Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies Author: | Rick_S. | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 19:28 | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | Viewed: | 32 times | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
| I see, I think that there's blame on both sides here.
This should have been resolved better by the seller as the customer was obviously
not satisfied and was justified to leave a non positive.
The seller fell short and obviously didn't provide a satisfactory solution
to the buyer- and escalated the matter by leaving non positive.
The buyer abused the NSS system as a result of the seller's behavior.
This could be looked at in a couple ways- the feedback system wasn't abused
here- the NSS system was abused.
Our store puts more emphasis on customer experience so we would have sent the
piece or would have made a plea for the buyer to see what would be a reasonable
solution.
We also notify our buyers before shipping an order that is short to give them
an option to cancel.
I do think it is reasonable to spend $4 to repair a 7 cent mistake- but i believe
in taking full responsibility for my mistakes.
Two adults should be able to resolve their disputes- no need for a nanny.
the NSS was an abuse of BL TOS and requires interjection by admin- the feedback
system doesn't.
|
and yet the buyer is stuck with a negative he does not deserve and you do not
think that needs to be fixed?
|
|
Author: | Heartbricker | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 19:17 | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | Viewed: | 32 times | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| As it goes a rule not allowing retaliatory feedback should also be added for
removal of said feedback since as the rules stand retaliatory feedback is allowed:
Feedback you Received:
The following are currently the only valid reasons for which you can request
feedback you received to be removed:
Feedback you received contains vulgar language.
Feedback you received contains personally identifying information including your
name, address, e-mail address or telephone number.
You are the seller and the buyer has not paid. Non-Paying Buyer Alert has been
completed or the buyer has accepted the NPB penalty via NPX.
You are the buyer and the seller has not responded or shipped. Non-Responding
Seller Alert or Non-Shipping Seller Alert has been completed.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who had their
membership terminated.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who was on
your Stop List before the order was placed.
If you're requesting feedback to be removed for the last 2 reasons above,
you should contact the Help Desk before you submit the request and let us know
the original username of the duplicate account.
Requests can be submitted until the order is purged from the system - up to 6
months from the order date. Requests are submitted to the BrickLink Administration
for approval. If the feedback is removed, it cannot be reposted. Each request
has a status:
|
I understand the frustration of getting a retaliatory feedback BUT i don't
support interjecting the BL admins into disputes over feedback.
The BL team has enough to do without this added task which is not a revenue producing
nor a productive use of their time.
Having the admin being a referee between two disputing users may result in one
of those users leaving the site which will not be beneficial for the greater
good.
Retaliatory feedback is easy to spot and usually hurts the image of the user
who left it more than the user who received it.
|
oh wouldn't be surprised if the seller made it onto a lot of peoples do not
buy from lists since his actions are not those of a good seller. but the whole
reason behind admins and moderators is to moderate between 2 parties, instead
the buyer was forced to file an NSS so as to remove said feedback, do you think
that is better?
|
Not sure which seller you are speaking of.
Buyers filing NSS to remove feedback is a violation against bricklinks' TOS
therefore does require interjection- retaliatory feedback isn't.
The case you described is very rare.
|
the incident is over a seller not shipping a full order, which the buyer left
negative feedback then the seller left retaliatory feedback and the only option
the buyer had was to file an NSS.
read this entire forum chain to get at why I posted this:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1205906
|
I see, I think that there's blame on both sides here.
This should have been resolved better by the seller as the customer was obviously
not satisfied and was justified to leave a non positive.
The seller fell short and obviously didn't provide a satisfactory solution
to the buyer- and escalated the matter by leaving non positive.
The buyer abused the NSS system as a result of the seller's behavior.
This could be looked at in a couple ways- the feedback system wasn't abused
here- the NSS system was abused.
Our store puts more emphasis on customer experience so we would have sent the
piece or would have made a plea for the buyer to see what would be a reasonable
solution.
We also notify our buyers before shipping an order that is short to give them
an option to cancel.
I do think it is reasonable to spend $4 to repair a 7 cent mistake- but i believe
in taking full responsibility for my mistakes.
Two adults should be able to resolve their disputes- no need for a nanny.
the NSS was an abuse of BL TOS and requires interjection by admin- the feedback
system doesn't.
|
|
Author: | Rick_S. | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 18:39 | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | Viewed: | 41 times | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| As it goes a rule not allowing retaliatory feedback should also be added for
removal of said feedback since as the rules stand retaliatory feedback is allowed:
Feedback you Received:
The following are currently the only valid reasons for which you can request
feedback you received to be removed:
Feedback you received contains vulgar language.
Feedback you received contains personally identifying information including your
name, address, e-mail address or telephone number.
You are the seller and the buyer has not paid. Non-Paying Buyer Alert has been
completed or the buyer has accepted the NPB penalty via NPX.
You are the buyer and the seller has not responded or shipped. Non-Responding
Seller Alert or Non-Shipping Seller Alert has been completed.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who had their
membership terminated.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who was on
your Stop List before the order was placed.
If you're requesting feedback to be removed for the last 2 reasons above,
you should contact the Help Desk before you submit the request and let us know
the original username of the duplicate account.
Requests can be submitted until the order is purged from the system - up to 6
months from the order date. Requests are submitted to the BrickLink Administration
for approval. If the feedback is removed, it cannot be reposted. Each request
has a status:
|
I understand the frustration of getting a retaliatory feedback BUT i don't
support interjecting the BL admins into disputes over feedback.
The BL team has enough to do without this added task which is not a revenue producing
nor a productive use of their time.
Having the admin being a referee between two disputing users may result in one
of those users leaving the site which will not be beneficial for the greater
good.
Retaliatory feedback is easy to spot and usually hurts the image of the user
who left it more than the user who received it.
|
oh wouldn't be surprised if the seller made it onto a lot of peoples do not
buy from lists since his actions are not those of a good seller. but the whole
reason behind admins and moderators is to moderate between 2 parties, instead
the buyer was forced to file an NSS so as to remove said feedback, do you think
that is better?
|
Not sure which seller you are speaking of.
Buyers filing NSS to remove feedback is a violation against bricklinks' TOS
therefore does require interjection- retaliatory feedback isn't.
The case you described is very rare.
|
the incident is over a seller not shipping a full order, which the buyer left
negative feedback then the seller left retaliatory feedback and the only option
the buyer had was to file an NSS.
read this entire forum chain to get at why I posted this:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1205906
|
|
Author: | Heartbricker | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 18:32 | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | Viewed: | 48 times | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| As it goes a rule not allowing retaliatory feedback should also be added for
removal of said feedback since as the rules stand retaliatory feedback is allowed:
Feedback you Received:
The following are currently the only valid reasons for which you can request
feedback you received to be removed:
Feedback you received contains vulgar language.
Feedback you received contains personally identifying information including your
name, address, e-mail address or telephone number.
You are the seller and the buyer has not paid. Non-Paying Buyer Alert has been
completed or the buyer has accepted the NPB penalty via NPX.
You are the buyer and the seller has not responded or shipped. Non-Responding
Seller Alert or Non-Shipping Seller Alert has been completed.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who had their
membership terminated.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who was on
your Stop List before the order was placed.
If you're requesting feedback to be removed for the last 2 reasons above,
you should contact the Help Desk before you submit the request and let us know
the original username of the duplicate account.
Requests can be submitted until the order is purged from the system - up to 6
months from the order date. Requests are submitted to the BrickLink Administration
for approval. If the feedback is removed, it cannot be reposted. Each request
has a status:
|
I understand the frustration of getting a retaliatory feedback BUT i don't
support interjecting the BL admins into disputes over feedback.
The BL team has enough to do without this added task which is not a revenue producing
nor a productive use of their time.
Having the admin being a referee between two disputing users may result in one
of those users leaving the site which will not be beneficial for the greater
good.
Retaliatory feedback is easy to spot and usually hurts the image of the user
who left it more than the user who received it.
|
oh wouldn't be surprised if the seller made it onto a lot of peoples do not
buy from lists since his actions are not those of a good seller. but the whole
reason behind admins and moderators is to moderate between 2 parties, instead
the buyer was forced to file an NSS so as to remove said feedback, do you think
that is better?
|
Not sure which seller you are speaking of.
Buyers filing NSS to remove feedback is a violation against bricklinks' TOS
therefore does require interjection- retaliatory feedback isn't.
The case you described is very rare.
|
|
Author: | Rick_S. | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 18:23 | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | Viewed: | 46 times | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| As it goes a rule not allowing retaliatory feedback should also be added for
removal of said feedback since as the rules stand retaliatory feedback is allowed:
Feedback you Received:
The following are currently the only valid reasons for which you can request
feedback you received to be removed:
Feedback you received contains vulgar language.
Feedback you received contains personally identifying information including your
name, address, e-mail address or telephone number.
You are the seller and the buyer has not paid. Non-Paying Buyer Alert has been
completed or the buyer has accepted the NPB penalty via NPX.
You are the buyer and the seller has not responded or shipped. Non-Responding
Seller Alert or Non-Shipping Seller Alert has been completed.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who had their
membership terminated.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who was on
your Stop List before the order was placed.
If you're requesting feedback to be removed for the last 2 reasons above,
you should contact the Help Desk before you submit the request and let us know
the original username of the duplicate account.
Requests can be submitted until the order is purged from the system - up to 6
months from the order date. Requests are submitted to the BrickLink Administration
for approval. If the feedback is removed, it cannot be reposted. Each request
has a status:
|
I understand the frustration of getting a retaliatory feedback BUT i don't
support interjecting the BL admins into disputes over feedback.
The BL team has enough to do without this added task which is not a revenue producing
nor a productive use of their time.
Having the admin being a referee between two disputing users may result in one
of those users leaving the site which will not be beneficial for the greater
good.
Retaliatory feedback is easy to spot and usually hurts the image of the user
who left it more than the user who received it.
|
oh wouldn't be surprised if the seller made it onto a lot of peoples do not
buy from lists since his actions are not those of a good seller. but the whole
reason behind admins and moderators is to moderate between 2 parties, instead
the buyer was forced to file an NSS so as to remove said feedback, do you think
that is better?
|
|
Author: | Heartbricker | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 18:16 | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | Viewed: | 65 times | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| As it goes a rule not allowing retaliatory feedback should also be added for
removal of said feedback since as the rules stand retaliatory feedback is allowed:
Feedback you Received:
The following are currently the only valid reasons for which you can request
feedback you received to be removed:
Feedback you received contains vulgar language.
Feedback you received contains personally identifying information including your
name, address, e-mail address or telephone number.
You are the seller and the buyer has not paid. Non-Paying Buyer Alert has been
completed or the buyer has accepted the NPB penalty via NPX.
You are the buyer and the seller has not responded or shipped. Non-Responding
Seller Alert or Non-Shipping Seller Alert has been completed.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who had their
membership terminated.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who was on
your Stop List before the order was placed.
If you're requesting feedback to be removed for the last 2 reasons above,
you should contact the Help Desk before you submit the request and let us know
the original username of the duplicate account.
Requests can be submitted until the order is purged from the system - up to 6
months from the order date. Requests are submitted to the BrickLink Administration
for approval. If the feedback is removed, it cannot be reposted. Each request
has a status:
|
I understand the frustration of getting a retaliatory feedback BUT i don't
support interjecting the BL admins into disputes over feedback.
The BL team has enough to do without this added task which is not a revenue producing
nor a productive use of their time.
Having the admin being a referee between two disputing users may result in one
of those users leaving the site which will not be beneficial for the greater
good.
Retaliatory feedback is easy to spot and usually hurts the image of the user
who left it more than the user who received it.
|
|
Author: | Brickwilbo | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 18:15 | Subject: | Re: Report post button | Viewed: | 22 times | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| curious how many of those mods are still active moderating?
|
All of them are.
|
are they? when a couple scam reported posts are still up most of the day after
being reported it just tells me there is not a good spread of mods to cover all
time zones.
|
Thank you for reporting.
There were two scam posts reported around 5 at night, in my timezone.
Both were canceled immediately after I woke up. 😉
|
figured it was you that removed them, in fact feels like you are the only moderator
working.
|
You can be assured that all active moderators are working together.
It's visible below the canceled post who canceled it.
|
|
Author: | Rick_S. | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 18:11 | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | Viewed: | 38 times | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Tracyd writes:
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| In Suggestions, Tracyd writes:
| The definition of retaliatory is in the eye of the beholder. If I think I did
everything right and did not deserve the feedback left for me then it is not
deserved. But the other party thinks they are right and it should stand. This
would make Bricklink the final judge and jury of feedback. I look at seller's
feedback and the buyer's feedback if I am evaluating a seller. Some buyers
are unhappy at every little thing. Some sellers overreact to even the smallest
criticism.
|
yes that is why it should be an option to let the admin decide, take this recent
case into question, this buyer received negative feedback because of negative
feedback he left the seller who failed to deliver items the buyer bought and
refused to deal with the situation, the seller deserved the negative feedback,
the buyer did not and it is obviously retaliatory in nature:
https://www.bricklink.com/feedback.asp?u=sludgemonster
|
The retaliation came for the NSS charge. They shipped, missing item was refunded,
even PayPal wouldn't side with the buyer on this.
|
actually the NSS came after the negative feedback since that is evidently the
only way to remove said feedback by the rules.
|
|
Author: | Rick_S. | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 18:10 | Subject: | Re: Report post button | Viewed: | 20 times | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| curious how many of those mods are still active moderating?
|
All of them are.
|
are they? when a couple scam reported posts are still up most of the day after
being reported it just tells me there is not a good spread of mods to cover all
time zones.
|
Thank you for reporting.
There were two scam posts reported around 5 at night, in my timezone.
Both were canceled immediately after I woke up. 😉
|
figured it was you that removed them, in fact feels like you are the only moderator
working.
|
|
Author: | Tracyd | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 18:06 | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | Viewed: | 31 times | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| In Suggestions, Tracyd writes:
| The definition of retaliatory is in the eye of the beholder. If I think I did
everything right and did not deserve the feedback left for me then it is not
deserved. But the other party thinks they are right and it should stand. This
would make Bricklink the final judge and jury of feedback. I look at seller's
feedback and the buyer's feedback if I am evaluating a seller. Some buyers
are unhappy at every little thing. Some sellers overreact to even the smallest
criticism.
|
yes that is why it should be an option to let the admin decide, take this recent
case into question, this buyer received negative feedback because of negative
feedback he left the seller who failed to deliver items the buyer bought and
refused to deal with the situation, the seller deserved the negative feedback,
the buyer did not and it is obviously retaliatory in nature:
https://www.bricklink.com/feedback.asp?u=sludgemonster
|
The retaliation came for the NSS charge. They shipped, missing item was refunded,
even PayPal wouldn't side with the buyer on this.
|
|
Author: | Brickwilbo | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 18:05 | Subject: | Re: Report post button | Viewed: | 21 times | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| curious how many of those mods are still active moderating?
|
All of them are.
|
are they? when a couple scam reported posts are still up most of the day after
being reported it just tells me there is not a good spread of mods to cover all
time zones.
|
Thank you for reporting.
There were two scam posts reported around 5 at night, in my timezone.
Both were canceled immediately after I woke up. 😉
|
|
Author: | Rick_S. | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 18:03 | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | Viewed: | 33 times | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Tracyd writes:
| The definition of retaliatory is in the eye of the beholder. If I think I did
everything right and did not deserve the feedback left for me then it is not
deserved. But the other party thinks they are right and it should stand. This
would make Bricklink the final judge and jury of feedback. I look at seller's
feedback and the buyer's feedback if I am evaluating a seller. Some buyers
are unhappy at every little thing. Some sellers overreact to even the smallest
criticism.
|
yes that is why it should be an option to let the admin decide, take this recent
case into question, this buyer received negative feedback because of negative
feedback he left the seller who failed to deliver items the buyer bought and
refused to deal with the situation, the seller deserved the negative feedback,
the buyer did not and it is obviously retaliatory in nature:
https://www.bricklink.com/feedback.asp?u=sludgemonster
|
|
Author: | Tracyd | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 17:58 | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | Viewed: | 44 times | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| As it goes a rule not allowing retaliatory feedback should also be added for
removal of said feedback since as the rules stand retaliatory feedback is allowed:
Feedback you Received:
The following are currently the only valid reasons for which you can request
feedback you received to be removed:
Feedback you received contains vulgar language.
Feedback you received contains personally identifying information including your
name, address, e-mail address or telephone number.
You are the seller and the buyer has not paid. Non-Paying Buyer Alert has been
completed or the buyer has accepted the NPB penalty via NPX.
You are the buyer and the seller has not responded or shipped. Non-Responding
Seller Alert or Non-Shipping Seller Alert has been completed.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who had their
membership terminated.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who was on
your Stop List before the order was placed.
If you're requesting feedback to be removed for the last 2 reasons above,
you should contact the Help Desk before you submit the request and let us know
the original username of the duplicate account.
Requests can be submitted until the order is purged from the system - up to 6
months from the order date. Requests are submitted to the BrickLink Administration
for approval. If the feedback is removed, it cannot be reposted. Each request
has a status:
|
The definition of retaliatory is in the eye of the beholder. If I think I did
everything right and did not deserve the feedback left for me then it is not
deserved. But the other party thinks they are right and it should stand. This
would make Bricklink the final judge and jury of feedback. I look at seller's
feedback and the buyer's feedback if I am evaluating a seller. Some buyers
are unhappy at every little thing. Some sellers overreact to even the smallest
criticism.
|
|
Author: | Rob_and_Shelagh | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 17:54 | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | Viewed: | 54 times | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| As it goes a rule not allowing retaliatory feedback should also be added for
removal of said feedback since as the rules stand retaliatory feedback is allowed:
Feedback you Received:
The following are currently the only valid reasons for which you can request
feedback you received to be removed:
Feedback you received contains vulgar language.
Feedback you received contains personally identifying information including your
name, address, e-mail address or telephone number.
You are the seller and the buyer has not paid. Non-Paying Buyer Alert has been
completed or the buyer has accepted the NPB penalty via NPX.
You are the buyer and the seller has not responded or shipped. Non-Responding
Seller Alert or Non-Shipping Seller Alert has been completed.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who had their
membership terminated.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who was on
your Stop List before the order was placed.
If you're requesting feedback to be removed for the last 2 reasons above,
you should contact the Help Desk before you submit the request and let us know
the original username of the duplicate account.
Requests can be submitted until the order is purged from the system - up to 6
months from the order date. Requests are submitted to the BrickLink Administration
for approval. If the feedback is removed, it cannot be reposted. Each request
has a status:
|
How and who decides if feedback is retaliatory or not and what would be the criteria
for that?
I would agree that purely retaliatory feedback is wrong but there then becomes
an issue where there are 2 sides to a story..
Robert
|
|
Author: | Rick_S. | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 17:45 | Subject: | Changing rules of feedback | Viewed: | 318 times | Topic: | Suggestions | Status: | Open | Vote: | [Yes|No] | |
| As it goes a rule not allowing retaliatory feedback should also be added for
removal of said feedback since as the rules stand retaliatory feedback is allowed:
Feedback you Received:
The following are currently the only valid reasons for which you can request
feedback you received to be removed:
Feedback you received contains vulgar language.
Feedback you received contains personally identifying information including your
name, address, e-mail address or telephone number.
You are the seller and the buyer has not paid. Non-Paying Buyer Alert has been
completed or the buyer has accepted the NPB penalty via NPX.
You are the buyer and the seller has not responded or shipped. Non-Responding
Seller Alert or Non-Shipping Seller Alert has been completed.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who had their
membership terminated.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who was on
your Stop List before the order was placed.
If you're requesting feedback to be removed for the last 2 reasons above,
you should contact the Help Desk before you submit the request and let us know
the original username of the duplicate account.
Requests can be submitted until the order is purged from the system - up to 6
months from the order date. Requests are submitted to the BrickLink Administration
for approval. If the feedback is removed, it cannot be reposted. Each request
has a status:
|
|
Author: | popsicle | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 14:26 | Subject: | Re: Report post button | Viewed: | 43 times | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| Should be all. But to what degree each are, dunno. Here are the Hall of Fame
Discussion Mods, in any case
|
think the hall of fame refers to past mods.
|
Yes, they are former admins and mods. Thought it would interest you and others.
|
Author: | Rick_S. | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 14:23 | Subject: | Re: Report post button | Viewed: | 21 times | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| Should be all. But to what degree each are, dunno. Here are the Hall of Fame
Discussion Mods, in any case
|
think the hall of fame refers to past mods.
|
Author: | Rick_S. | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 14:22 | Subject: | Re: Report post button | Viewed: | 27 times | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| curious how many of those mods are still active moderating?
|
All of them are.
|
are they? when a couple scam reported posts are still up most of the day after
being reported it just tells me there is not a good spread of mods to cover all
time zones.
|
|
Author: | popsicle | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 14:17 | Subject: | Re: Report post button | Viewed: | 34 times | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| I feel we should get a report post button added since trying to find that page
is very not user friendly.
|
Can you imagine the level of misuse such a convenient tab would allow for?
The Discussions Mods might have to give up their day jobs, considering the amount
of time it would take in filtering through the invalid to find the valid claims.
On the other hand, I could be wrong and if all the Discussions Mods were to call
for it, or at least back the suggestion, I’d say why not.
-Cory
|
you forgot to mention i've seen some serious spam posts like buying fake
ID's and such and I almost gave up reporting them because finding the report
post function is not user friendly. when you have to go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/helpMain.asp
Then go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?topicID=18
then go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=1107
just to get to here:
https://www.bricklink.com/problemMessage.asp
My suggestion is to reduce that greatly. to go straight to the last part.
|
Yeah, I understood with this morning spam why you posted the suggestion. I connected
those dots before I posted my reply.
So my thoughts stand: have the mods endorse the suggestion. It's their wheelhouse.
|
other then Brickwilbo being on the fence (agrees it is complicated but not sure
how to fix it) have not heard from any other mods, in fact not sure who the other
mods are if any others?
|
https://www.bricklink.com/memberAdmins.asp?utm_content=subnav
I’d add Russell, as well
|
curious how many of those mods are still active moderating? cause noticed a couple
of posts reported were still around for a long while.
|
Should be all. But to what degree each are, dunno. Here are the Hall of Fame
Discussion Mods, in any case
|
|
|
Author: | randyf | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 14:17 | Subject: | Re: Report post button | Viewed: | 29 times | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| curious how many of those mods are still active moderating?
|
All of them are.
|
|
Author: | Rick_S. | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 14:12 | Subject: | Re: Report post button | Viewed: | 18 times | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| I feel we should get a report post button added since trying to find that page
is very not user friendly.
|
Can you imagine the level of misuse such a convenient tab would allow for?
The Discussions Mods might have to give up their day jobs, considering the amount
of time it would take in filtering through the invalid to find the valid claims.
On the other hand, I could be wrong and if all the Discussions Mods were to call
for it, or at least back the suggestion, I’d say why not.
-Cory
|
you forgot to mention i've seen some serious spam posts like buying fake
ID's and such and I almost gave up reporting them because finding the report
post function is not user friendly. when you have to go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/helpMain.asp
Then go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?topicID=18
then go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=1107
just to get to here:
https://www.bricklink.com/problemMessage.asp
My suggestion is to reduce that greatly. to go straight to the last part.
|
Yeah, I understood with this morning spam why you posted the suggestion. I connected
those dots before I posted my reply.
So my thoughts stand: have the mods endorse the suggestion. It's their wheelhouse.
|
other then Brickwilbo being on the fence (agrees it is complicated but not sure
how to fix it) have not heard from any other mods, in fact not sure who the other
mods are if any others?
|
https://www.bricklink.com/memberAdmins.asp?utm_content=subnav
I’d add Russell, as well
|
curious how many of those mods are still active moderating? cause noticed a couple
of posts reported were still around for a long while.
|
|
Author: | popsicle | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 14:07 | Subject: | Re: Report post button | Viewed: | 25 times | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| I feel we should get a report post button added since trying to find that page
is very not user friendly.
|
Can you imagine the level of misuse such a convenient tab would allow for?
The Discussions Mods might have to give up their day jobs, considering the amount
of time it would take in filtering through the invalid to find the valid claims.
On the other hand, I could be wrong and if all the Discussions Mods were to call
for it, or at least back the suggestion, I’d say why not.
-Cory
|
you forgot to mention i've seen some serious spam posts like buying fake
ID's and such and I almost gave up reporting them because finding the report
post function is not user friendly. when you have to go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/helpMain.asp
Then go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?topicID=18
then go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=1107
just to get to here:
https://www.bricklink.com/problemMessage.asp
My suggestion is to reduce that greatly. to go straight to the last part.
|
Yeah, I understood with this morning spam why you posted the suggestion. I connected
those dots before I posted my reply.
So my thoughts stand: have the mods endorse the suggestion. It's their wheelhouse.
|
other then Brickwilbo being on the fence (agrees it is complicated but not sure
how to fix it) have not heard from any other mods, in fact not sure who the other
mods are if any others?
|
https://www.bricklink.com/memberAdmins.asp?utm_content=subnav
I’d add Russell, as well
|
|
|
Author: | Rick_S. | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 14:02 | Subject: | Re: Report post button | Viewed: | 26 times | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| I feel we should get a report post button added since trying to find that page
is very not user friendly.
|
Can you imagine the level of misuse such a convenient tab would allow for?
The Discussions Mods might have to give up their day jobs, considering the amount
of time it would take in filtering through the invalid to find the valid claims.
On the other hand, I could be wrong and if all the Discussions Mods were to call
for it, or at least back the suggestion, I’d say why not.
-Cory
|
you forgot to mention i've seen some serious spam posts like buying fake
ID's and such and I almost gave up reporting them because finding the report
post function is not user friendly. when you have to go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/helpMain.asp
Then go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?topicID=18
then go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=1107
just to get to here:
https://www.bricklink.com/problemMessage.asp
My suggestion is to reduce that greatly. to go straight to the last part.
|
Yeah, I understood with this morning spam why you posted the suggestion. I connected
those dots before I posted my reply.
So my thoughts stand: have the mods endorse the suggestion. It's their wheelhouse.
|
other then Brickwilbo being on the fence (agrees it is complicated but not sure
how to fix it) have not heard from any other mods, in fact not sure who the other
mods are if any others?
|
|
Author: | popsicle | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 13:54 | Subject: | Re: Report post button | Viewed: | 34 times | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| I feel we should get a report post button added since trying to find that page
is very not user friendly.
|
Can you imagine the level of misuse such a convenient tab would allow for?
The Discussions Mods might have to give up their day jobs, considering the amount
of time it would take in filtering through the invalid to find the valid claims.
On the other hand, I could be wrong and if all the Discussions Mods were to call
for it, or at least back the suggestion, I’d say why not.
-Cory
|
you forgot to mention i've seen some serious spam posts like buying fake
ID's and such and I almost gave up reporting them because finding the report
post function is not user friendly. when you have to go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/helpMain.asp
Then go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?topicID=18
then go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=1107
just to get to here:
https://www.bricklink.com/problemMessage.asp
My suggestion is to reduce that greatly. to go straight to the last part.
|
Yeah, I understood with this morning spam why you posted the suggestion. I connected
those dots before I posted my reply.
So my thoughts stand: have the mods endorse the suggestion. It's their wheelhouse.
|
|
Author: | Rick_S. | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 13:46 | Subject: | Re: Report post button | Viewed: | 19 times | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, popsicle writes:
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| I feel we should get a report post button added since trying to find that page
is very not user friendly.
|
Can you imagine the level of misuse such a convenient tab would allow for?
The Discussions Mods might have to give up their day jobs, considering the amount
of time it would take in filtering through the invalid to find the valid claims.
On the other hand, I could be wrong and if all the Discussions Mods were to call
for it, or at least back the suggestion, I’d say why not.
-Cory
|
you forgot to mention i've seen some serious spam posts like buying fake
ID's and such and I almost gave up reporting them because finding the report
post function is not user friendly. when you have to go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/helpMain.asp
Then go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?topicID=18
then go here:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=1107
just to get to here:
https://www.bricklink.com/problemMessage.asp
My suggestion is to reduce that greatly. to go straight to the last part.
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|