Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | Turez  | | Posted: | Jun 25, 2020 03:24 | | Subject: | Re: Darth Vader Head Mold Variance | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, M.Boss writes:
| |
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.
|
I have an original helmet from 1999 and it is fur sure the left variant, so that's
definitly not a new mold. I would also say that most if not all images here show
the left variant:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogItemIn.asp?P=30368&in=M
And regarding the reintroduction of the old helmet in set 75261, the designers
said that the old mold was still available:
https://www.brothers-brick.com/2019/04/09/interview-with-lego-star-wars-designers-jens-kronvold-and-kurt-kristiansen-feature/
So I am wondering: Where did you find the right variant and are you sure it is
a genuine LEGO part?
|
 |
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Jun 25, 2020 00:55 | | Subject: | Re: Parts in new colors by set history | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, TtOoWwAa writes:
| | Hi,
Can we get a feature that tells us what year a part comes out in a new or previoustly
discontinued color for that part, or a previoustly discontinued color in general
(eg dark turqoise) and also the set that it comes in.
I say this because right now I have to wait for a new set to be on the web, look
closley at photos of it and see if there are any new part recolors, then I will
put it in a table with the part number, the color, the part name, the set it
comes in first, and the quandity.
Luckily Im only doing this with technic / sami-technic parts but as you might
imagine it is quite tedious.
I am aware that there is the NEW keyword bedide a part that has been released
in a new color however this does not tell us what set it comes in right away
because you can have a bricklink part catalog entry but the section "part appears
in" can be blank for a while,
I know that a load of people are interested in part recolors so I think this
feature would make the bricklink catalog a more powerful tool for lego fans!.
Any questions, leave a reply.
Thanks, SNIPE
|
Try:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogColors.asp
For dark turqoise you mentioned, scroll down to that colour, click on the sets
link and sort by year:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogList.asp?v=5&pg=1&colorInSet=39&catType=S
For parts, click on the parts link on that colours page, then sort by year again:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogList.asp?v=5&pg=1&colorPart=39&catType=P
You can also just view of all of the technic parts by going to:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogSearch.asp
Selecting "parts" for item type, "technic" for the Category and the colour you
want from the drop down list. I'm afraid though I do not know how to select
multiple categories, so I have to do it for axles, pins, links, panels etc as
a search each time. Probably why I prefer to just use the colour page and sort
by category if that is what is needed:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogList.asp?v=3&pg=1&colorPart=39&catType=P
then click on the specific categories I need. There might be an easier method
lurking somewhere.
|
|
| Author: | jbroman | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 23:50 | | Subject: | Re: How are stud measurements translated? | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| This is what I got after I sent in a dimensions change for the robot body part:
| | Do I have to put in a change for all three variants?
|
No, the dimensions changes wouldn't be accepted for any of them because this
part has non-standard dimensions.
| | The reason I put the dimensions in for this one was that I had a sale and the dimensions made it want to go as a package instead of meeting the dimensions of our lettermail. I guess I’ll have to change the dimensions for my own inventory.
|
I'm sorry that our dimensions are so confusing. We will be working on improving
them this year. I'll try to explain how packaging dimensions work. There
is a hidden field for each catalog entry that contains packaging dimensions and
these are used to calculate instant checkout.
The stud-size dimensions you see (2 x 2 x 2, in this case) are not used for packaging
dimensions. And stud-size dimensions themselves are in a mess. There are 28,000+
parts missing stud-size dimensions altogether.
But that's another issue. If you need packaging dimensions updated, these
are handled by a site administrator out in California and not by catalog associates
like myself. To get packaging dimensions added or corrected, please post in
the discussion forum using the Packaging Dimensions topic.
If you have any questions about any of this, please let us know. And again,
I apologize for the confusing way we do things right now.
I still haven't sent in the packaging dimensions to the site admin.
|
|
| Author: | TtOoWwAa | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 23:33 | | Subject: | Parts in new colors by set history | | Viewed: | 72 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | | Status: | Open | | Vote: | [Yes|No] | |
|
| Hi,
Can we get a feature that tells us what year a part comes out in a new or previoustly
discontinued color for that part, or a previoustly discontinued color in general
(eg dark turqoise) and also the set that it comes in.
I say this because right now I have to wait for a new set to be on the web, look
closley at photos of it and see if there are any new part recolors, then I will
put it in a table with the part number, the color, the part name, the set it
comes in first, and the quandity.
Luckily Im only doing this with technic / sami-technic parts but as you might
imagine it is quite tedious.
I am aware that there is the NEW keyword bedide a part that has been released
in a new color however this does not tell us what set it comes in right away
because you can have a bricklink part catalog entry but the section "part appears
in" can be blank for a while,
I know that a load of people are interested in part recolors so I think this
feature would make the bricklink catalog a more powerful tool for lego fans!.
Any questions, leave a reply.
Thanks, SNIPE
|
|
| Author: | jennnifer | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 22:19 | | Subject: | Re: How are stud measurements translated? | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Crafteewon writes:
| | In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:
| | In Catalog, Crafteewon writes:
| | Hello
I got a quote request from a customer saying that the shipping was too high.
When I looked at the order it looks like the below piece is the issue.
I have shipped this part before with no issues as lettermail.
With Canada post anything thicker than 2cm must be sent as parcel which is much
more expensive.
I am trying to understand how bricklink takes the 2x2x2 and translates that to
shipping dimensions in centimetres or inches.
Also can someone help me to understand how this can be 2x2x2 when one side is
longer than it is wide.
Is one of the measurements stacked bricks?
Thanks for any help
Edward
|
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=261
|
Thank you this helps, but it doesn’t address how bricklink uses this information
as it relates to packaging limits.
|
BrickLink keeps a separate database for packaging dimensions not related to the
format of our catalog data. The new database was derived from a mishmash of sources
but is now updated by members posting in a certain thread here in the Forum.
You can only view the dimensions entered for the parts in your shop on the My
Inventory pages.
Hope that helps,
Jen
|
|
| Author: | M.Boss | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 21:36 | | Subject: | Re: Darth Vader Head Mold Variance | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, starbeanie writes:
| | I think it's a pretty big change and worth a new entry.
In Catalog, M.Boss writes:
| | In Catalog, M.Boss writes:
| |
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.
|
Anyone? Does this mold change necessitate an amendment to the Bricklink Catalog?
|
|
It appears it has just been made as an additional note.
|
|
| Author: | starbeanie | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 20:45 | | Subject: | Re: Darth Vader Head Mold Variance | | Viewed: | 23 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| I think it's a pretty big change and worth a new entry.
In Catalog, M.Boss writes:
| | In Catalog, M.Boss writes:
| |
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.
|
Anyone? Does this mold change necessitate an amendment to the Bricklink Catalog?
|
|
|
| Author: | Crafteewon | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 20:38 | | Subject: | Re: How are stud measurements translated? | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:
| | In Catalog, Crafteewon writes:
| | Hello
I got a quote request from a customer saying that the shipping was too high.
When I looked at the order it looks like the below piece is the issue.
I have shipped this part before with no issues as lettermail.
With Canada post anything thicker than 2cm must be sent as parcel which is much
more expensive.
I am trying to understand how bricklink takes the 2x2x2 and translates that to
shipping dimensions in centimetres or inches.
Also can someone help me to understand how this can be 2x2x2 when one side is
longer than it is wide.
Is one of the measurements stacked bricks?
Thanks for any help
Edward
|
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=261
|
Thank you this helps, but it doesn’t address how bricklink uses this information
as it relates to packaging limits.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 20:29 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, tEoS writes:
| | Recheck the facts, then reread your full report of the incident. Then maybe
you will see the error.
In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | 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.
|
|
Yes buyer left neutral, but still does not excuse the negative left by the seller.
and the way the rules are written the seller could do nothing about it. since
the rules were very specific on what reasons feedback could be removed. and that
is what I want changed since they are not the only reasons, since retaliatory
feedback has been removed before and so forth. (in fact he has already contacted
the admins about getting the feedback removed)
|
|
| Author: | M.Boss | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 20:23 | | Subject: | Re: Darth Vader Head Mold Variance | | Viewed: | 22 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, M.Boss writes:
| |
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.
|
Anyone? Does this mold change necessitate an amendment to the Bricklink Catalog?
|
|
| Author: | tEoS | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 20:11 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| Recheck the facts, then reread your full report of the incident. Then maybe
you will see the error.
In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | 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: | Hygrotus | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 18:49 | | Subject: | Re: How are stud measurements translated? | | Viewed: | 46 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Crafteewon writes:
| | Hello
I got a quote request from a customer saying that the shipping was too high.
When I looked at the order it looks like the below piece is the issue.
I have shipped this part before with no issues as lettermail.
With Canada post anything thicker than 2cm must be sent as parcel which is much
more expensive.
I am trying to understand how bricklink takes the 2x2x2 and translates that to
shipping dimensions in centimetres or inches.
Also can someone help me to understand how this can be 2x2x2 when one side is
longer than it is wide.
Is one of the measurements stacked bricks?
Thanks for any help
Edward
|
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=261
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 18:14 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | […]
ShakeyShuffle was a character.
|
But that doesn’t prevent a member using “ShackyShuffle” (with or without the
‘e’) for their ID here.
Are you Ricky Stratton from Silver Spoons?
|
Nope
|
Too bad. You wouldn’t gift me a million $ or two anyway? 
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 18:14 | | Subject: | Re: How are stud measurements translated? | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Crafteewon writes:
| | […]
Also can someone help me to understand how this can be 2x2x2 when one side is
longer than it is wide.
Is one of the measurements stacked bricks?
|
Yes. It’s not stud x stud x stud, it’s stud x stud x brick.
A longstanding issue that could be simply solved by a few words changed….
|
|
| Author: | edeevo | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 18:00 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 32 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).
|
I 'memba that member... they gave many Buyers quite the wild ride...
Life is Good.
~Ed.
|
|
|
| Author: | Crafteewon | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 17:59 | | Subject: | How are stud measurements translated? | | Viewed: | 84 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Hello
I got a quote request from a customer saying that the shipping was too high.
When I looked at the order it looks like the below piece is the issue.
I have shipped this part before with no issues as lettermail.
With Canada post anything thicker than 2cm must be sent as parcel which is much
more expensive.
I am trying to understand how bricklink takes the 2x2x2 and translates that to
shipping dimensions in centimetres or inches.
Also can someone help me to understand how this can be 2x2x2 when one side is
longer than it is wide.
Is one of the measurements stacked bricks?
Thanks for any help
Edward
|
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 17:53 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | […]
ShakeyShuffle was a character.
|
But that doesn’t prevent a member using “ShackyShuffle” (with or without the
‘e’) for their ID here.
Are you Ricky Stratton from Silver Spoons?
|
Nope
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 17:04 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | 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.
|
Well every system has drawbacks but presumably the current system has big enough
drawbacks for you to warrant posting your concerns in the first place? Hopefully
any drawbacks you associate with the ebay system will be outweighed with what
you are already experiencing right now with the current system?
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 16:57 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | […]
ShakeyShuffle was a character.
|
But that doesn’t prevent a member using “ShackyShuffle” (with or without the
‘e’) for their ID here.
Are you Ricky Stratton from Silver Spoons?
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 16:55 | | Subject: | Re: Change Notification: Parts 4623 and 88072 | | Viewed: | 56 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | All four changes are planned to occur between the hours of 8 AM and 4 PM CST
on July 8th, 2020.
|
The date listed above is a typographical error.
It should read July 18th, 2020.
|
|
| 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: | 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.
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
Germany, Niedersachsen
South Africa, Western Cape
Canada, British Columbia
United Kingdom, England
USA, Illinois
Poland, w. Wielkopolskie
France, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
