BrickLink Discussion Forum

In Catalog, randyf writes:

In Catalog, Rick_S. writes:

In Catalog, randyf writes:

In Catalog, Rick_S. writes:

In Catalog, randyf writes:

In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:

In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:

[…]

49577 Plant Thallus / Seaweed / Coral
Parts: Plant

in my opinion this is seaweed not coral
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seaweed

and btw LEEGO offcial name of this part is plant
https://brickset.com/parts/design-49577
PLANT, W/ 3.2 SHAFT, NO. 2
so I think this also prevails towards seaweed than coral.

On the other hand, it also comes in the Coral colour (⅓ Coral, ⅔ Dark Turquoise).

On the other other hand, plants can be orangish.

And if you put it flat, it looks like lichen….

Oh, and if it’s coral, is it the microscopic animal or its mineral exo-skeletton?

It's definitely the mineral exoskeleton of coral polyps. I don't see
how it can possibly be seaweed.

haven't seen much seaweed before have you?

Actually, I saw quite a bit of both growing up along the south-eastern coast
of Florida. So, yeah, I've seen seaweed, and it is usually a bit more "leafier"
than that part.

so only seen seaweed in one general location then ?

Nope. I have seen seaweed in other places, also.

let us take one example shall
we, how about this type of red seaweed which a picture of it is enclosed, now
tell me does that look like the seaweed you know? or? seaweed comes in all shapes
and colors and designs and what not. the leafy stuff is just the most commonly
known stuff.

Reread what I wrote. I said seaweed is "usually a bit more 'leafier'".
I didn't say seaweed is *always* a bit more leafier.

The part in question just reminds me a lot of the fire corals and elkhorn corals
I use to snorkel around when I was younger.

Interesting thing though... I just learned that fire corals aren't true corals,
but are hydrocorals. Neat!

yeah but several things to consider, 1: LEGO calls this a plant, and whoever
put the description plant thallus would have been more correct in the plant family
since it does appear to display what a thallus would look like, also you have
to take into consideration some of LEGO's examples of tree branches and such
are not what I would call spot on or leafy

Author:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jul 2, 2020 02:35

Subject:

Re: Coral part should not be in the Plant Section

Viewed:

37 times

Topic:

In Catalog, randyf writes:

In Catalog, Rick_S. writes:

In Catalog, randyf writes:

In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:

In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:

[…]

49577 Plant Thallus / Seaweed / Coral
Parts: Plant

On the other hand, it also comes in the Coral colour (⅓ Coral, ⅔ Dark Turquoise).

On the other other hand, plants can be orangish.

And if you put it flat, it looks like lichen….

Oh, and if it’s coral, is it the microscopic animal or its mineral exo-skeletton?

It's definitely the mineral exoskeleton of coral polyps. I don't see
how it can possibly be seaweed.

haven't seen much seaweed before have you?

Actually, I saw quite a bit of both growing up along the south-eastern coast
of Florida. So, yeah, I've seen seaweed, and it is usually a bit more "leafier"
than that part.

so only seen seaweed in one general location then ? let us take one example shall
we, how about this type of red seaweed which a picture of it is enclosed, now
tell me does that look like the seaweed you know? or? seaweed comes in all shapes
and colors and designs and what not. the leafy stuff is just the most commonly
known stuff.

Author:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jul 1, 2020 21:57

Subject:

Re: Coral part should not be in the Plant Section

Viewed:

27 times

Topic:

In Catalog, randyf writes:

In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:

In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:

[…]

49577 Plant Thallus / Seaweed / Coral
Parts: Plant

On the other hand, it also comes in the Coral colour (⅓ Coral, ⅔ Dark Turquoise).

On the other other hand, plants can be orangish.

And if you put it flat, it looks like lichen….

Oh, and if it’s coral, is it the microscopic animal or its mineral exo-skeletton?

It's definitely the mineral exoskeleton of coral polyps. I don't see
how it can possibly be seaweed.

haven't seen much seaweed before have you?

Author:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 25, 2020 14:21

Subject:

Re: Darth Vader Head Mold Variance

Viewed:

27 times

Topic:

In Catalog, M.Boss writes:

30368 Minifigure, Headgear Helmet SW Darth Vader
Parts: Minifigure, Headgear

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

75261-1 (Inv) Clone Scout Walker – 20th Anniversary Edition
198 Parts, 5 Minifigures, 2019
Sets: Star Wars: Star Wars Episode 3

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.

think one on right is a chinese knock off.

Author:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 24, 2020 20:29

Subject:

Re: Changing rules of feedback

Viewed:

48 times

Topic:

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:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 24, 2020 17:53

Subject:

Re: Changing rules of feedback

Viewed:

35 times

Topic:

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:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 24, 2020 16:35

Subject:

Re: Changing rules of feedback

Viewed:

37 times

Topic:

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:

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:

In Suggestions, tEoS writes:

Buyer left neutral feedback = error in what you wrote

Author:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 24, 2020 16:03

Subject:

Re: Changing rules of feedback

Viewed:

31 times

Topic:

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.

Author:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 24, 2020 15:03

Subject:

Re: Changing rules of feedback

Viewed:

44 times

Topic:

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:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 24, 2020 14:28

Subject:

Re: Changing rules of feedback

Viewed:

32 times

Topic:

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:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 24, 2020 11:12

Subject:

Re: Changing rules of feedback

Viewed:

32 times

Topic:

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:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 24, 2020 01:35

Subject:

Re: Changing rules of feedback

Viewed:

42 times

Topic:

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.

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:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 24, 2020 00:49

Subject:

Re: Changing rules of feedback

Viewed:

49 times

Topic:

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.

Author:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 23, 2020 22:26

Subject:

Re: Report post button

Viewed:

32 times

Topic:

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:

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.

Author:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 23, 2020 21:46

Subject:

Re: Report post button

Viewed:

27 times

Topic:

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.

Author:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 23, 2020 21:43

Subject:

Re: Changing rules of feedback

Viewed:

32 times

Topic:

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:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 23, 2020 20:38

Subject:

Re: Changing rules of feedback

Viewed:

35 times

Topic:

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:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 23, 2020 20:09

Subject:

Re: Changing rules of feedback

Viewed:

26 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:

Author:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 23, 2020 19:28

Subject:

Re: Changing rules of feedback

Viewed:

32 times

Topic:

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:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 23, 2020 18:39

Subject:

Re: Changing rules of feedback

Viewed:

41 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:

In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:

In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:

In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:

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:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 23, 2020 18:23

Subject:

Re: Changing rules of feedback

Viewed:

46 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:

In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:

Author:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 23, 2020 18:11

Subject:

Re: Changing rules of feedback

Viewed:

38 times

Topic:

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:

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:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 23, 2020 18:03

Subject:

Re: Changing rules of feedback

Viewed:

33 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Tracyd writes:

Author:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 23, 2020 17:45

Subject:

Changing rules of feedback

Viewed:

318 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Vote:

[Yes|No]

Author:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 23, 2020 14:23

Subject:

Re: Report post button

Viewed:

21 times

Topic:

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:

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:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 23, 2020 14:12

Subject:

Re: Report post button

Viewed:

18 times

Topic:

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:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 23, 2020 14:02

Subject:

Re: Report post button

Viewed:

26 times

Topic:

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.

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:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 23, 2020 13:46

Subject:

Re: Report post button

Viewed:

19 times

Topic:

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.

Author:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 23, 2020 13:44

Subject:

Re: Report post button

Viewed:

17 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:

In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:

In Suggestions, Brickwilbo 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:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 23, 2020 13:23

Subject:

Re: Report post button

Viewed:

26 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Brickwilbo 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:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 23, 2020 02:11

Subject:

Re: Report post button

Viewed:

40 times

Topic:

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:

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:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 22, 2020 23:44

Subject:

Report post button

Viewed:

164 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Vote:

[Yes|No]

I feel we should get a report post button added since trying to find that page
is very not user friendly.

Author:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 17, 2020 13:43

Subject:

Re: Pickable Models and In-Store Builds

Viewed:

31 times

Topic:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

In Catalog, bje writes:

Can I resubmit my pickable models from 2012 or are you just going to change
the instruction entries to sets?

It doesn't appear to cause any problems to change instructions to
sets, so for existing instructions this is probably what will occur - except
possibly in cases where there are large numbers of items for sale.

Here's one changed:

TORQUE-1 (Inv) Toys "R" Us Exclusive Build - Rod "Torque" Redline
30 Parts, 2011
Sets: Building Event: Cars: Cars 2

I tried listing those instructions when I listed the sticker sheet for the set
and it got denied, guess rules changed?

Author:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jan 28, 2020 16:53

Subject:

Re: Attack of the Blusers

Viewed:

78 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, BLUSER13161 writes:

In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:

bluser numbers assigned already
but just happen to be known by our chosen usernames instead.

Yes, your bluser number can be seen by going to your Account Info page. The
second bit of information there is titled User ID. That's your bluser number.

Someday in the distant future, when we're all dead, they'll eject us
from the system and make us blusers, too. Not too fond of the idea, as I'd
rather be remembered as StormChaser, not BLUSER_13161.

Doesn't matter what I want, though.

I'm BLUSER 9140

Author:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Apr 6, 2017 20:54

Subject:

Re: Add Bricklinked/Not original in Sales

Viewed:

54 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Kael944 writes:

We need to add a new category to the sales process, i.e. Bricklinked/Not Original.
It would weed out false hits for those of us who only seek original sets!

you can add the category but if there is a price discreprency don't count
on many using it, furthermore some of them resell sets so no clue if those sets
are bricklinked either.

Author:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Apr 5, 2017 10:09

Subject:

Re: Ban selling custom parts

Viewed:

65 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, metropolis1927 writes:

OK, didn't know LEGO build custom parts, off catalog stuff. That's different
"pair of sleeves". And think that that parts can easy be checked, they have letters
LEGO marks. TLG guarantee for plastic and print that are not toxic and harmful.

I was referring to fake LEGO brands and custom parts build in "garage". I don't
say that there's no quality custom parts, but who can say that this and this
custom part is of good quality and this and this isn't (and everything that
came with it; durability, paint peeling, what king of plastic and paint, how
safe are for kids to play with them...). All sellers of those parts will write
that their parts are high quality.
Example, you all heard of custom minifigs from Christo7108, that are praised.
But he has some custom parts (and prints) that are copied by others like Sheng
Yuan (fake Lego brand), like Flash's helmet (SY269), see pics.
I'm for banning all, as 1974 write, 3rd party stuff.
Marko

not all LEGO is marked LEGO.

Author:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Apr 3, 2017 10:13

Subject:

Re: Ban selling custom parts

Viewed:

62 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Brettj666 writes:

In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:

In Suggestions, metropolis1927 writes:

Hello

I suggest to ban selling custom parts from bricklink that aren't official
LEGO parts.
LEGO guarantee for quality of their parts and we can't know of what kind
of plastic are made custom parts. Plastic maybe toxic or another way harmful.
And what guarantee we have that those parts aren't from fake LEGO brands
like Lepin or similar.
Let those fake parts be on ebay and other sites, let bricklink be just for LEGO
and not for "Lego".

Cheers
Marko

I see this is still being discussed and has been discussed over so long, now
if you wanted to ban items that are duplicate of LEGO items I might be behind
it, but alas LEGO does not make all things many seek to obtain and custom parts
makers do fill that niche, while also giving good quality items.

So, any piece that Tyco or Megablocks make which Lego hasn't, should be fair
game?

no since I consider Tyco and Megablock competition with LEGO while customizers
and their parts are not, they accentuate LEGO.

Author:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Apr 3, 2017 10:04

Subject:

Re: Ban selling custom parts

Viewed:

80 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, metropolis1927 writes:

Author:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Aug 29, 2015 20:32

Subject:

Re: Prohibit Vigilante Orders

Viewed:

57 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:

In Suggestions, Leftoverbricks writes:

+1

I notice by myself that I'm getting more and more irritated by lengthy posts
from 'sellers' who have nothing to sell, yet they have very strong opinions
on everything going on here on BL. Not only Thor, but Rick_S as well.
To those people I would say: go on with your life and have fun with LEGO - but
not in this forum...

Best wishes,
Martin

seriously you just said that? lets look at your feedback, hmm smaller then mine,
hmm lets see your start date, wow a recent date, maybe BL should ban all members
with less then 5 or 10 years from posting? and lets see I've sold a lot here
before, did rather well, helped with other things on this site, your comment
would be akin to say ignore the old or those over 40 years of age or 50 or 60
since they do nothing, congrats you made my stoplist for being insulting.

my bad your already on it for stoplisting me

Author:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Aug 29, 2015 20:31

Subject:

Re: Prohibit Vigilante Orders

Viewed:

57 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Leftoverbricks writes:

Author:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Aug 25, 2015 13:46

Subject:

Re: Ranking up ideas to slow down potential SCAM

Viewed:

64 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, RobErNat writes:

Over the years a lot of suggestions have been made to prevent scam sellers from
getting loads of orders, take the money and run.
I'm sure BL is trying to work out systems to prevent such things from happening
in future, so it would be good to rank up all the potential options one could
imagine to have limitations, to have faster action on potential scam stores and
to potentially send warnings to buyers with open orders.
Please don't make this thread into a discussion, just state a clear idea,
without too much blah blah and without arguing about pro's and contra's,
without repeating or applauding to another ones suggestion, so just simple
things like the one below, with a brief indication/explanation of the option

Certain things could apply for new sellers with no feedback or when a member
opens a store (if if the member has hundreds or thousands of feedbacks from buying),
untill either they proof themselves by generating selling feedback, and/or by
giving proof items are in stock and/or by prooving who they are. Some of the
suggestion may conflict with eachother, but that is besides the intention of
the thread, let's just rank up the ideas in an easy to review thread for
the site admins so they can compile the ideas.

* Lot limitation: New sellers usually start pretty small and build up their store
along the way, so a lot limitation could prevent scammers using the PO function
on high valued sets. Example: maximum 200 lot's (legit sellers would probably
get a few orders a long the way and build up feedback)

* value limitation: example 500$, legit sellers would probably start small with
a limited inventory, get a few orders and work their way up. This limit would
exclude newbies from selling high valued sets soon they open a store, and for
legit sellers starting small, $500 is most likely quite a nice base to get started
(parts/minifigs/small and medium sets) and rank up some orders and feedbacks.

* maximum on 'number' of orders during the first month, for example 1/day
and 3/week, if no complaints during that month (no negatives, no neutrals, no
NSS/NRS statusses), upgrade to 2/day and 5/week the next month, if still no complaints,
full access

* Tags on high valued sets, so the admins would get a warning, sellers with a
sellers feedback lower then 10 for example.

* As admins can't be around 24/7: select a number of people worldwide who
can tag stores or listings, if a store or an item get's tagged by 3 different
people: Closure as 'preventive action', or block an item from being bought,
so the admins can review if there is a problem or not, the next business day
or their next avaliable moment online, with offcourse a mail to the admins to
check the situation or the item for sale that was 'locked'.

* If a store is locked (except if the reason is non payment of fees): a warning
to all buyers with open orders to either delay payment for a few days, to contact
seller to ask for tracking or proof of postage if shipped or ask information
about the status of the order and expected shippingdate if not yet shipped.

* Obligation for brand new sellers to have Paypal among the offered accepted
payment methods (after all they'll need to pay fees to BL for the sales,
so they need Paypal anyway).

* BL as temporary withholder of funds particulary on larger orders from newbie
sellers (I'm not in favor of this myself, but I do consider it an option).

* More proof on who sellers are, prior to being allowed opening a store: ID card
/ Drivers license / a small Paypal payment / Business documentation / etc, so
BL has the sellers details on record and can compare it to the registered address.

So, ideas like that with brief explanation and again, please don't make it
a discussion, just state your idea on what could help to improve BL in regards
to prevent scams

Eric

My one suggestion was to verify they are who they say they are thru payment from
a verifiable source like PayPal and such, where a new seller would pay a $5 fee
thru PayPal or such which admin would then apply towards their account to pay
their fees.

paying money will deter many scammers, paying thru a site like PayPal verified
will also verify the seller is who they say they are.

Author:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 23, 2015 19:46

Subject:

Re: Display number of orders store is yet to proc

Viewed:

28 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, activoice writes:

I find that some stores process orders a lot faster than other stores. Most
of the time this is proportionate to the number of outstanding orders that the
store has yet to fill (IE how backlogged they are)

In some cases I've waited 3 weeks from the day I paid for an order until
it was actually shipped.

From a buyers perspective if I knew how many orders there were ahead of mine
it would help me make a decision as to whether or not I was going to order from
this store or not... (in many cases you have no choice because you are selecting
the store because they have most of the items on your wanted list)

But at least if I knew that the store had 100 orders ahead of mine I could make
an informed decision whether I wanted to buy from them or if I would be better
off splitting my order across a few stores that have much fewer orders ahead
of mine.

In the brick and mortar world it's like being in a food court... I could
really want Chipotle, but I can see they've got a huge line... but hey there's
no line at Subway... that's good enough... I'll go there...

So what would count against the seller would be things like
- Order Placed but not yet invoiced
- Orders Paid for by the buyer but not yet shipped

Things that would not count against the seller
- Orders invoiced but not yet paid for by the buyer

You could even display an average for number of days from the day the Buyer marks
the invoice as PAID to the day the SELLER sets the status to SHIPPED. This would
be simpler and tell you how fast a SELLER processes orders on average.

(Hopefully most people are honest... once again I've had a seller outright
lie and tell me that they shipped something out, but when I actually received
the item I can see what date it was post marked, and it's more than 2 weeks
later.. I understand people get busy and they have lives... but at least be
honest about it)

I would rather see a turn around average per order listed.

Author:

Rick_S.

Posted:

Jun 23, 2015 19:44

Subject:

Re: Display number of orders store is yet to proc

Viewed:

31 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Miro78 writes:

I see your point here, but generally speaking, feedback comments tell you a lot
in regards to level of service a store provides (speed, packing, part quality,
communication, etc). Your suggestion would hurt those stores that allow buyers
to hold orders open while the buyer takes more time to add additional items over
a course of few days. That's just one example. Some of the big stores state
in their TOS and/or Splash page about their turn around time. Not all, but over
time you will see which ones are honest and speedy. I have my favorite go to
stores for when I need stuff fast.

Miro

well doubt buyer feedback is being honest considering you have sellers who leave
a negative feedback when a buyer leaves a neutral because of slow shipping (6
days for a 1 part order).

the way this system is designed sellers can hold feedback hostage, plain and
simple as a buyer I do not leave feedback till after the seller does, regardless
of how the order went, as a seller I leave feedback once the order is shipped,
but that is because I have faith in how I process and ship orders and my feedback
speaks to that(not a single neutral or negative feedback ever received as a seller).

Author:

Rick_S.

Posted:

May 28, 2015 11:10

Subject:

Re: Dealing with orders

Viewed:

73 times

Topic: