealt
with by Bricklink!
|
|
| Author: | tEoS | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 16:06 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| Buyer left neutral feedback = error in what you wrote
| | Actually there is no error, the synopsis is based on available data. but that
is just one incident it still brings up the issue that retaliatory feedback cannot
be removed and in that, it can cause more issues down the road. and it also prevents
buyers from leaving honest feedback in fear they will receive retaliatory feedback
in response.
|
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 16:03 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, tEoS writes:
| | Get your facts straight. You even have an error in the incident.
You come back to the forum after all these years and pretend like no one is aware
of what is going on. I read the suggestion and do not see its merits.
The problem is not retaliatory feedback, it is with certain members.
| | didn't read the suggestion did ya? the suggestion is to have the opportunity
to have what is known as retaliatory feedback removed, this was brought about
because of an incident that happened which went like this:
|
|
Actually there is no error, the synopsis is based on available data. but that
is just one incident it still brings up the issue that retaliatory feedback cannot
be removed and in that, it can cause more issues down the road. and it also prevents
buyers from leaving honest feedback in fear they will receive retaliatory feedback
in response.
|
|
| Author: | tEoS | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 15:54 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| Was ShackyShuffle also HoL? I recall them having similar issues.
| | From what I got from the forum at that time, there were many awful delays, lots
of (tardy) refunds (so no NSS), etc.
And part of the problem was that there also were many people having no problems,
defending them and using them again.
“It didn’t happen to me, therefore it will never happen to me (because I’m special).”
Or worse: “It didn’t happen to me, therefore it didn’t happen to anyone (they
are just impatient sourpusses).”
It took months for the admins to smooth them out.
|
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 15:49 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Tracyd writes:
| | […]
| | I think it’s more a “it won’t happen to me” attitude.
Remember HouseOfLogo (and what a real mess it was).
|
Whatever happened with them was in my dark time. Before their meltdown I had
5 successful orders with them with no problems.
|
From what I got from the forum at that time, there were many awful delays, lots
of (tardy) refunds (so no NSS), etc.
And part of the problem was that there also were many people having no problems,
defending them and using them again.
“It didn’t happen to me, therefore it will never happen to me (because I’m special).”
Or worse: “It didn’t happen to me, therefore it didn’t happen to anyone (they
are just impatient sourpusses).”
It took months for the admins to smooth them out.
|
|
| Author: | tEoS | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 15:48 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| Get your facts straight. You even have an error in the incident.
You come back to the forum after all these years and pretend like no one is aware
of what is going on. I read the suggestion and do not see its merits.
The problem is not retaliatory feedback, it is with certain members.
| | didn't read the suggestion did ya? the suggestion is to have the opportunity
to have what is known as retaliatory feedback removed, this was brought about
because of an incident that happened which went like this:
|
|
|
| Author: | Tracyd | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 15:34 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:
| | […]
Part of the problem is buyers keep buying from sellers with relatively poor feedback,
suggesting (some) buyers don't care.
|
I think it’s more a “it won’t happen to me” attitude.
Remember HouseOfLogo (and what a real mess it was).
|
Whatever happened with them was in my dark time. Before their meltdown I had
5 successful orders with them with no problems.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 15:03 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, tEoS writes:
| | Voted no. I don't believe this is the solution to the problem.
The problem, as I see it, is two-fold (or maybe more) and is related to human
behavior:
1) The desire to be viewed as perfect. Further derived from one's careful
approach to their online persona (ie: through Facebook, etc. where you only see
one's "good" side or positive achievements).
2) Inability to view one's mistakes as an opportunity to learn and grow.
Blames others for their own shortcomings. Ties into ego, above.
Of course, I think these are experienced in varying degrees by at least most
individuals. The more extreme of which behave in aggressive selling practices.
|
didn't read the suggestion did ya? the suggestion is to have the opportunity
to have what is known as retaliatory feedback removed, this was brought about
because of an incident that happened which went like this:
Buyer buys items from seller
Seller ships items, but then discovers he "forgot" 3 .07 cent tires
Seller decides to refund the .21 cents without contacting buyer and getting their
input
Buyer is miffed and rightly so and leaves negative feedback
Seller turns around and leaves negative feedback for the buyer even though the
buyer did nothing wrong
Buyer is unable to have feedback removed because of the current rules
Buyer goes with only option to remove feedback and that is to file an NSS
The NSS will get dropped since the buyer was refunded but not at his request.
As it goes do you feel it is justified for said buyer to have said negative feedback
even though they did nothing wrong to deserve it? do you believe it is ok for
anyone to leave retaliatory feedback because they got a deserved negative?
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 14:52 | | Subject: | Re: Change Notification: Parts 4623 and 88072 | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | NOTIFICATION OF CHANGES TO PARTS 4623 AND 88072
[P=88072]
Members have recently identified two problems with these part variant entries:
1. The additional notes need to be updated.
2. Part 4623 comes in both 5 MM and 6 MM horizontal arm length versions.
A member has submitted a request for us to take action.
What changes will happen?
1. The title of Part 4623 currently in parentheses will be changed to
read "Undetermined Arm Length," but the part will not immediately be marked for
deletion.
2. A new catalog entry will be created with the part number 4623a and
the title "Plate, Modified 1 x 2 with Arm Up (Horizontal Arm Length 6mm)."
3. Part 88072 has 4623b as an alternate item number. The primary number
(88072) and alternate item number (4623b) will be switched for this part.
4. The additional notes for all three entries will be updated for brevity
and ease of comprehension.
When will these changes occur?
All four changes are planned to occur between the hours of 8 AM and 4 PM CST
on July 8th, 2020.
Why are these changes necessary?
The changes are necessary because Part 4623 comes in both 5 MM and 6 MM horizontal
arm lengths. The catalog does not currently recognize this fact and some inventories
include incorrect part variants.
How will these changes affect BrickLink members?
Sellers should move their for-sale listings from the undetermined entry to either
4623a or 4623b as soon as reasonably possible after the July 8th changes. Members
who object to one or more changes should immediately provide input with clear
reasons for their objections.
|
I don't understand why there is a 2 week waiting period.
|
|
| Author: | tEoS | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 14:51 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| Voted no. I don't believe this is the solution to the problem.
The problem, as I see it, is two-fold (or maybe more) and is related to human
behavior:
1) The desire to be viewed as perfect. Further derived from one's careful
approach to their online persona (ie: through Facebook, etc. where you only see
one's "good" side or positive achievements).
2) Inability to view one's mistakes as an opportunity to learn and grow.
Blames others for their own shortcomings. Ties into ego, above.
Of course, I think these are experienced in varying degrees by at least most
individuals. The more extreme of which behave in aggressive selling practices.
|
|
| Author: | Stuart9 | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 14:44 | | Subject: | Re: Change Notification: Parts 4623 and 88072 | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| Thanks, changes and dates noted.
In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | NOTIFICATION OF CHANGES TO PARTS 4623 AND 88072
[P=88072]
Members have recently identified two problems with these part variant entries:
1. The additional notes need to be updated.
2. Part 4623 comes in both 5 MM and 6 MM horizontal arm length versions.
A member has submitted a request for us to take action.
What changes will happen?
1. The title of Part 4623 currently in parentheses will be changed to
read "Undetermined Arm Length," but the part will not immediately be marked for
deletion.
2. A new catalog entry will be created with the part number 4623a and
the title "Plate, Modified 1 x 2 with Arm Up (Horizontal Arm Length 6mm)."
3. Part 88072 has 4623b as an alternate item number. The primary number
(88072) and alternate item number (4623b) will be switched for this part.
4. The additional notes for all three entries will be updated for brevity
and ease of comprehension.
When will these changes occur?
All four changes are planned to occur between the hours of 8 AM and 4 PM CST
on July 8th, 2020.
Why are these changes necessary?
The changes are necessary because Part 4623 comes in both 5 MM and 6 MM horizontal
arm lengths. The catalog does not currently recognize this fact and some inventories
include incorrect part variants.
How will these changes affect BrickLink members?
Sellers should move their for-sale listings from the undetermined entry to either
4623a or 4623b as soon as reasonably possible after the July 8th changes. Members
who object to one or more changes should immediately provide input with clear
reasons for their objections.
|
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 14:30 | | Subject: | Change Notification: Parts 4623 and 88072 | | Viewed: | 138 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
| NOTIFICATION OF CHANGES TO PARTS 4623 AND 88072
[P=88072]
Members have recently identified two problems with these part variant entries:
1. The additional notes need to be updated.
2. Part 4623 comes in both 5 MM and 6 MM horizontal arm length versions.
A member has submitted a request for us to take action.
What changes will happen?
1. The title of Part 4623 currently in parentheses will be changed to
read "Undetermined Arm Length," but the part will not immediately be marked for
deletion.
2. A new catalog entry will be created with the part number 4623a and
the title "Plate, Modified 1 x 2 with Arm Up (Horizontal Arm Length 6mm)."
3. Part 88072 has 4623b as an alternate item number. The primary number
(88072) and alternate item number (4623b) will be switched for this part.
4. The additional notes for all three entries will be updated for brevity
and ease of comprehension.
When will these changes occur?
All four changes are planned to occur between the hours of 8 AM and 4 PM CST
on July 8th, 2020.
Why are these changes necessary?
The changes are necessary because Part 4623 comes in both 5 MM and 6 MM horizontal
arm lengths. The catalog does not currently recognize this fact and some inventories
include incorrect part variants.
How will these changes affect BrickLink members?
Sellers should move their for-sale listings from the undetermined entry to either
4623a or 4623b as soon as reasonably possible after the July 8th changes. Members
who object to one or more changes should immediately provide input with clear
reasons for their objections.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 14:28 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:
| | In Suggestions, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Suggestions, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:
| | […]
Part of the problem is buyers keep buying from sellers with relatively poor feedback,
suggesting (some) buyers don't care.
|
I think it’s more a “it won’t happen to me” attitude.
Remember HouseOfLogo (and what a real mess it was).
|
Yes, and it was a huge ordeal to get that store shut down. I have often thought
of establishing some kind of disciplinary board to handle these high profile
cases. But regardless of the mechanism, honest data from users would be a big
help.
|
If you want honest feedback from buyers, then remove feedback for buyers. That
way, they don't have anything to lose by being honest (not that a buyer's
feedback matters anyway). Buyers getting only positives like at ebay is pointless.
You might as well just use the buyer order count instead, it amounts to the same
thing and saves a seller the time of leaving positive feedback.
It would be nice though to have a buyer score based not on the feedback they
received, but the feedback they left. If a buyer continuously leaves negatives
or neutrals as they feel they have the power to do so with no comeback, then
they are the problem. It should not be anonymous either. If they leave a seller
a negative (or multiple negatives), then the seller should have the right to
ban them from continuing to purchase and continue to leave poor feedback. If
a buyer has a problem with say 1 in every 20 orders, then leaving negative feedback
on that scale is fine. However, if they claim they have negative experiences
in 1 in every 2 orders then I imagine they will get added to many stoplists and
should probably be banned themselves.
I think you have to be careful though, giving lots of power to buyers might actually
reduce standards. If a buyer says they have a problem and is probably going to
leave negative feedback anyway no matter what the seller does, then the seller
has no incentive to put things right. And in a similar way, if negatives become
more common and there is some threshold set then there is less of an incentive
to maintain an excellent record when good enough is still enough to keep selling.
I think there is a better way for you to maintain standards than through feedback
though and that is through NSS claims. Not completed ones, but claims. For example,
if a seller continually fails to deliver but refunds when caught and does this
time and time again, why are they allowed to continue getting away with it? Just
refunding when they get a complaint does not mean they are a good seller.
You could always have another box for buyers to fill in when leaving feedback
- asking did you get everything in your order in the stated condition. If a seller
gets below a certain percentage for those, they should be warned. If they continue
to get very low ratings, then they should be banned. Of course, it should only
count if a buyer fills in this information for all of their orders.
|
I'd disagree with that assumption, since right now the only negative feedback
I have is as a buyer and I did deserve it I failed in my obligation to the seller.
and as to feedback I have left as both a buyer and seller, they were deserved.
in fact in one case where I was the buyer my feedback along with others helped
to inform the public the seller was a serious problem and even then it took awhile
to get rid of them. https://www.bricklink.com/feedback.asp?viewType=&u=lego_police2
|
|
| Author: | Turez | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 14:23 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 60265-1 | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Change 1 Part Lime {87989 Minifigure, Utensil Syringe to 53020 Minifigure, Utensil Syringe with 2 Hollows}
* Change 1 Part Lime {87989 Minifigure, Utensil Syringe to 53020 Minifigure, Utensil Syringe with 2 Hollows} (Extra)
Comments from Submitter:
Marek just told me that this new syringe type got its own catalog entry today - and I have the new type 53020 in my copy of set 60265 which was used to create the inventory.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 14:11 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Suggestions, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:
| | […]
Part of the problem is buyers keep buying from sellers with relatively poor feedback,
suggesting (some) buyers don't care.
|
I think it’s more a “it won’t happen to me” attitude.
Remember HouseOfLogo (and what a real mess it was).
|
Yes, and it was a huge ordeal to get that store shut down. I have often thought
of establishing some kind of disciplinary board to handle these high profile
cases. But regardless of the mechanism, honest data from users would be a big
help.
|
If you want honest feedback from buyers, then remove feedback for buyers. That
way, they don't have anything to lose by being honest (not that a buyer's
feedback matters anyway). Buyers getting only positives like at ebay is pointless.
You might as well just use the buyer order count instead, it amounts to the same
thing and saves a seller the time of leaving positive feedback.
It would be nice though to have a buyer score based not on the feedback they
received, but the feedback they left. If a buyer continuously leaves negatives
or neutrals as they feel they have the power to do so with no comeback, then
they are the problem. It should not be anonymous either. If they leave a seller
a negative (or multiple negatives), then the seller should have the right to
ban them from continuing to purchase and continue to leave poor feedback. If
a buyer has a problem with say 1 in every 20 orders, then leaving negative feedback
on that scale is fine. However, if they claim they have negative experiences
in 1 in every 2 orders then I imagine they will get added to many stoplists and
should probably be banned themselves.
I think you have to be careful though, giving lots of power to buyers might actually
reduce standards. If a buyer says they have a problem and is probably going to
leave negative feedback anyway no matter what the seller does, then the seller
has no incentive to put things right. And in a similar way, if negatives become
more common and there is some threshold set then there is less of an incentive
to maintain an excellent record when good enough is still enough to keep selling.
I think there is a better way for you to maintain standards than through feedback
though and that is through NSS claims. Not completed ones, but claims. For example,
if a seller continually fails to deliver but refunds when caught and does this
time and time again, why are they allowed to continue getting away with it? Just
refunding when they get a complaint does not mean they are a good seller.
You could always have another box for buyers to fill in when leaving feedback
- asking did you get everything in your order in the stated condition. If a seller
gets below a certain percentage for those, they should be warned. If they continue
to get very low ratings, then they should be banned. Of course, it should only
count if a buyer fills in this information for all of their orders.
|
|
| Author: | Admin_Russell | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 13:20 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 76 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:
| | […]
Part of the problem is buyers keep buying from sellers with relatively poor feedback,
suggesting (some) buyers don't care.
|
I think it’s more a “it won’t happen to me” attitude.
Remember HouseOfLogo (and what a real mess it was).
|
Yes, and it was a huge ordeal to get that store shut down. I have often thought
of establishing some kind of disciplinary board to handle these high profile
cases. But regardless of the mechanism, honest data from users would be a big
help.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 12:28 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:
| | […]
Part of the problem is buyers keep buying from sellers with relatively poor feedback,
suggesting (some) buyers don't care.
|
I think it’s more a “it won’t happen to me” attitude.
Remember HouseOfLogo (and what a real mess it was).
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 11:12 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, infinibrix writes:
| | In Suggestions, Admin_Russell writes:
| | That, of course, is the real issue. IMO we need an auxiliary buyer feedback system
that is completely anonymous, where the results are amalgamated before presenting
them (privately) to the seller. These results could then be used to weed out
sellers who consistently perform poorly and lower the reputation of the site.
I have always felt that public feedback was not enough to raise the selling standards
of the site. For many BrickLink sellers, their standards are sky-high and represent
their passion for the hobby. For others, they do nothing but dull the effect
of the excellent sellers, cause problems for us in the Help Desk, and in general
apply a lot of pressure on us to implement a heavy-handed "sellers will only
get paid when the buyer is happy" system where BrickLink controls all the money.
|
The only problems I have with anonymous feedback is that think it may head in
a direction where the feedback left may become even more sinister!
The thing is there are always people out there that look to destroy and ruin
things simply because they can and/or they get a kick out of doing things like
that and similarly there are people who I’m sure would love to put a neutral/negative
against a sellers otherwise flawless feedback simply because they can and have
the power to do so without being bought to task about why they did this?
There may be others that begrudge a seller somewhat simply because they didn’t
agree to discount something when asked? and then you may have other competitor
sellers who may be looking to bring a high performing seller down a few pegs?
From a sellers point of view if I make a right hash of an order or end up
non-intentionally messing the customer around with mistakes, oversights or forgetting
to ship their order and I get a negative then I guess I have to just take that
on the chin but if a buyer leaves what I consider to be unfair negative then
I would at least like to be able to see who has complained and what I have done
wrong so that I can improve or choose to block the buyer if I don’t feel its
justified!
In fact I would also say that perhaps make it common knowledge to everyone using
Bricklink that by choosing to leave a negative for someone you are also choosing
to never deal with that store/person again and so perhaps put in place an auto-blocking
feature?
Presumably if someone leaves a negative they are unhappy with the way a store
performs and in which case for that same person to continue to shop in your store
for a second time would seem a bit sinister to me or am I wrong here?
Either way in some cases I’m sure people will be able to work out who left the
negative feedback anyway based on the feedback comments or the way an email conversations
went beforehand but on the other hand what if a buyer complains and still leaves
positive and yet the seller receives a negative from someone else and wrongly
assumes it’s the buyer who complained meaning you still end up with some retalitory
feedback injustices!
The only way I think this really works is as I’ve mention before with the ebay
style where sellers can’t leave anything but positive feedback for buyers and
buyers can leave whatever they feel appropriate so that the feedback system is
used to help keep all sellers on their toes and performing to high standards.
At the end of the day if there are severe feedback injustices left by buyers
I’m sure they can be reported and removed by admins where appropriate and rather
than rely on sellers feedback to attempt to tackle bad buyers, I’m sure if these
buyers are that that bad it should just be a case of reporting any outrageous
buyer behaviour to the admins so that with enough reported incidents they can
be weeded off the site for good and with it all the feedback they've left
for people!
|
problem is it is not just bad buyers but bad sellers, my suggestion here was
made because of a seller who left retaliatory feedback for a deserved negative
they had received from a buyer.
|
|
| Author: | Heartbricker | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 11:08 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, infinibrix writes:
| | In Suggestions, Admin_Russell writes:
| | That, of course, is the real issue. IMO we need an auxiliary buyer feedback system
that is completely anonymous, where the results are amalgamated before presenting
them (privately) to the seller. These results could then be used to weed out
sellers who consistently perform poorly and lower the reputation of the site.
I have always felt that public feedback was not enough to raise the selling standards
of the site. For many BrickLink sellers, their standards are sky-high and represent
their passion for the hobby. For others, they do nothing but dull the effect
of the excellent sellers, cause problems for us in the Help Desk, and in general
apply a lot of pressure on us to implement a heavy-handed "sellers will only
get paid when the buyer is happy" system where BrickLink controls all the money.
|
The only problems I have with anonymous feedback is that think it may head in
a direction where the feedback left may become even more sinister!
The thing is there are always people out there that look to destroy and ruin
things simply because they can and/or they get a kick out of doing things like
that and similarly there are people who I’m sure would love to put a neutral/negative
against a sellers otherwise flawless feedback simply because they can and have
the power to do so without being bought to task about why they did this?
There may be others that begrudge a seller somewhat simply because they didn’t
agree to discount something when asked? and then you may have other competitor
sellers who may be looking to bring a high performing seller down a few pegs?
From a sellers point of view if I make a right hash of an order or end up
non-intentionally messing the customer around with mistakes, oversights or forgetting
to ship their order and I get a negative then I guess I have to just take that
on the chin but if a buyer leaves what I consider to be unfair negative then
I would at least like to be able to see who has complained and what I have done
wrong so that I can improve or choose to block the buyer if I don’t feel its
justified!
In fact I would also say that perhaps make it common knowledge to everyone using
Bricklink that by choosing to leave a negative for someone you are also choosing
to never deal with that store/person again and so perhaps put in place an auto-blocking
feature?
Presumably if someone leaves a negative they are unhappy with the way a store
performs and in which case for that same person to continue to shop in your store
for a second time would seem a bit sinister to me or am I wrong here?
Either way in some cases I’m sure people will be able to work out who left the
negative feedback anyway based on the feedback comments or the way an email conversations
went beforehand but on the other hand what if a buyer complains and still leaves
positive and yet the seller receives a negative from someone else and wrongly
assumes it’s the buyer who complained meaning you still end up with some retalitory
feedback injustices!
The only way I think this really works is as I’ve mention before with the ebay
style where sellers can’t leave anything but positive feedback for buyers and
buyers can leave whatever they feel appropriate so that the feedback system is
used to help keep all sellers on their toes and performing to high standards.
At the end of the day if there are severe feedback injustices left by buyers
I’m sure they can be reported and removed by admins where appropriate and rather
than rely on sellers feedback to attempt to tackle bad buyers, I’m sure if these
buyers are that that bad it should just be a case of reporting any outrageous
buyer behaviour to the admins so that with enough reported incidents they can
be weeded off the site for good and with it all the feedback they've left
for people!
|
+1 million! What you wrote makes so much sense. thank you.
|
|
| Author: | ziddi | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 10:23 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 41109-1 | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Add 1 Part 54092c02pb03 White Aircraft Fuselage Curved Forward 8 x 16 x 5 with Trans-Light Blue Glass with Heart, Feathers and 'HLA' Pattern on Both Sides (Stickers) - set 41109 (Counterpart)
* Add 1 Part 54094pb07 Medium Lavender Tail 14 x 2 x 8 with Heart, Feathers and 'HLA' Pattern on Both Sides (Stickers) - Set 41109 (Counterpart)
* Add 2 Part 54095pb13 White Slope, Curved 8 x 8 x 2 Double with 'Heartlake' and 'Airlines' Pattern (Stickers) - Set 41109 (Counterpart)
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 07:49 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 47 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Admin_Russell writes:
| | That, of course, is the real issue. IMO we need an auxiliary buyer feedback system
that is completely anonymous, where the results are amalgamated before presenting
them (privately) to the seller. These results could then be used to weed out
sellers who consistently perform poorly and lower the reputation of the site.
I have always felt that public feedback was not enough to raise the selling standards
of the site. For many BrickLink sellers, their standards are sky-high and represent
their passion for the hobby. For others, they do nothing but dull the effect
of the excellent sellers, cause problems for us in the Help Desk, and in general
apply a lot of pressure on us to implement a heavy-handed "sellers will only
get paid when the buyer is happy" system where BrickLink controls all the money.
|
The only problems I have with anonymous feedback is that think it may head in
a direction where the feedback left may become even more sinister!
The thing is there are always people out there that look to destroy and ruin
things simply because they can and/or they get a kick out of doing things like
that and similarly there are people who I’m sure would love to put a neutral/negative
against a sellers otherwise flawless feedback simply because they can and have
the power to do so without being bought to task about why they did this?
There may be others that begrudge a seller somewhat simply because they didn’t
agree to discount something when asked? and then you may have other competitor
sellers who may be looking to bring a high performing seller down a few pegs?
From a sellers point of view if I make a right hash of an order or end up
non-intentionally messing the customer around with mistakes, oversights or forgetting
to ship their order and I get a negative then I guess I have to just take that
on the chin but if a buyer leaves what I consider to be unfair negative then
I would at least like to be able to see who has complained and what I have done
wrong so that I can improve or choose to block the buyer if I don’t feel its
justified!
In fact I would also say that perhaps make it common knowledge to everyone using
Bricklink that by choosing to leave a negative for someone you are also choosing
to never deal with that store/person again and so perhaps put in place an auto-blocking
feature?
Presumably if someone leaves a negative they are unhappy with the way a store
performs and in which case for that same person to continue to shop in your store
for a second time would seem a bit sinister to me or am I wrong here?
Either way in some cases I’m sure people will be able to work out who left the
negative feedback anyway based on the feedback comments or the way an email conversations
went beforehand but on the other hand what if a buyer complains and still leaves
positive and yet the seller receives a negative from someone else and wrongly
assumes it’s the buyer who complained meaning you still end up with some retalitory
feedback injustices!
The only way I think this really works is as I’ve mention before with the ebay
style where sellers can’t leave anything but positive feedback for buyers and
buyers can leave whatever they feel appropriate so that the feedback system is
used to help keep all sellers on their toes and performing to high standards.
At the end of the day if there are severe feedback injustices left by buyers
I’m sure they can be reported and removed by admins where appropriate and rather
than rely on sellers feedback to attempt to tackle bad buyers, I’m sure if these
buyers are that that bad it should just be a case of reporting any outrageous
buyer behaviour to the admins so that with enough reported incidents they can
be weeded off the site for good and with it all the feedback they've left
for people!
|
|
| Author: | Tonirr | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 05:45 | | Subject: | Login fail clearity | | Viewed: | 77 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | | Status: | Open | | Vote: | [Yes|No] | |
| Hi,
There is one minor problem with login for me:
On double or more wrong login tries, there isn't a clear information about
next login fails, as message stays same.
After additional login error, clearing old error message then adding "Loading
..." text or loading icon for 1-2 seconds or fail counter would be nice to inform
user that login button works and page is loaded again.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 05:10 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | As it goes a rule not allowing retaliatory feedback should also be added for
removal of said feedback
|
I voted no, for the simple reason that a bad seller that knows they have done
wrong will leave a negative feedback first. Then any negative feedback
from the buyer is retaliatory and should be removed according to the rule. So
the buyer gets negative feedback and the seller gets none.
|
|
| Author: | SteinchendeaIer | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 04:35 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | As it goes a rule not allowing retaliatory feedback should also be added for
removal of said feedback since as the rules stand retaliatory feedback is allowed:
Feedback you Received:
The following are currently the only valid reasons for which you can request
feedback you received to be removed:
Feedback you received contains vulgar language.
Feedback you received contains personally identifying information including your
name, address, e-mail address or telephone number.
You are the seller and the buyer has not paid. Non-Paying Buyer Alert has been
completed or the buyer has accepted the NPB penalty via NPX.
You are the buyer and the seller has not responded or shipped. Non-Responding
Seller Alert or Non-Shipping Seller Alert has been completed.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who had their
membership terminated.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who was on
your Stop List before the order was placed.
If you're requesting feedback to be removed for the last 2 reasons above,
you should contact the Help Desk before you submit the request and let us know
the original username of the duplicate account.
Requests can be submitted until the order is purged from the system - up to 6
months from the order date. Requests are submitted to the BrickLink Administration
for approval. If the feedback is removed, it cannot be reposted. Each request
has a status:
|
I would also like to make a note here. It is unfair to receive a rating for shipping.
Received a neutral rating because the shipping from germany to usa took 42 days
by Covid-19.
I hope that this system will be rebuilt, because what can I do that the German
post no longer sends anything.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 04:19 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
| | I don’t think it’s fair but I also don’t think that merits an intervention or
an investment of resources.
The retaliatory feedback reflects worse on the person who left it.
As a seller, this feedback wouldn’t cause me to block the buyer- specially considering
the seller who left it has a bad track record.
This has no impact on the buyer, it impacts the seller negatively as it should-
seems like it’s working okay.
It’s not perfect but it doesn’t merit investment of resources.
|
Actually you would be wrong, how do people not know the buyer was very difficult
or made outrageous demands or such? you don't all you know is the buyer got
a negative feedback which reflects on him in the negative and you are saying
he has to suffer with it. wouldn't be surprised if this keeps up this site
may lose many potential buyers because they are not allowed to change a grave
injustice to their reputation and you are ok with that.
|
Your insinuation of me not caring about buyers experience is a good point for
me to tag out and not waste any further time debating you.
good luck.
|
But it is true, you say he should just keep the negative feedback, it is like
you do not care and think nothing should be done about and that I disagree with.
|
Does it matter if the buyer has a negative feedback? It is not possible to stop
anyone with a minority of negative feedback from buying, so the buyer is not
affected in any way. However, if a buyer has many negative feedbacks, then they
are probably a problem.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 04:16 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| | | That, of course, is the real issue. IMO we need an auxiliary buyer feedback system
that is completely anonymous, where the results are amalgamated before presenting
them (privately) to the seller. These results could then be used to weed out
sellers who consistently perform poorly and lower the reputation of the site.
|
There are a number of sellers that come up time and time again, for bad selling
practices. Leaving negative feedback, not supplying items but refunding to get
out of NSS, sending orders missing items and refunding for missing parts without
telling buyers, and so on. If BL really cared, they could weed out these sellers
now.
Part of the problem is buyers keep buying from sellers with relatively poor feedback,
suggesting (some) buyers don't care.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 01:35 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | I basically told him the same thing, but the core issue is the buyer has no recourse
to get what is obviously retaliatory feedback removed.
which brings into question how can buyers leave honest feedback when they face
the potential of retaliatory feedback that cannot be removed? such a situation
is a threat to what the feedback system is.
|
That, of course, is the real issue. IMO we need an auxiliary buyer feedback system
that is completely anonymous, where the results are amalgamated before presenting
them (privately) to the seller. These results could then be used to weed out
sellers who consistently perform poorly and lower the reputation of the site.
I have always felt that public feedback was not enough to raise the selling standards
of the site. For many BrickLink sellers, their standards are sky-high and represent
their passion for the hobby. For others, they do nothing but dull the effect
of the excellent sellers, cause problems for us in the Help Desk, and in general
apply a lot of pressure on us to implement a heavy-handed "sellers will only
get paid when the buyer is happy" system where BrickLink controls all the money.
|
Unfortunately such a system would not work well with the seller waiting for money
till buyer receives item, sounds good in theory, but in practice not so well,
one of the things that could be added is like eBay's star system or with
holding feed back till both parties give feedback with neither knowing the other,
then it would be honest feedback from both sides. if neither party is happy then
they can communicate with the other party on getting the feedback removed. which
can only be removed if both parties agree.
|
|
| Author: | Admin_Russell | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 01:27 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 79 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | I basically told him the same thing, but the core issue is the buyer has no recourse
to get what is obviously retaliatory feedback removed.
which brings into question how can buyers leave honest feedback when they face
the potential of retaliatory feedback that cannot be removed? such a situation
is a threat to what the feedback system is.
|
That, of course, is the real issue. IMO we need an auxiliary buyer feedback system
that is completely anonymous, where the results are amalgamated before presenting
them (privately) to the seller. These results could then be used to weed out
sellers who consistently perform poorly and lower the reputation of the site.
I have always felt that public feedback was not enough to raise the selling standards
of the site. For many BrickLink sellers, their standards are sky-high and represent
their passion for the hobby. For others, they do nothing but dull the effect
of the excellent sellers, cause problems for us in the Help Desk, and in general
apply a lot of pressure on us to implement a heavy-handed "sellers will only
get paid when the buyer is happy" system where BrickLink controls all the money.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 00:49 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | As it goes a rule not allowing retaliatory feedback should also be added for
removal of said feedback since as the rules stand retaliatory feedback is allowed:
Feedback you Received:
The following are currently the only valid reasons for which you can request
feedback you received to be removed:
Feedback you received contains vulgar language.
Feedback you received contains personally identifying information including your
name, address, e-mail address or telephone number.
You are the seller and the buyer has not paid. Non-Paying Buyer Alert has been
completed or the buyer has accepted the NPB penalty via NPX.
You are the buyer and the seller has not responded or shipped. Non-Responding
Seller Alert or Non-Shipping Seller Alert has been completed.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who had their
membership terminated.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who was on
your Stop List before the order was placed.
If you're requesting feedback to be removed for the last 2 reasons above,
you should contact the Help Desk before you submit the request and let us know
the original username of the duplicate account.
Requests can be submitted until the order is purged from the system - up to 6
months from the order date. Requests are submitted to the BrickLink Administration
for approval. If the feedback is removed, it cannot be reposted. Each request
has a status:
|
I understand the frustration of getting a retaliatory feedback BUT i don't
support interjecting the BL admins into disputes over feedback.
The BL team has enough to do without this added task which is not a revenue producing
nor a productive use of their time.
Having the admin being a referee between two disputing users may result in one
of those users leaving the site which will not be beneficial for the greater
good.
Retaliatory feedback is easy to spot and usually hurts the image of the user
who left it more than the user who received it.
|
oh wouldn't be surprised if the seller made it onto a lot of peoples do not
buy from lists since his actions are not those of a good seller. but the whole
reason behind admins and moderators is to moderate between 2 parties, instead
the buyer was forced to file an NSS so as to remove said feedback, do you think
that is better?
|
An NSS like that will never stand. It is abuse of the system and admin will remove
it immediately upon notice.
|
I basically told him the same thing, but the core issue is the buyer has no recourse
to get what is obviously retaliatory feedback removed.
which brings into question how can buyers leave honest feedback when they face
the potential of retaliatory feedback that cannot be removed? such a situation
is a threat to what the feedback system is.
|
|
| Author: | Admin_Russell | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 00:28 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 97 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | As it goes a rule not allowing retaliatory feedback should also be added for
removal of said feedback since as the rules stand retaliatory feedback is allowed:
Feedback you Received:
The following are currently the only valid reasons for which you can request
feedback you received to be removed:
Feedback you received contains vulgar language.
Feedback you received contains personally identifying information including your
name, address, e-mail address or telephone number.
You are the seller and the buyer has not paid. Non-Paying Buyer Alert has been
completed or the buyer has accepted the NPB penalty via NPX.
You are the buyer and the seller has not responded or shipped. Non-Responding
Seller Alert or Non-Shipping Seller Alert has been completed.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who had their
membership terminated.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who was on
your Stop List before the order was placed.
If you're requesting feedback to be removed for the last 2 reasons above,
you should contact the Help Desk before you submit the request and let us know
the original username of the duplicate account.
Requests can be submitted until the order is purged from the system - up to 6
months from the order date. Requests are submitted to the BrickLink Administration
for approval. If the feedback is removed, it cannot be reposted. Each request
has a status:
|
I understand the frustration of getting a retaliatory feedback BUT i don't
support interjecting the BL admins into disputes over feedback.
The BL team has enough to do without this added task which is not a revenue producing
nor a productive use of their time.
Having the admin being a referee between two disputing users may result in one
of those users leaving the site which will not be beneficial for the greater
good.
Retaliatory feedback is easy to spot and usually hurts the image of the user
who left it more than the user who received it.
|
oh wouldn't be surprised if the seller made it onto a lot of peoples do not
buy from lists since his actions are not those of a good seller. but the whole
reason behind admins and moderators is to moderate between 2 parties, instead
the buyer was forced to file an NSS so as to remove said feedback, do you think
that is better?
|
An NSS like that will never stand. It is abuse of the system and admin will remove
it immediately upon notice.
|
|
| Author: | jennnifer | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 00:19 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 10176-1 | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Change 2 Part Black {2453 Brick 1 x 1 x 5 (Undetermined Stud Type) to 2453a Brick 1 x 1 x 5 - Blocked Open Stud or Hollow Stud}
* Change 13 Part Light Bluish Gray {2453 Brick 1 x 1 x 5 (Undetermined Stud Type) to 2453a Brick 1 x 1 x 5 - Blocked Open Stud or Hollow Stud}
* Change 2 Part Reddish Brown {4460 Slope 75 2 x 1 x 3 (Undetermined Stud Type) to 4460a Slope 75 2 x 1 x 3 - Open Stud}
Comments from Submitter:
I acquired this set from its original owner in fantastic shape and still built. I am reasonably confident that these parts were not mixed with other sets, and this can be treated as a reliable source to update the inventory.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 22:26 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | curious how many of those mods are still active moderating?
|
All of them are.
|
are they? when a couple scam reported posts are still up most of the day after
being reported it just tells me there is not a good spread of mods to cover all
time zones.
|
They are volunteers. They aren't required to be here around the clock. 
|
yeah but it can be worrisome since if someone posts something that is not to
be posted of an illegal nature and there is no one around to remove it, it can
cause problems for this site, like it did for Majhost.
|
So you want someone standing by in the forums 24/7/365 to make sure that a couple
of spam posts do not last on the forums for more than a little while? I am sorry,
but I don't need BrickLink to be a nanny for everything. People are supposed
to be adults here, and adults can take the time to figure out if something is
legitimate or not. I don't need BrickLink making sure that a "hall monitor"
is staffed all hours of the day, and I don't want the fees that sellers pay
to increase due to the need for said "hall monitor". Not to mention that spam
posts are so rare around here.
|
Spam posts are not my concern you should learn what happened to Majhost and almost
happened to Brickshelf because they lacked proper moderation. and then you will
understand my concern since I have seen some issues like that on other sites
happen of late.
|
in fact people don't remember but we also had issues almost like that here
too, but had a more active moderation team at that time.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 22:24 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | curious how many of those mods are still active moderating?
|
All of them are.
|
are they? when a couple scam reported posts are still up most of the day after
being reported it just tells me there is not a good spread of mods to cover all
time zones.
|
They are volunteers. They aren't required to be here around the clock.
|
yeah but it can be worrisome since if someone posts something that is not to
be posted of an illegal nature and there is no one around to remove it, it can
cause problems for this site, like it did for Majhost.
|
So you want someone standing by in the forums 24/7/365 to make sure that a couple
of spam posts do not last on the forums for more than a little while? I am sorry,
but I don't need BrickLink to be a nanny for everything. People are supposed
to be adults here, and adults can take the time to figure out if something is
legitimate or not. I don't need BrickLink making sure that a "hall monitor"
is staffed all hours of the day, and I don't want the fees that sellers pay
to increase due to the need for said "hall monitor". Not to mention that spam
posts are so rare around here.
|
Spam posts are not my concern you should learn what happened to Majhost and almost
happened to Brickshelf because they lacked proper moderation. and then you will
understand my concern since I have seen some issues like that on other sites
happen of late.
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 22:13 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 22 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | curious how many of those mods are still active moderating?
|
All of them are.
|
are they? when a couple scam reported posts are still up most of the day after
being reported it just tells me there is not a good spread of mods to cover all
time zones.
|
They are volunteers. They aren't required to be here around the clock.
|
yeah but it can be worrisome since if someone posts something that is not to
be posted of an illegal nature and there is no one around to remove it, it can
cause problems for this site, like it did for Majhost.
|
So you want someone standing by in the forums 24/7/365 to make sure that a couple
of spam posts do not last on the forums for more than a little while? I am sorry,
but I don't need BrickLink to be a nanny for everything. People are supposed
to be adults here, and adults can take the time to figure out if something is
legitimate or not. I don't need BrickLink making sure that a "hall monitor"
is staffed all hours of the day, and I don't want the fees that sellers pay
to increase due to the need for said "hall monitor". Not to mention that spam
posts are so rare around here.
|
|
| Author: | M.Boss | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 22:06 | | Subject: | Darth Vader Head Mold Variance | | Viewed: | 123 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
When comparing two Darth Vader figures I had, I discovered a mold variance between
two helmets. The "old" type came likey was made from 1999-2014, while The "new"
type appeared in the 2019 20th Anniversary Clone Scout Walker I think
this new mold was created because in order to create the anniversary figure lego
wanted to use a 1 piece Vader helmet, as opposed to the 2 piece helmets they
switched to a couple of years ago. This mold variation deserves a note in the
catalog entry for the helmet,, or a variant added to the catalog, but I'm
not sure which. If someone wants to take the appropriate action from here, please
go ahead. See the attached image for the differences between the two.
|
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 21:46 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | curious how many of those mods are still active moderating?
|
All of them are.
|
are they? when a couple scam reported posts are still up most of the day after
being reported it just tells me there is not a good spread of mods to cover all
time zones.
|
They are volunteers. They aren't required to be here around the clock.
|
yeah but it can be worrisome since if someone posts something that is not to
be posted of an illegal nature and there is no one around to remove it, it can
cause problems for this site, like it did for Majhost.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 21:43 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, qwertyboy writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | the incident is over a seller not shipping a full order, which the buyer left
negative feedback then the seller left retaliatory feedback and the only option
the buyer had was to file an NSS.
|
I get that the buyer wants to have the neg removed, and I am not condoning seller's
behaviour, but posting an NSS just to get rid of a FB is not the way to go. It
is a mis-use of the system. According to the rules, seller did refund the missing
parts, so an NSS is simply not applicable.
Niek.
|
I agree an NSS was excessive, but the way the rules are written for removing
negative feedback, that was the buyers only option, since he cannot have retaliatory
feedback removed.
|
|
| Author: | tEoS | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 21:41 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 21 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| This is all we see. From a message that I'm pretty sure Brickwilbo cancelled.
In Suggestions, qwertyboy writes:
| | In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| | It's visible below the canceled post who canceled it.
|
Maybe for moderators, but I don't think us mere mortals can see that info.
Niek.
|
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 21:35 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | curious how many of those mods are still active moderating?
|
All of them are.
|
are they? when a couple scam reported posts are still up most of the day after
being reported it just tells me there is not a good spread of mods to cover all
time zones.
|
They are volunteers. They aren't required to be here around the clock.
|
|
| Author: | qwertyboy | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 21:11 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | the incident is over a seller not shipping a full order, which the buyer left
negative feedback then the seller left retaliatory feedback and the only option
the buyer had was to file an NSS.
|
I get that the buyer wants to have the neg removed, and I am not condoning seller's
behaviour, but posting an NSS just to get rid of a FB is not the way to go. It
is a mis-use of the system. According to the rules, seller did refund the missing
parts, so an NSS is simply not applicable.
Niek.
|
| Author: | qwertyboy | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 20:57 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| | It's visible below the canceled post who canceled it.
|
Maybe for moderators, but I don't think us mere mortals can see that info.
Niek.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 20:38 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
| | I don’t think it’s fair but I also don’t think that merits an intervention or
an investment of resources.
The retaliatory feedback reflects worse on the person who left it.
As a seller, this feedback wouldn’t cause me to block the buyer- specially considering
the seller who left it has a bad track record.
This has no impact on the buyer, it impacts the seller negatively as it should-
seems like it’s working okay.
It’s not perfect but it doesn’t merit investment of resources.
|
Actually you would be wrong, how do people not know the buyer was very difficult
or made outrageous demands or such? you don't all you know is the buyer got
a negative feedback which reflects on him in the negative and you are saying
he has to suffer with it. wouldn't be surprised if this keeps up this site
may lose many potential buyers because they are not allowed to change a grave
injustice to their reputation and you are ok with that.
|
Your insinuation of me not caring about buyers experience is a good point for
me to tag out and not waste any further time debating you.
good luck.
|
But it is true, you say he should just keep the negative feedback, it is like
you do not care and think nothing should be done about and that I disagree with.
|
|
| Author: | Heartbricker | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 20:25 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
| | I don’t think it’s fair but I also don’t think that merits an intervention or
an investment of resources.
The retaliatory feedback reflects worse on the person who left it.
As a seller, this feedback wouldn’t cause me to block the buyer- specially considering
the seller who left it has a bad track record.
This has no impact on the buyer, it impacts the seller negatively as it should-
seems like it’s working okay.
It’s not perfect but it doesn’t merit investment of resources.
|
Actually you would be wrong, how do people not know the buyer was very difficult
or made outrageous demands or such? you don't all you know is the buyer got
a negative feedback which reflects on him in the negative and you are saying
he has to suffer with it. wouldn't be surprised if this keeps up this site
may lose many potential buyers because they are not allowed to change a grave
injustice to their reputation and you are ok with that.
|
Your insinuation of me not caring about buyers experience is a good point for
me to tag out and not waste any further time debating you.
good luck.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 20:09 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
| | I don’t think it’s fair but I also don’t think that merits an intervention or
an investment of resources.
The retaliatory feedback reflects worse on the person who left it.
As a seller, this feedback wouldn’t cause me to block the buyer- specially considering
the seller who left it has a bad track record.
This has no impact on the buyer, it impacts the seller negatively as it should-
seems like it’s working okay.
It’s not perfect but it doesn’t merit investment of resources.
|
Actually you would be wrong, how do people not know the buyer was very difficult
or made outrageous demands or such? you don't all you know is the buyer got
a negative feedback which reflects on him in the negative and you are saying
he has to suffer with it. wouldn't be surprised if this keeps up this site
may lose many potential buyers because they are not allowed to change a grave
injustice to their reputation and you are ok with that.
|
|
| Author: | Heartbricker | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 19:49 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
| | I see, I think that there's blame on both sides here.
This should have been resolved better by the seller as the customer was obviously
not satisfied and was justified to leave a non positive.
The seller fell short and obviously didn't provide a satisfactory solution
to the buyer- and escalated the matter by leaving non positive.
The buyer abused the NSS system as a result of the seller's behavior.
This could be looked at in a couple ways- the feedback system wasn't abused
here- the NSS system was abused.
Our store puts more emphasis on customer experience so we would have sent the
piece or would have made a plea for the buyer to see what would be a reasonable
solution.
We also notify our buyers before shipping an order that is short to give them
an option to cancel.
I do think it is reasonable to spend $4 to repair a 7 cent mistake- but i believe
in taking full responsibility for my mistakes.
Two adults should be able to resolve their disputes- no need for a nanny.
the NSS was an abuse of BL TOS and requires interjection by admin- the feedback
system doesn't.
|
and yet the buyer is stuck with a negative he does not deserve and you do not
think that needs to be fixed?
|
I don’t think it’s fair but I also don’t think that merits an intervention or
an investment of resources.
The retaliatory feedback reflects worse on the person who left it.
As a seller, this feedback wouldn’t cause me to block the buyer- specially considering
the seller who left it has a bad track record.
This has no impact on the buyer, it impacts the seller negatively as it should-
seems like it’s working okay.
It’s not perfect but it doesn’t merit investment of resources.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 19:28 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
| | I see, I think that there's blame on both sides here.
This should have been resolved better by the seller as the customer was obviously
not satisfied and was justified to leave a non positive.
The seller fell short and obviously didn't provide a satisfactory solution
to the buyer- and escalated the matter by leaving non positive.
The buyer abused the NSS system as a result of the seller's behavior.
This could be looked at in a couple ways- the feedback system wasn't abused
here- the NSS system was abused.
Our store puts more emphasis on customer experience so we would have sent the
piece or would have made a plea for the buyer to see what would be a reasonable
solution.
We also notify our buyers before shipping an order that is short to give them
an option to cancel.
I do think it is reasonable to spend $4 to repair a 7 cent mistake- but i believe
in taking full responsibility for my mistakes.
Two adults should be able to resolve their disputes- no need for a nanny.
the NSS was an abuse of BL TOS and requires interjection by admin- the feedback
system doesn't.
|
and yet the buyer is stuck with a negative he does not deserve and you do not
think that needs to be fixed?
|
|
| Author: | Heartbricker | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 19:17 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | As it goes a rule not allowing retaliatory feedback should also be added for
removal of said feedback since as the rules stand retaliatory feedback is allowed:
Feedback you Received:
The following are currently the only valid reasons for which you can request
feedback you received to be removed:
Feedback you received contains vulgar language.
Feedback you received contains personally identifying information including your
name, address, e-mail address or telephone number.
You are the seller and the buyer has not paid. Non-Paying Buyer Alert has been
completed or the buyer has accepted the NPB penalty via NPX.
You are the buyer and the seller has not responded or shipped. Non-Responding
Seller Alert or Non-Shipping Seller Alert has been completed.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who had their
membership terminated.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who was on
your Stop List before the order was placed.
If you're requesting feedback to be removed for the last 2 reasons above,
you should contact the Help Desk before you submit the request and let us know
the original username of the duplicate account.
Requests can be submitted until the order is purged from the system - up to 6
months from the order date. Requests are submitted to the BrickLink Administration
for approval. If the feedback is removed, it cannot be reposted. Each request
has a status:
|
I understand the frustration of getting a retaliatory feedback BUT i don't
support interjecting the BL admins into disputes over feedback.
The BL team has enough to do without this added task which is not a revenue producing
nor a productive use of their time.
Having the admin being a referee between two disputing users may result in one
of those users leaving the site which will not be beneficial for the greater
good.
Retaliatory feedback is easy to spot and usually hurts the image of the user
who left it more than the user who received it.
|
oh wouldn't be surprised if the seller made it onto a lot of peoples do not
buy from lists since his actions are not those of a good seller. but the whole
reason behind admins and moderators is to moderate between 2 parties, instead
the buyer was forced to file an NSS so as to remove said feedback, do you think
that is better?
|
Not sure which seller you are speaking of.
Buyers filing NSS to remove feedback is a violation against bricklinks' TOS
therefore does require interjection- retaliatory feedback isn't.
The case you described is very rare.
|
the incident is over a seller not shipping a full order, which the buyer left
negative feedback then the seller left retaliatory feedback and the only option
the buyer had was to file an NSS.
read this entire forum chain to get at why I posted this:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1205906
|
I see, I think that there's blame on both sides here.
This should have been resolved better by the seller as the customer was obviously
not satisfied and was justified to leave a non positive.
The seller fell short and obviously didn't provide a satisfactory solution
to the buyer- and escalated the matter by leaving non positive.
The buyer abused the NSS system as a result of the seller's behavior.
This could be looked at in a couple ways- the feedback system wasn't abused
here- the NSS system was abused.
Our store puts more emphasis on customer experience so we would have sent the
piece or would have made a plea for the buyer to see what would be a reasonable
solution.
We also notify our buyers before shipping an order that is short to give them
an option to cancel.
I do think it is reasonable to spend $4 to repair a 7 cent mistake- but i believe
in taking full responsibility for my mistakes.
Two adults should be able to resolve their disputes- no need for a nanny.
the NSS was an abuse of BL TOS and requires interjection by admin- the feedback
system doesn't.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 18:39 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | As it goes a rule not allowing retaliatory feedback should also be added for
removal of said feedback since as the rules stand retaliatory feedback is allowed:
Feedback you Received:
The following are currently the only valid reasons for which you can request
feedback you received to be removed:
Feedback you received contains vulgar language.
Feedback you received contains personally identifying information including your
name, address, e-mail address or telephone number.
You are the seller and the buyer has not paid. Non-Paying Buyer Alert has been
completed or the buyer has accepted the NPB penalty via NPX.
You are the buyer and the seller has not responded or shipped. Non-Responding
Seller Alert or Non-Shipping Seller Alert has been completed.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who had their
membership terminated.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who was on
your Stop List before the order was placed.
If you're requesting feedback to be removed for the last 2 reasons above,
you should contact the Help Desk before you submit the request and let us know
the original username of the duplicate account.
Requests can be submitted until the order is purged from the system - up to 6
months from the order date. Requests are submitted to the BrickLink Administration
for approval. If the feedback is removed, it cannot be reposted. Each request
has a status:
|
I understand the frustration of getting a retaliatory feedback BUT i don't
support interjecting the BL admins into disputes over feedback.
The BL team has enough to do without this added task which is not a revenue producing
nor a productive use of their time.
Having the admin being a referee between two disputing users may result in one
of those users leaving the site which will not be beneficial for the greater
good.
Retaliatory feedback is easy to spot and usually hurts the image of the user
who left it more than the user who received it.
|
oh wouldn't be surprised if the seller made it onto a lot of peoples do not
buy from lists since his actions are not those of a good seller. but the whole
reason behind admins and moderators is to moderate between 2 parties, instead
the buyer was forced to file an NSS so as to remove said feedback, do you think
that is better?
|
Not sure which seller you are speaking of.
Buyers filing NSS to remove feedback is a violation against bricklinks' TOS
therefore does require interjection- retaliatory feedback isn't.
The case you described is very rare.
|
the incident is over a seller not shipping a full order, which the buyer left
negative feedback then the seller left retaliatory feedback and the only option
the buyer had was to file an NSS.
read this entire forum chain to get at why I posted this:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1205906
|
|
| Author: | Heartbricker | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 18:32 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | As it goes a rule not allowing retaliatory feedback should also be added for
removal of said feedback since as the rules stand retaliatory feedback is allowed:
Feedback you Received:
The following are currently the only valid reasons for which you can request
feedback you received to be removed:
Feedback you received contains vulgar language.
Feedback you received contains personally identifying information including your
name, address, e-mail address or telephone number.
You are the seller and the buyer has not paid. Non-Paying Buyer Alert has been
completed or the buyer has accepted the NPB penalty via NPX.
You are the buyer and the seller has not responded or shipped. Non-Responding
Seller Alert or Non-Shipping Seller Alert has been completed.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who had their
membership terminated.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who was on
your Stop List before the order was placed.
If you're requesting feedback to be removed for the last 2 reasons above,
you should contact the Help Desk before you submit the request and let us know
the original username of the duplicate account.
Requests can be submitted until the order is purged from the system - up to 6
months from the order date. Requests are submitted to the BrickLink Administration
for approval. If the feedback is removed, it cannot be reposted. Each request
has a status:
|
I understand the frustration of getting a retaliatory feedback BUT i don't
support interjecting the BL admins into disputes over feedback.
The BL team has enough to do without this added task which is not a revenue producing
nor a productive use of their time.
Having the admin being a referee between two disputing users may result in one
of those users leaving the site which will not be beneficial for the greater
good.
Retaliatory feedback is easy to spot and usually hurts the image of the user
who left it more than the user who received it.
|
oh wouldn't be surprised if the seller made it onto a lot of peoples do not
buy from lists since his actions are not those of a good seller. but the whole
reason behind admins and moderators is to moderate between 2 parties, instead
the buyer was forced to file an NSS so as to remove said feedback, do you think
that is better?
|
Not sure which seller you are speaking of.
Buyers filing NSS to remove feedback is a violation against bricklinks' TOS
therefore does require interjection- retaliatory feedback isn't.
The case you described is very rare.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 18:23 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 46 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | As it goes a rule not allowing retaliatory feedback should also be added for
removal of said feedback since as the rules stand retaliatory feedback is allowed:
Feedback you Received:
The following are currently the only valid reasons for which you can request
feedback you received to be removed:
Feedback you received contains vulgar language.
Feedback you received contains personally identifying information including your
name, address, e-mail address or telephone number.
You are the seller and the buyer has not paid. Non-Paying Buyer Alert has been
completed or the buyer has accepted the NPB penalty via NPX.
You are the buyer and the seller has not responded or shipped. Non-Responding
Seller Alert or Non-Shipping Seller Alert has been completed.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who had their
membership terminated.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who was on
your Stop List before the order was placed.
If you're requesting feedback to be removed for the last 2 reasons above,
you should contact the Help Desk before you submit the request and let us know
the original username of the duplicate account.
Requests can be submitted until the order is purged from the system - up to 6
months from the order date. Requests are submitted to the BrickLink Administration
for approval. If the feedback is removed, it cannot be reposted. Each request
has a status:
|
I understand the frustration of getting a retaliatory feedback BUT i don't
support interjecting the BL admins into disputes over feedback.
The BL team has enough to do without this added task which is not a revenue producing
nor a productive use of their time.
Having the admin being a referee between two disputing users may result in one
of those users leaving the site which will not be beneficial for the greater
good.
Retaliatory feedback is easy to spot and usually hurts the image of the user
who left it more than the user who received it.
|
oh wouldn't be surprised if the seller made it onto a lot of peoples do not
buy from lists since his actions are not those of a good seller. but the whole
reason behind admins and moderators is to moderate between 2 parties, instead
the buyer was forced to file an NSS so as to remove said feedback, do you think
that is better?
|
|
| Author: | Heartbricker | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 18:16 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 65 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | As it goes a rule not allowing retaliatory feedback should also be added for
removal of said feedback since as the rules stand retaliatory feedback is allowed:
Feedback you Received:
The following are currently the only valid reasons for which you can request
feedback you received to be removed:
Feedback you received contains vulgar language.
Feedback you received contains personally identifying information including your
name, address, e-mail address or telephone number.
You are the seller and the buyer has not paid. Non-Paying Buyer Alert has been
completed or the buyer has accepted the NPB penalty via NPX.
You are the buyer and the seller has not responded or shipped. Non-Responding
Seller Alert or Non-Shipping Seller Alert has been completed.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who had their
membership terminated.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who was on
your Stop List before the order was placed.
If you're requesting feedback to be removed for the last 2 reasons above,
you should contact the Help Desk before you submit the request and let us know
the original username of the duplicate account.
Requests can be submitted until the order is purged from the system - up to 6
months from the order date. Requests are submitted to the BrickLink Administration
for approval. If the feedback is removed, it cannot be reposted. Each request
has a status:
|
I understand the frustration of getting a retaliatory feedback BUT i don't
support interjecting the BL admins into disputes over feedback.
The BL team has enough to do without this added task which is not a revenue producing
nor a productive use of their time.
Having the admin being a referee between two disputing users may result in one
of those users leaving the site which will not be beneficial for the greater
good.
Retaliatory feedback is easy to spot and usually hurts the image of the user
who left it more than the user who received it.
|
|
| Author: | Brickwilbo | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 18:15 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 22 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | curious how many of those mods are still active moderating?
|
All of them are.
|
are they? when a couple scam reported posts are still up most of the day after
being reported it just tells me there is not a good spread of mods to cover all
time zones.
|
Thank you for reporting.
There were two scam posts reported around 5 at night, in my timezone.
Both were canceled immediately after I woke up. 😉
|
figured it was you that removed them, in fact feels like you are the only moderator
working.
|
You can be assured that all active moderators are working together.
It's visible below the canceled post who canceled it.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 18:11 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Tracyd writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Tracyd writes:
| | The definition of retaliatory is in the eye of the beholder. If I think I did
everything right and did not deserve the feedback left for me then it is not
deserved. But the other party thinks they are right and it should stand. This
would make Bricklink the final judge and jury of feedback. I look at seller's
feedback and the buyer's feedback if I am evaluating a seller. Some buyers
are unhappy at every little thing. Some sellers overreact to even the smallest
criticism.
|
yes that is why it should be an option to let the admin decide, take this recent
case into question, this buyer received negative feedback because of negative
feedback he left the seller who failed to deliver items the buyer bought and
refused to deal with the situation, the seller deserved the negative feedback,
the buyer did not and it is obviously retaliatory in nature:
https://www.bricklink.com/feedback.asp?u=sludgemonster
|
The retaliation came for the NSS charge. They shipped, missing item was refunded,
even PayPal wouldn't side with the buyer on this.
|
actually the NSS came after the negative feedback since that is evidently the
only way to remove said feedback by the rules.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 18:10 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 20 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | curious how many of those mods are still active moderating?
|
All of them are.
|
are they? when a couple scam reported posts are still up most of the day after
being reported it just tells me there is not a good spread of mods to cover all
time zones.
|
Thank you for reporting.
There were two scam posts reported around 5 at night, in my timezone.
Both were canceled immediately after I woke up. 😉
|
figured it was you that removed them, in fact feels like you are the only moderator
working.
|
|
| Author: | Tracyd | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 18:06 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Tracyd writes:
| | The definition of retaliatory is in the eye of the beholder. If I think I did
everything right and did not deserve the feedback left for me then it is not
deserved. But the other party thinks they are right and it should stand. This
would make Bricklink the final judge and jury of feedback. I look at seller's
feedback and the buyer's feedback if I am evaluating a seller. Some buyers
are unhappy at every little thing. Some sellers overreact to even the smallest
criticism.
|
yes that is why it should be an option to let the admin decide, take this recent
case into question, this buyer received negative feedback because of negative
feedback he left the seller who failed to deliver items the buyer bought and
refused to deal with the situation, the seller deserved the negative feedback,
the buyer did not and it is obviously retaliatory in nature:
https://www.bricklink.com/feedback.asp?u=sludgemonster
|
The retaliation came for the NSS charge. They shipped, missing item was refunded,
even PayPal wouldn't side with the buyer on this.
|
|
| Author: | Brickwilbo | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 18:05 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 21 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | curious how many of those mods are still active moderating?
|
All of them are.
|
are they? when a couple scam reported posts are still up most of the day after
being reported it just tells me there is not a good spread of mods to cover all
time zones.
|
Thank you for reporting.
There were two scam posts reported around 5 at night, in my timezone.
Both were canceled immediately after I woke up. 😉
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 18:03 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Tracyd writes:
| | The definition of retaliatory is in the eye of the beholder. If I think I did
everything right and did not deserve the feedback left for me then it is not
deserved. But the other party thinks they are right and it should stand. This
would make Bricklink the final judge and jury of feedback. I look at seller's
feedback and the buyer's feedback if I am evaluating a seller. Some buyers
are unhappy at every little thing. Some sellers overreact to even the smallest
criticism.
|
yes that is why it should be an option to let the admin decide, take this recent
case into question, this buyer received negative feedback because of negative
feedback he left the seller who failed to deliver items the buyer bought and
refused to deal with the situation, the seller deserved the negative feedback,
the buyer did not and it is obviously retaliatory in nature:
https://www.bricklink.com/feedback.asp?u=sludgemonster
|
|
| Author: | Tracyd | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 17:58 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | As it goes a rule not allowing retaliatory feedback should also be added for
removal of said feedback since as the rules stand retaliatory feedback is allowed:
Feedback you Received:
The following are currently the only valid reasons for which you can request
feedback you received to be removed:
Feedback you received contains vulgar language.
Feedback you received contains personally identifying information including your
name, address, e-mail address or telephone number.
You are the seller and the buyer has not paid. Non-Paying Buyer Alert has been
completed or the buyer has accepted the NPB penalty via NPX.
You are the buyer and the seller has not responded or shipped. Non-Responding
Seller Alert or Non-Shipping Seller Alert has been completed.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who had their
membership terminated.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who was on
your Stop List before the order was placed.
If you're requesting feedback to be removed for the last 2 reasons above,
you should contact the Help Desk before you submit the request and let us know
the original username of the duplicate account.
Requests can be submitted until the order is purged from the system - up to 6
months from the order date. Requests are submitted to the BrickLink Administration
for approval. If the feedback is removed, it cannot be reposted. Each request
has a status:
|
The definition of retaliatory is in the eye of the beholder. If I think I did
everything right and did not deserve the feedback left for me then it is not
deserved. But the other party thinks they are right and it should stand. This
would make Bricklink the final judge and jury of feedback. I look at seller's
feedback and the buyer's feedback if I am evaluating a seller. Some buyers
are unhappy at every little thing. Some sellers overreact to even the smallest
criticism.
|
|
| Author: | Rob_and_Shelagh | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 17:54 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | As it goes a rule not allowing retaliatory feedback should also be added for
removal of said feedback since as the rules stand retaliatory feedback is allowed:
Feedback you Received:
The following are currently the only valid reasons for which you can request
feedback you received to be removed:
Feedback you received contains vulgar language.
Feedback you received contains personally identifying information including your
name, address, e-mail address or telephone number.
You are the seller and the buyer has not paid. Non-Paying Buyer Alert has been
completed or the buyer has accepted the NPB penalty via NPX.
You are the buyer and the seller has not responded or shipped. Non-Responding
Seller Alert or Non-Shipping Seller Alert has been completed.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who had their
membership terminated.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who was on
your Stop List before the order was placed.
If you're requesting feedback to be removed for the last 2 reasons above,
you should contact the Help Desk before you submit the request and let us know
the original username of the duplicate account.
Requests can be submitted until the order is purged from the system - up to 6
months from the order date. Requests are submitted to the BrickLink Administration
for approval. If the feedback is removed, it cannot be reposted. Each request
has a status:
|
How and who decides if feedback is retaliatory or not and what would be the criteria
for that?
I would agree that purely retaliatory feedback is wrong but there then becomes
an issue where there are 2 sides to a story..
Robert
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 17:45 | | Subject: | Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 318 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | | Status: | Open | | Vote: | [Yes|No] | |
| As it goes a rule not allowing retaliatory feedback should also be added for
removal of said feedback since as the rules stand retaliatory feedback is allowed:
Feedback you Received:
The following are currently the only valid reasons for which you can request
feedback you received to be removed:
Feedback you received contains vulgar language.
Feedback you received contains personally identifying information including your
name, address, e-mail address or telephone number.
You are the seller and the buyer has not paid. Non-Paying Buyer Alert has been
completed or the buyer has accepted the NPB penalty via NPX.
You are the buyer and the seller has not responded or shipped. Non-Responding
Seller Alert or Non-Shipping Seller Alert has been completed.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who had their
membership terminated.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who was on
your Stop List before the order was placed.
If you're requesting feedback to be removed for the last 2 reasons above,
you should contact the Help Desk before you submit the request and let us know
the original username of the duplicate account.
Requests can be submitted until the order is purged from the system - up to 6
months from the order date. Requests are submitted to the BrickLink Administration
for approval. If the feedback is removed, it cannot be reposted. Each request
has a status:
|
|
| Author: | TheBrickGuys | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 16:41 | | Subject: | Re: bricklink lego piece not found | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Crafteewon writes:
| | In Catalog, foxbricks2009 writes:
| | what if i have a piece that i know is lego but i can't find it in the catalog.
could we have a feature for adding your own piece? or should i just make a custom
item?
i have this 2x8 apple bush piece i can't find.
|
|
Not Bad, 2 Minutes!
Jim
|
| Author: | primadeluxe | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 16:39 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 182-1 | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Delete 2 Part 3009pb213 Yellow Brick 1 x 6 with Crossed Knife and Fork Pattern (Sticker) - Set 182 (Counterpart)
Comments from Submitter:
Not according to instructions
|
|
| Author: | Fox_Brickr | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 15:42 | | Subject: | Re: bricklink lego piece not found | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Cob writes:
| | In Catalog, Crafteewon writes:
| | In Catalog, foxbricks2009 writes:
| | what if i have a piece that i know is lego but i can't find it in the catalog.
could we have a feature for adding your own piece? or should i just make a custom
item?
i have this 2x8 apple bush piece i can't find.
|
|
BrickLink search is very specific.
In this situation apple is incorrect, you must search for either apple* or apples
|
oh,i looked up apple and not apples, thank you!
|
|
| Author: | Cob | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 15:39 | | Subject: | Re: bricklink lego piece not found | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Crafteewon writes:
| | In Catalog, foxbricks2009 writes:
| | what if i have a piece that i know is lego but i can't find it in the catalog.
could we have a feature for adding your own piece? or should i just make a custom
item?
i have this 2x8 apple bush piece i can't find.
|
|
BrickLink search is very specific.
In this situation apple is incorrect, you must search for either apple* or apples
|
|
| Author: | Fox_Brickr | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 15:39 | | Subject: | Re: bricklink lego piece not found | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Crafteewon writes:
| | In Catalog, foxbricks2009 writes:
| | what if i have a piece that i know is lego but i can't find it in the catalog.
could we have a feature for adding your own piece? or should i just make a custom
item?
i have this 2x8 apple bush piece i can't find.
|
|
thank you!
|
| Author: | Crafteewon | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 15:38 | | Subject: | Re: bricklink lego piece not found | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, foxbricks2009 writes:
| | what if i have a piece that i know is lego but i can't find it in the catalog.
could we have a feature for adding your own piece? or should i just make a custom
item?
i have this 2x8 apple bush piece i can't find.
|
|
| Author: | Fox_Brickr | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 15:36 | | Subject: | bricklink lego piece not found | | Viewed: | 128 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
| what if i have a piece that i know is lego but i can't find it in the catalog.
could we have a feature for adding your own piece? or should i just make a custom
item?
i have this 2x8 apple bush piece i can't find.
|
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 14:35 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 3804-1 | | Viewed: | 19 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
| In Inventories Requests, randyf writes:
| | In Inventories Requests, axaday writes:
| | In Inventories Requests, axaday writes:
| | Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Add 4 Part 5306bc020 Black Electric, Wire with Brick 2 x 2 x 2/3 Pair, 20 Studs Long (Alternate) (match ID 3)
* Change 4 Part Black 5306bc017 Electric, Wire with Brick 2 x 2 x 2/3 Pair, 17 Studs Long {match ID 0 to 3}
|
Not a perfect picture, I realize. I had to borrow extra hands to get it and
then didn't look at the picture until later. But I think it is just good
enough.
|
This looks like a situation where having a lack of defined wire protocols leads
to differing views on how to measure a wire. You are measuring the wire from
end to end with the connectors, so it seems to be ~20L. The one that is in the
inventory looks like it is also ~20L when measured this way, but it was inserted
into the catalog as ~17L which is just the length of the wire. I would almost
bet that the 5306bc017 and 5306bc020 entries are probably the same and should
probably be merged, but we have not got to the wire project yet. Please make
a note somewhere of the wire length you received for this set and how it was
measured, so we can use it at a later time. For now, the inventory will be left
as is concerning the wire.
Cheers,
Randy
|
The wire itself would only be 16L.
|
|
| Author: | popsicle | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 14:26 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| | Should be all. But to what degree each are, dunno. Here are the Hall of Fame
Discussion Mods, in any case
|
think the hall of fame refers to past mods.
|
Yes, they are former admins and mods. Thought it would interest you and others.
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 14:23 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 21 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| | Should be all. But to what degree each are, dunno. Here are the Hall of Fame
Discussion Mods, in any case
|
think the hall of fame refers to past mods.
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 14:22 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | curious how many of those mods are still active moderating?
|
All of them are.
|
are they? when a couple scam reported posts are still up most of the day after
being reported it just tells me there is not a good spread of mods to cover all
time zones.
|
|
| Author: | popsicle | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 14:17 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | I feel we should get a report post button added since trying to find that page
is very not user friendly.
|
Can you imagine the level of misuse such a convenient tab would allow for?
The Discussions Mods might have to give up their day jobs, considering the amount
of time it would take in filtering through the invalid to find the valid claims.
On the other hand, I could be wrong and if all the Discussions Mods were to call
for it, or at least back the suggestion, I’d say why not.
-Cory
|
you forgot to mention i've seen some serious spam posts like buying fake
ID's and such and I almost gave up reporting them because finding the report
post function is not user friendly. when you have to go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/helpMain.asp
Then go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?topicID=18
then go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=1107
just to get to here:
https://www.bricklink.com/problemMessage.asp
My suggestion is to reduce that greatly. to go straight to the last part.
|
Yeah, I understood with this morning spam why you posted the suggestion. I connected
those dots before I posted my reply.
So my thoughts stand: have the mods endorse the suggestion. It's their wheelhouse.
|
other then Brickwilbo being on the fence (agrees it is complicated but not sure
how to fix it) have not heard from any other mods, in fact not sure who the other
mods are if any others?
|
https://www.bricklink.com/memberAdmins.asp?utm_content=subnav
I’d add Russell, as well
|
curious how many of those mods are still active moderating? cause noticed a couple
of posts reported were still around for a long while.
|
Should be all. But to what degree each are, dunno. Here are the Hall of Fame
Discussion Mods, in any case
|
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 14:17 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | curious how many of those mods are still active moderating?
|
All of them are.
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 14:12 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 3804-1 | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
| In Inventories Requests, axaday writes:
| | In Inventories Requests, axaday writes:
| | Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Add 4 Part 5306bc020 Black Electric, Wire with Brick 2 x 2 x 2/3 Pair, 20 Studs Long (Alternate) (match ID 3)
* Change 4 Part Black 5306bc017 Electric, Wire with Brick 2 x 2 x 2/3 Pair, 17 Studs Long {match ID 0 to 3}
|
Not a perfect picture, I realize. I had to borrow extra hands to get it and
then didn't look at the picture until later. But I think it is just good
enough.
|
This looks like a situation where having a lack of defined wire protocols leads
to differing views on how to measure a wire. You are measuring the wire from
end to end with the connectors, so it seems to be ~20L. The one that is in the
inventory looks like it is also ~20L when measured this way, but it was inserted
into the catalog as ~17L which is just the length of the wire. I would almost
bet that the 5306bc017 and 5306bc020 entries are probably the same and should
probably be merged, but we have not got to the wire project yet. Please make
a note somewhere of the wire length you received for this set and how it was
measured, so we can use it at a later time. For now, the inventory will be left
as is concerning the wire.
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 14:12 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 18 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | I feel we should get a report post button added since trying to find that page
is very not user friendly.
|
Can you imagine the level of misuse such a convenient tab would allow for?
The Discussions Mods might have to give up their day jobs, considering the amount
of time it would take in filtering through the invalid to find the valid claims.
On the other hand, I could be wrong and if all the Discussions Mods were to call
for it, or at least back the suggestion, I’d say why not.
-Cory
|
you forgot to mention i've seen some serious spam posts like buying fake
ID's and such and I almost gave up reporting them because finding the report
post function is not user friendly. when you have to go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/helpMain.asp
Then go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?topicID=18
then go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=1107
just to get to here:
https://www.bricklink.com/problemMessage.asp
My suggestion is to reduce that greatly. to go straight to the last part.
|
Yeah, I understood with this morning spam why you posted the suggestion. I connected
those dots before I posted my reply.
So my thoughts stand: have the mods endorse the suggestion. It's their wheelhouse.
|
other then Brickwilbo being on the fence (agrees it is complicated but not sure
how to fix it) have not heard from any other mods, in fact not sure who the other
mods are if any others?
|
https://www.bricklink.com/memberAdmins.asp?utm_content=subnav
I’d add Russell, as well
|
curious how many of those mods are still active moderating? cause noticed a couple
of posts reported were still around for a long while.
|
|
| Author: | popsicle | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 14:07 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | I feel we should get a report post button added since trying to find that page
is very not user friendly.
|
Can you imagine the level of misuse such a convenient tab would allow for?
The Discussions Mods might have to give up their day jobs, considering the amount
of time it would take in filtering through the invalid to find the valid claims.
On the other hand, I could be wrong and if all the Discussions Mods were to call
for it, or at least back the suggestion, I’d say why not.
-Cory
|
you forgot to mention i've seen some serious spam posts like buying fake
ID's and such and I almost gave up reporting them because finding the report
post function is not user friendly. when you have to go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/helpMain.asp
Then go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?topicID=18
then go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=1107
just to get to here:
https://www.bricklink.com/problemMessage.asp
My suggestion is to reduce that greatly. to go straight to the last part.
|
Yeah, I understood with this morning spam why you posted the suggestion. I connected
those dots before I posted my reply.
So my thoughts stand: have the mods endorse the suggestion. It's their wheelhouse.
|
other then Brickwilbo being on the fence (agrees it is complicated but not sure
how to fix it) have not heard from any other mods, in fact not sure who the other
mods are if any others?
|
https://www.bricklink.com/memberAdmins.asp?utm_content=subnav
I’d add Russell, as well
|
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 14:02 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | I feel we should get a report post button added since trying to find that page
is very not user friendly.
|
Can you imagine the level of misuse such a convenient tab would allow for?
The Discussions Mods might have to give up their day jobs, considering the amount
of time it would take in filtering through the invalid to find the valid claims.
On the other hand, I could be wrong and if all the Discussions Mods were to call
for it, or at least back the suggestion, I’d say why not.
-Cory
|
you forgot to mention i've seen some serious spam posts like buying fake
ID's and such and I almost gave up reporting them because finding the report
post function is not user friendly. when you have to go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/helpMain.asp
Then go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?topicID=18
then go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=1107
just to get to here:
https://www.bricklink.com/problemMessage.asp
My suggestion is to reduce that greatly. to go straight to the last part.
|
Yeah, I understood with this morning spam why you posted the suggestion. I connected
those dots before I posted my reply.
So my thoughts stand: have the mods endorse the suggestion. It's their wheelhouse.
|
other then Brickwilbo being on the fence (agrees it is complicated but not sure
how to fix it) have not heard from any other mods, in fact not sure who the other
mods are if any others?
|
|
| Author: | popsicle | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 13:54 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | I feel we should get a report post button added since trying to find that page
is very not user friendly.
|
Can you imagine the level of misuse such a convenient tab would allow for?
The Discussions Mods might have to give up their day jobs, considering the amount
of time it would take in filtering through the invalid to find the valid claims.
On the other hand, I could be wrong and if all the Discussions Mods were to call
for it, or at least back the suggestion, I’d say why not.
-Cory
|
you forgot to mention i've seen some serious spam posts like buying fake
ID's and such and I almost gave up reporting them because finding the report
post function is not user friendly. when you have to go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/helpMain.asp
Then go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?topicID=18
then go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=1107
just to get to here:
https://www.bricklink.com/problemMessage.asp
My suggestion is to reduce that greatly. to go straight to the last part.
|
Yeah, I understood with this morning spam why you posted the suggestion. I connected
those dots before I posted my reply.
So my thoughts stand: have the mods endorse the suggestion. It's their wheelhouse.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 13:46 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 19 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | I feel we should get a report post button added since trying to find that page
is very not user friendly.
|
Can you imagine the level of misuse such a convenient tab would allow for?
The Discussions Mods might have to give up their day jobs, considering the amount
of time it would take in filtering through the invalid to find the valid claims.
On the other hand, I could be wrong and if all the Discussions Mods were to call
for it, or at least back the suggestion, I’d say why not.
-Cory
|
you forgot to mention i've seen some serious spam posts like buying fake
ID's and such and I almost gave up reporting them because finding the report
post function is not user friendly. when you have to go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/helpMain.asp
Then go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?topicID=18
then go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=1107
just to get to here:
https://www.bricklink.com/problemMessage.asp
My suggestion is to reduce that greatly. to go straight to the last part.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 13:44 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 17 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | I feel we should get a report post button added since trying to find that page
is very not user friendly.
|
This was suggested before.
The Problem Center is below the page. Click forum, then enter the message number.
|
yeah but a bit redundant when you have to go thru 3 clicks just to get tot the
report post section.
|
sorry make that 4 clicks before you get to the page where you give the post number
and reason.
|
Yes, it's a lot of clicks and copy/paste. Not easy on a mobile phone.
|
while a simple report post button on the post itself would make it so much easier
|
It would probably also lead to accidentally clicked reports.
I prefer a more visible button with two-step verification to report a message.
|
well when you have to click the button on the post then fill in the info and
click report that would be like a 2-step verification. my suggestion would be
to have the button on the post go right to the report function, avoiding all
those extra steps and such to get there. in other words the button on the post
would take you here https://www.bricklink.com/problemMessage.asp
|
|
| Author: | popsicle | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 13:39 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | I feel we should get a report post button added since trying to find that page
is very not user friendly.
|
Can you imagine the level of misuse such a convenient tab would allow for?
The Discussions Mods might have to give up their day jobs, considering the amount
of time it would take in filtering through the invalid to find the valid claims.
On the other hand, I could be wrong and if all the Discussions Mods were to call
for it, or at least back the suggestion, I’d say why not.
-Cory
|
|
| Author: | Brickwilbo | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 13:36 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | I feel we should get a report post button added since trying to find that page
is very not user friendly.
|
This was suggested before.
The Problem Center is below the page. Click forum, then enter the message number.
|
yeah but a bit redundant when you have to go thru 3 clicks just to get tot the
report post section.
|
sorry make that 4 clicks before you get to the page where you give the post number
and reason.
|
Yes, it's a lot of clicks and copy/paste. Not easy on a mobile phone.
|
while a simple report post button on the post itself would make it so much easier
|
It would probably also lead to accidentally clicked reports.
I prefer a more visible button with two-step verification to report a message.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 13:23 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | I feel we should get a report post button added since trying to find that page
is very not user friendly.
|
This was suggested before.
The Problem Center is below the page. Click forum, then enter the message number.
|
yeah but a bit redundant when you have to go thru 3 clicks just to get tot the
report post section.
|
sorry make that 4 clicks before you get to the page where you give the post number
and reason.
|
Yes, it's a lot of clicks and copy/paste. Not easy on a mobile phone.
|
while a simple report post button on the post itself would make it so much easier
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 12:02 | | Subject: | Re: Apply order on multiple wish lists | | Viewed: | 20 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Tholwin writes:
| | In Suggestions, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Suggestions, SylvainLS writes:
… but it would still be better if it were directly on BL.
|
Indeed. It's a nice tool though. (Sadly my OS isn't compatible.)
|
It’s Python, it should work on a Mac too.
You can also talk to the author, I’m sure he’ll be open to help you make it work.
|
|
|
| Author: | Tholwin | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 07:24 | | Subject: | Re: Apply order on multiple wish lists | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Suggestions, SylvainLS writes:
… but it would still be better if it were directly on BL.
|
Indeed. It's a nice tool though. (Sadly my OS isn't compatible.)
|
| Author: | bb371467 | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 04:00 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 8253-1 | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Add 1 Part 6629pb028R Black Technic, Liftarm 1 x 9 Bent (6 - 4) Thick with Red Lever and Six Buttons Pattern Model Right Side (Sticker) - Set 8253 (Counterpart)
|
|
| Author: | Brickwilbo | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 03:24 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | I feel we should get a report post button added since trying to find that page
is very not user friendly.
|
This was suggested before.
The Problem Center is below the page. Click forum, then enter the message number.
|
yeah but a bit redundant when you have to go thru 3 clicks just to get tot the
report post section.
|
sorry make that 4 clicks before you get to the page where you give the post number
and reason.
|
Yes, it's a lot of clicks and copy/paste. Not easy on a mobile phone.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 02:11 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | I feel we should get a report post button added since trying to find that page
is very not user friendly.
|
This was suggested before.
The Problem Center is below the page. Click forum, then enter the message number.
|
yeah but a bit redundant when you have to go thru 3 clicks just to get tot the
report post section.
|
sorry make that 4 clicks before you get to the page where you give the post number
and reason.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 02:09 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | I feel we should get a report post button added since trying to find that page
is very not user friendly.
|
This was suggested before.
The Problem Center is below the page. Click forum, then enter the message number.
|
yeah but a bit redundant when you have to go thru 3 clicks just to get tot the
report post section.
|
| Author: | Brickwilbo | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 01:31 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 51 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | I feel we should get a report post button added since trying to find that page
is very not user friendly.
|
This was suggested before.
The Problem Center is below the page. Click forum, then enter the message number.
|
|
| Author: | jeffgerry | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 00:49 | | Subject: | Re: Help to Identify Part Numbers for these... | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
| In Colors, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Colors, jeffgerry writes:
| | Can't seem to locate these. Not a sticker, printed pattern.
Thank You!
|
|
Thank YOU!!
|
| Author: | 1977_mauro | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 00:41 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 4548431-1 | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Change 2 Part Red {3044 Slope 45 2 x 1 Double (Undetermined Underside Type) to 3044b Slope 45 2 x 1 Double - with Inside Bar}
Comments from Submitter:
From a sealed set.
|
| Author: | FantasyBricks | | Posted: | Jun 22, 2020 23:51 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | I feel we should get a report post button added since trying to find that page
is very not user friendly.
|
+1
|
| Author: | 0to60 | | Posted: | Jun 22, 2020 23:50 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 60062-1 | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Add 2 Part 3245c Orange Brick 1 x 2 x 2 with Inside Stud Holder (Counterpart)
* Add 2 Part 3245c White Brick 1 x 2 x 2 with Inside Stud Holder (Counterpart)
Comments from Submitter:
two orange 3245 w/ arctic explorer sticker
two white 3245 w/ arctic explorer sticker
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
)
)
)
)
)
