| Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | StormChaser  | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2020 12:57 | | Subject: | Re: Have A Heart | | Viewed: | 65 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In General, Legolibrarian2 writes:
| | This may be in response to a new law that took effect in California this month.
It has to do with personal information in an online environment. BL headquarters
is in California, so I guess they have to abide by the law.
|
No, from what I can tell by reading a summary of that law it would not be applicable
in this situation.
The following is not directed to you, but to several readers who really don't
seem to get it. I understand getting it and disagreeing, but some people really
aren't getting it.
So: there is a somewhat recent trend in society of erasing people from history.
A number of different reasons are used to justify this. In this instance, privacy
appears to have been the reason. Obviously I disagree with that trend.
BrickLink assigns each person a unique identifying number upon sign-up. This
is necessary for their database of members. Now it has reduced certain users
to that number, even though the vast majority (probably all) of them did not
request it.
I will present a couple of situations that may be somewhat analogous depending
on perspective.
Imagine a graveyard where the company that owns the graveyard has assigned each
gravesite a number. One day the company goes through and erases the name from
every headstone (or most of them) and replaces those names with the numbers they
have assigned to the plots. The reasons why they did so are irrelevant - it
should be obvious that this is not a wise decision on the part of the company.
Here's another: imagine that someone comes up with a numbering system for
authors and assigns every author throughout history a unique identifying number.
Then, one day, they have the power and ability to replace each author's
name with a number in all records kept by humans. So they do it.
And then we have Hamlet by Author_291763. Moby Dick by Author_9182772. 1984
by Author_3177634. I could continue, of course.
mfav makes the point that these contributors didn't contribute much and it
was a long time ago. He's saying that it therefore doesn't matter how
we treat them. Using the analogy above, then, if an author hasn't contributed
much to the collective human store of literature, then it's okay to erase
them. But Shakespeare, much as he desired anonymity, won't get it because
he contributed too much.
Of course, the logical response is that catalog contributions are not works of
art. That is fair, but they are still effort someone put forth with the understanding
and promise that they would receive perpetual credit for the volunteer work they
did. BrickLink has broken that promise and there is no way to justify that.
A username is not (and correct me if I'm wrong) PII.
It amazes me that I'm putting so much effort into explaining the effects
of erasing history. I think I may know the reason: nearly everyone alive today
grew up in cultures where everything is disposable. It is a logical extension
to see humans in the same way. I'm arguing against that way of looking at
the past. I'm arguing for treating people with the respect they deserve
and keeping promises. I'm arguing against erasure.
|
 |
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2020 12:07 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 75022-1 | | Viewed: | 22 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
|
| In Inventories Requests, teraith writes:
| | Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Add 2 Part 64802 Dark Bluish Gray Minifigure, Jet Pack with Nozzles
Comments from Submitter:
The deathwatch command have them as per the instructions.
|
Those items are already included in the inventory of the set. They exist in
the sub-inventories of these figures:
If you click on the Break Minifigs link at the top of the inventory page
the jet packs will be shown in the complete inventory.
The packs, by the way, are pearl dark gray, not dark bluish gray.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2020 03:31 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 70731-1 | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Add 1 Minifig njo184s Jay (Deepstone Armor) - Possession, Lightning Pack with Yellow Danger Stripes and Gold Lightning Reactor Pattern (Sticker) (Counterpart)
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jan 24, 2020 13:41 | | Subject: | Re: Have A Heart | | Viewed: | 68 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In General, MidwestBrick writes:
| | In the long-run, why does it matter?
|
You make a fine argument. And if we were all to agree with it, then this page
should be removed from BrickLink altogether (which you clearly support):
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogMembers.asp
But to answer your question, I'll give you one way in which it actually does
matter. Catalog and inventory administrators sometimes have to make judgments
about the reliability of information that members submit. Contributors build
a reputation based on the quality of work they've done in the past.
Looking back on past work done to know how reliable it should be considered,
it actually does mean something to be able to identify a user and not just see
that one the blusers did it.
| | This literally sounds like an employee of mine that needs to know for every task they do that we all know they did it. After awhile, it doesn't hold any merit and I really don't care. The task was completed and we can move on.
|
Yeah, but if you truly believed that, then you would refer to all your employees
by a number. You would say things like, "Employee Number 3827, go assist Employees
Number 99234 and 439 with the task they're working on."
But you don't. Because people have names and you treat them like people,
not cogs in your machine.
At least I hope you do.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jan 24, 2020 13:28 | | Subject: | Re: Have A Heart | | Viewed: | 70 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In General, Andrsv writes:
| | It is probably related to privacy laws. If someone deletes their account it is
for a reason, and many want their info removed. This is a guess based on related
issues on other places.
|
This was done wholesale for a large number of users at the same time and thus
was likely NOT based on privacy laws. The likelihood that hundreds of thousands
of users simultaneously requested that their information be removed is remarkably
low.
The Help Center states:
If you have done any of the following, then that information and your user
profile cannot be deleted but all other information attached to your user profile
will be deleted:
•Placed or received at least 1 order
•Changed your username or a profile was merged into your username
•Added at least 1 item to the catalog
•Added at least 1 image small or large to the catalog
•Added at least 1 inventory of an item to the catalog
•Added at least 1 relationship to the catalog
•Added at least 1 link to the links section
•Added at least 1 inventory change request to the catalog
•Added weight, dimensions or color code for at least 1 item in the catalog
•Are an inventories verifier and verified at least 1 inventory
•Sent any messages to other members through the contact form
•Posted a message in our discussion forum and it is still there
•Moved a discussion forum post and the message is still there
•Are currently or have been before banned from Chat
I assume BrickLink decided that sentence in bold meant that the username was
part of the information that should be removed.
I get privacy laws and removing information attached to profiles, but taking
the username is what I have a problem with. I don't see any reason whatsoever
why it was necessary to go that far.
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
|
USA, Oklahoma
