Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | calebfishn  | | Posted: | Nov 5, 2019 12:32 | | Subject: | Re: Sticky/ oily vintage wheels...trash? | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Help, runner.caller writes:
| | In Help, Adjour writes:
| | Anyone know why this happens? I notice the also melt the bricks they are sitting
against, so I'm presuming some sort of chemical reaction.
I'm guessing heat? I've run into this 3 times now one the lots also had
heat warped baseplates. I've never seen it on my own/original lego which
has never experienced a hot garage.
Are they trash? Can I clean them?
I just got some in light grey and was pretty stoked (only came in 3
sets) and they are awful gooey messes, I have more on the way and I don't
want it to be a total loss. The weird color on a common part is so neat in person.
Thanks everyone
|
|
| |
Weird! I've encountered oily tires before, but just assumed it was a coating
to help them pop out of the mold at the factory or a light coating to help guard
against dry rot.
I've seen the leaching before in my fishing tackle box when old plastic "twister
tails" would start to leach through the plastic baggies and even start to melt
the plastic in the utility box they were inside.
I didn't know this could happen to lego tires too!? Makes me nervous about
my stored childhood sets.
So too much air, and they dry out and get dry-rot, not enough, and they melt.
Nice....
I'll note that the tackle box spent many a thermal cycle in a garage, whereas
the lego temps have always been more stable.
|
I don't think tackle box trouble has much to do with hot and cold temperature.
All of your soft plastic lures and worms seem to be a vinyl plastic that will
react strongly with styrene plastic. Fishing boxes of that material work well
for weights and hooks, and usually don't interact with the paint on your
jigs, bu they are trouble if they come into contact with . Good quality tackle
storage should not be that shiny clear styrene plastic.
|
 |
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Jun 11, 2019 10:31 | | Subject: | Re: Have all members pay BL $1 to buy and/or sell | | Viewed: | 61 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, matejo writes:
| | Mentioned in other posts, I am submitting this as a separate suggestion.
The goal of the $1 payment is to preclude new members from making false orders
and thereby avoid time wasted on pulling order items, attaining packing supplies,
calculating shipping, etc.
Perhaps there is also a benefit with regard to new sellers. Not sure.
I recognize there will be process, payment, and accounting challenges for BrickLink
administrators, along with maybe an undesired initial action to become a member,
however this proposal would screen out false buyers, and benefit the integrity
and positive experiences of the entire new member, buyer, and seller community
-- which for my part is a key reason I'm here.
|
No. It is not necessary to screen out false buyers. Although it is true that
this is very frustrating, it is part of doing business and running a store to
give quotes, calculate shipping, etc. When i walk into walmart, they don't
charge me a dollar to make sure I am a "real" customer.
Most so called "false" orders, are really in my view "Failed" orders, and those
are most often the result of new buyers, or people who could not figure something
out on the website interface. The percentage of "failed" orders is very small
compared to successful orders. I can deal with the odd inconvenience.
We should reject every single suggestion that would make it harder for first
time, and one time buyers from ordering lego in our stores.
I agree that community is important, and that is why I am here also. However,
I believe the health of the community depends on being open and welcoming to
newcomers, rather than being a closed community that wants to screen new arrivals
and place obstacles in their path.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Feb 6, 2019 11:00 | | Subject: | Re: New and Used: more shades of grey are needed | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| I think that many sellers know how to properly describe their lego and to ensure
that "used" lego is not junk. Bite marks, discolouration, deep scratches, and
damage are not part of what "used" means. All of those can only pass as filler
and should be clearly described as such.
I believe the best assurance a buyer has that used parts will be of good quality
is to choose a seller with a significant amount of positive feedback.
Buyers can also help themselves by regularly informing sellers if used parts
do not meet the standards for listing.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Jan 8, 2019 16:37 | | Subject: | Re: Please change "Coral" to "Vibrant Coral" | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, Classicsmiley writes:
| | I'm not sure who to address this to, but could the color "Coral" please be
renamed to the official "Vibrant Coral"?
Thanks!
|
I'm not in favour of this. I don't know how the word "vibrant" modifies
"coral" in any meaningful way, (not like, "dark" or "Medium")
if there are not multiple shares of coral, (which I am pretty sure is a shade
of pink or red) then there is no value in adding a modifier just to be consistent
with Lego's conventions.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Aug 20, 2018 14:20 | | Subject: | Re: Who akes OCR cannot leave feedback | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Bricklord writes:
| | The purpose of feedback is to give others a fair review of ones dealings with
another, be it as a seller or as a buyer. If a buyer makes a bogus order in my
store, I need the ability to warn others of the conduct of said buyer. I should
not be smeared by the buyer for warning other sellers about the buyer.
|
There are bogus orders, but in my experience the bogus buyer will never bother
to ask for an order cancellation. They are the ones that place the order and
then just disappear, forcing an entirely justified NPB with negative feedback.
That warns other sellers, without the risk of an unearned negative feedback.
But for polite requests to cancel, my feeling people make mistakes all the time,
and it isn't necessary that every one of those result in a negative consequence.
I prefer to treat others as I would like to be treated.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Aug 20, 2018 10:40 | | Subject: | Re: Who akes OCR cannot leave feedback | | Viewed: | 51 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| This is ridiculous, and a problem mostly of your own making.
I have had many, Requests to Cancel from people who did not understand Bricklink,
or who just decided they did not want to complete the order.
I have accepted every one of them. Zero is the number of times I ever received
any feedback from the buyer, and certainly I never received a negative.
It is a seller's voluntary decision to cancel an order. If you decided that
you were OK to cancel, then why, why, why, would you leave negative feedback?
If you don't like the cancellation, then do not accept it.
I accept cancellations because it is a positive response to a customer's
needs. And that is what selling is all about isn't it? It doesn't cost
me a penny to be gracious to a customer who politely asks for a cancellation.
When I accept a cancellation, I let the buyer know that I will not be giving
any feedback, because in my view, there was no actual transaction for which to
leave feedback. The buyers seen to accept that position.
However, I do not support removing the buyer's ability to leave feedback.
It is true that most of these cancellation requests come from people who did
not really intend to order. But it is possible that the buyer may need to request
a cancellation because of an obstreperous or unreasonable seller, and in that
case should have the feedback option.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Mar 18, 2018 19:16 | | Subject: | Re: Seller checkout approval for <X new buyers | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| i can't support anything that makes it harder for someone to become a bricklink
customer.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Mar 18, 2018 19:14 | | Subject: | Re: Have all members pay BL $1 to buy and/or sell | | Viewed: | 71 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, matejo writes:
| | Mentioned in other posts, I am submitting this as a separate suggestion.
The goal of the $1 payment is to preclude new members from making false orders
and thereby avoid time wasted on pulling order items, attaining packing supplies,
calculating shipping, etc.
Perhaps there is also a benefit with regard to new sellers. Not sure.
I recognize there will be process, payment, and accounting challenges for BrickLink
administrators, along with maybe an undesired initial action to become a member,
however this proposal would screen out false buyers, and benefit the integrity
and positive experiences of the entire new member, buyer, and seller community
-- which for my part is a key reason I'm here.
|
Just what we need, fewer buyers.
Your suggestion will not screen out "false" buyers. But it will discourage and
dissuade all the first time people who come to Bricklink to look around. I get
very few orders that are not paid, and the ones that don't pay, are in my
opinion people who are experimenting with the order system.
I say, let them experiment. It is a minor inconvenience.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Nov 28, 2017 20:38 | | Subject: | Re: Force sellers to ship in boxes | | Viewed: | 56 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| | |
It is rather silly isn't it? But rules are rules and every seller needs
to operate under the exact same set of standards so that we can make this a better
place!
|
I am now convinced that you actually intend all of your comments in this thread
to be ironic, and to mean exactly the opposite of what you wrote.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Nov 28, 2017 20:34 | | Subject: | Re: Force sellers to ship in boxes | | Viewed: | 61 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| I ship about 90% of all orders in bubble mailers. The difference in cost between
a box and a bubble mailer is enormous, and I would lose many orders if I was
forced to charge people $12.00 instead of $2.00.
It is possible to carefully pack a bubble mailer to avoid damage to the contents.
The situation you describe is certain related to multiple items thrown together
into a plastic bag, which is, in my opinion improper packing.
Let's leave it to sellers and buyers to figure out who they want their Lego
packaged, without interference from Bricklink Administrators who are already
too few to do their current tasks.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Nov 12, 2017 10:01 | | Subject: | Re: Payment method fee:Disallow manual percentage | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| I don't know how you can make this contradictory statement"
"In the EU, it's not allowed to overcharge payment methods. Of course it's
legally allowed to charge anything as long as buyer and seller agree"
Does the EU law specifically state that it is those overcharges are legally permitted
if there is agreement?
How can a buyer and seller enter into a bona fide contractual agreement that
circumvents specific regulations of law? For one thing, it would be an unenforcable
contract, and secondly, it would still be illegal.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Jan 30, 2017 23:17 | | Subject: | Re: Stats: Don't count buyer cancellations | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| Any statistics about cancellations that do not include context are misleading
and worse than useless.
I am not in favour of this stat being generated, no matter who initiated the
cancellation - seller or buyer.
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Jan 23, 2017 15:53 | | Subject: | Re: Stop Wanted List Spamming for Minifigs | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| A minifig is not a set.
I prefer a rule that makes clear that any "incomplete" listing is incorrect and
will be reported and removed.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Oct 8, 2016 20:44 | | Subject: | Re: Show number of Canceled order for buyers | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, cosmicray writes:
| | When a buyer places an order, the seller should be able to see how many orders
that buyer has placed, that ended up being canceled for any reason. If this number
is limited to 6 months, that would be acceptable.
Currently, buyers can see how many orders a seller has canceled during the past
6 months, for any reason. Based on a recent incident, I think my request would
be very revealing. I'm sure that a few buyers would not want this number
exposed.
Ray
|
I can't see the utility of such a feature.
Cancellations can happen for a multitude of reasons, but without context, the
raw number of cancellations can only result in people drawing conclusions that
are likely not accurate or helpful.
I don't belief this data will help me make a decision on whether or not to
cancel an order. I'm doing fine without it.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Aug 7, 2016 23:31 | | Subject: | Re: Part out extra parts | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, KingAlanI writes:
| | When I build a set for myself, I sell the extra parts on BL, but the site doesn't
have an option for that (as far as I know), so I have to add the parts one lot
at a time.
It would be handy to part out just the extra parts like you can with whole sets
and such.
|
Use the part out inventory feature. Set the default to exclude all parts. then
just unclick the parts you want into inventory, i.e. the extras.
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Jul 15, 2016 23:58 | | Subject: | Re: Negative Feedback: What if? | | Viewed: | 85 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| No. the feedback system does not need fixing. Automatic processes cannot adjust
human behaviour.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Jul 15, 2016 15:07 | | Subject: | Re: Do away with feedback | | Viewed: | 115 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, cosmicray writes:
| | … as it is known today.
The feedback system goes back to the earliest days of BL. It was probably copied
from eBay, who copied it from somewhere else.
It only provides 3 stark choices. That is insufficient in many cases.
Replace it with a numerical number, either 100 to 0, or possibly 50 to 0 to -50.
Something that allows for a more nuanced scoring of the transaction (without
going nuclear).
I hope this provokes people to think about the current system, whether it is
serving our needs, and what improvements can be applied.
Ray
|
vote no.
there is really nothing wrong with the current system for feedback. It works
for me, and meets my needs.
"Nuanced" feedback is not helpful. That just encourages people to vacillate and
avoid making a judgement about whether the experience was positive or not, and
that is the information that is useful.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Jun 13, 2016 22:46 | | Subject: | Re: Estimated shipping costs = "TBD"... | | Viewed: | 62 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, JayBeeOnline writes:
| | In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| | Each order is custom picked and packed.
Without proper dimensions most sellers overestimate postage and buyers pay more.
|
Why use proper dimensions?
If it fits in a padded envelope shipping costs are X...
It it fits in a small package shipping costs are Y...
If it fits in a big package shipping costs are Z...
Additional insurance? Recalculate...
|
Welcome to Canada. If I did as you suggest, my buyers would pay massively more
for postage.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Jun 13, 2016 22:41 | | Subject: | Re: Improved collectible minifigure searching | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| I vote no.
I think you are making too many assumptions about what a buyer may or may not
think. There may be equal probability that they will think the opposite of your
surmise.
I think the individual sellers can use existing bricklink functions (like comments
on the item) to educate buyers as to what they are buying.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Jun 10, 2016 09:35 | | Subject: | Re: payment method at ordering | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, legorecyclingwa writes:
| | Hi everyone,
was wondering how others deal with the fees from PayPal and banks etc. when passing
them along. I was thinking that a good feature to add to the invoice was for
the client to pick which payment method they would like to use when options are
available. For example A EFT transaction may be cost nothing whereas PayPal charges
higher than say Visa. At this time, without knowing another method I am forced
to contact the client prior to invoicing and offering the choice, to help them
reduce fees, annoying and slowing down the "drive -thru" process.
thanks.
Kind Regards,
Dave
|
fees should not be passed along
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Sep 21, 2015 12:49 | | Subject: | Re: Make Full Addresses required fields | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, TorontoLego writes:
| | Not infrequently I receive a new order from a member that has not completely
filled out their address.
Can we make the city, state/province, postal code, country fields mandatory
before the creation of an account - or at least mandatory before being able to
place an order.
I understand that there are specific countries that may not have "province" or
"postal code" fields that are applicable - so maybe this is only mandatory for
US, Can, UK, etc..
Mike.
|
Should certainly be required for anyone opening a store.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Aug 27, 2015 16:20 | | Subject: | Re: Prohibit Vigilante Orders | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| I understand your reasoning.
But the solution is unnecessary and unworkable.
I do not necessarily condone what you refer to as "vigilante orders", but Bricklink
should be focussed on blocking criminal scammers, not hunting for "vigilantes".
Anyone who believes that someone placed an order in their store that was not
in good faith, already has recourse through several systems already in place.
We do not need "vigilantes" judging and hunting for other "vigilantes".
By all means express your disapproval in the forum, but leave Bricklink out of
it.
I vote no.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Aug 25, 2015 07:51 | | Subject: | Re: Ranking up ideas to slow down potential SCAM | | Viewed: | 60 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| 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
|
If you do away with anonymity, all other methods such as lot limits, value limits,
low feedback etc, become irrelevant.
Crime happens in the shadows. Remove the internet anonymity from sellers, making
it easier to identify and prosecute fraud artists, and you will reduce criminal
scams. Valid credit card and address and ID, with verified contact info is the
best way.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Feb 7, 2015 19:38 | | Subject: | Re: Time to address seller quality issues | | Viewed: | 118 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, enig writes:
| | Earlier tonight I found a seller raking up feedback like you see in the second
picture below. The top feedback is retaliatory FB that he left for his buyer.
Had a thought to go here and ask what others think and ask BL if anything is
going to be done about it (in general). The seller is not listing items according
to "Used parts" rules
http://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=102&q=used
and he could care less
I guess I can also mention that the reason I checked that seller is because he
had a part that I need in a color that it does not exist, and he is the only
one who has it. I am now sure that he doesn't.
Anyways. Decided against it because it has been discussed a hundred times, and
for a hundred times in a row BL decided that nothing will be done about it.
But then YouTube read my mind and suggested me a video. It's a fresh video
I have not seen it before!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfstjgilDmE
SUGGESTION.
1) Dear BrickLink - please listen to what buyers have to say about bad sellers
2) Realize that BrickLink's reputation is going down
3) Create a system (OTHER than feedback*) + strategy where bad sellers
are given a chance to improve AND understand that they will be kicked
out of BL for good if they dont
4) Before doing it, ask BL community on how it could be done, and use the collective
knowledge and experience of the ones who are willing to share it with you
*Feedback is obviously not working. Please see the video why. Feedback will not
eliminate the problem itself.
You know what's absolutely hilarious? The reason I opened YouTube in the
first place is to watch this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJlN9jdQFSc
|
It would be quicker and preferrable for the community to address this issue through
existing means.
For example:
- All those neutrals, but no negatives, that are probably deserved.
- Post the sellers name and let people judge for themselves.
-
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Jan 30, 2015 23:11 | | Subject: | Re: Feedback bricks - like Roman numerals | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, baylit writes:
| | What if Feedback bricks were like Roman numerals. Instead of being a number range,
they were an actual number ...
When you had feedback of say, 12,000, you'd have one Dk Pink brick, and 2
Purple bricks?
Not that I expect anyone to do this - just a thought on a slow Friday.
|
The feedback system is already too hard for colour blind people.
I can't see the difference between Dark Pink and purple.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Jan 7, 2015 11:16 | | Subject: | Re: Integrate age verification software into BL | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Hardstone writes:
| | Bricklink would really benefit from having some sort of age verification software
integrated into it. Despite the minimum age to join being 18, it seems like a
lot of underage buyers keep managing to sign up. I am not going to name names,
but there is at least one recent buyer who admitted in the forums that he or
she is 16.
Can't BL staff add some sort of age verification element to the registration
process?
|
There are so many improvements that we need to make Bricklink work better for
sellers and buyers. Underage members are not a big enough problem to make age
verification a priority. It is an annoyance.
It is good that Bricklink has rules about age requirements, but sellers already
have tools to deal with any problems that arise.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Aug 20, 2014 17:09 | | Subject: | Re: BL Development Team: Test before rollout! | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| I do try to maintain perspective on this sort of thing.
Just yesterday, at work, the programmers made a requested change to the database.
But when the update and patch were complete, a major function of the system
was broken.
So I understand that glitches can happen in anything as complicated as Bricklink.
But here is the difference. In my work, I contacted the systems support person,
told him of the new problem, and it was fixed in less than 10 minutes. Everyone
got back on line and did their work.
Here, today, I contacted Helpdesk first thing this morning to inform of the problem
with tabs.
no action yet. No posting from admin or anyone else official about what happened.
That is not good, and I feel it is reasonable to expect better.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Aug 20, 2014 16:56 | | Subject: | Re: BL Development Team: Test before rollout! | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, QCBricks writes:
| | In Suggestions, TheBrickGuys writes:
| | In Suggestions, lovaquero writes:
| | Bricklink World Class Programming & Customer Serivce team -
Test before release. This concept is not hard. Perhaps in your eagerness to
pacify the crowd with pitchforks and torches you have forgotten it. Perhaps you
may just not know. Here is how you do it:
For EACH (individual) change to Bricklink:
-----------------------------------------
#1 - Scope your change to know its impact
#2 - Write your test plan to match the requirements for the change
#3 - Recognize that there are at least three (3) internet browsers to support:
Chrome, Firefox & Internet Explorer (IE)
#4 - Make sure that the test plan fails before any change is made
#5 - Implement the change, and only that change, in a development environment
#6 - Execute the test plan (in an isolated environement that matches the live
environment) for Chrome, Firefox and IE
#7 - Repeat steps 5-6 until the test plan passes for all three (3) browsers
#8* - Run the full test plan on the ENTIRE site to ensure everything still works
#9 - If anything fails, return to step #1 and repeat
#10 - Release the change to the live site.
(* Bricklink is written with ancient software that has so many dependencies,
querks, gotchas and 'hidden' features that it is impossible to know what
a change will do to seemingly unrelated features. That is why the software used
to run Bricklink is no longer used nor even supported, not even by the company
that originally created the software...)
Your new mantra must be: "test! Test! TEST! And then test it again!"
Any modern development team worth being paid - especially one that performs
web development - knows this.
Regards,
Rodney
Software Systems Engineer
Solution Infrastructure - Guidance & Machine Automation
John Deere Intelligent Solution Group
|
Thats a nice pitchfork and torch you carry.
Can you elaborate on what some of these horrible bad things are that BL has recently
done that now make it impossible for anyone to ever use BL again?
So many scream change CHANGE C H A N G E !! then.... oh wait
I dont like this change. I SAID I D O N T
L I K E T H I S C H A N G E ! !
Jim
|
Jim-
Logic is of no use. Bricklink is in a complete no-win situation at this point.
The 20 or so people that seem to live to instantly criticize them will do that
here in the forum no matter what Bricklink does. (or how well/poorly they do
it)
Fortunately for the complainers, they will have a whole new host of minor issues
to blow up over on Friday when the MOC shop opens.
Scott
|
i don't donsider it a minor issue that my buyers cannot view important information
about my store.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Jul 31, 2014 23:19 | | Subject: | Re: Suggestions: checkboxes to describe sellers | | Viewed: | 57 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| And if the form is just going to be
| | a non-binding general guideline, why even bother with it?
Thor
I think the check boxes are still useful, in providing a quick summary of key store terms and practices. It could actually encourage buyers to read terms more carefully.
|
if for example "Handling fees" is selected, that should be a cue for the buyer
to read the terms carefully, to find out what those fees are and when they will
be applied.
The checkbox cannot replace the actual store terms, but they could be searchable
fields that help buyers sort through stores. The checkboxes are a "Description
of Seller", not the terms. (or at least they should be)
The form should be kept simple. As soon as people try to make a system like this
account for every eventuality, you might as well just have complicated legal
language in written terms.
Also, some will ask: "But what if a seller does not disclose a fee?" Well, that
happens now in the current system with less than scrupulous sellers. In all cases
buyers must be encouraged to go past the advance advertizing and read the actual
terms, as with any business contract.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Jul 31, 2014 23:09 | | Subject: | Re: Suggestions: checkboxes to describe sellers | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, FigBits writes:
| | In Suggestions, picabo writes:
| | In Suggestions, FigBits writes:
| | There is a lot of information about sellers that could be captured through forms
and checkboxes, instead of always relying on store terms. I suggest that all
sellers fill out a form so that we can systematically store this information.
Right now, we already have this covered for a few items:
Countries I ship to
Minimum order
Accepted currencies
Accepted payment types
We should add more:
Minimum shipping
Additional fees
* Lot fee
* Small order fee
* Payment type fee
* Handling fee
* Other fees
Expected Dispatch time from date of payment
When I leave feedback
* On payment
* On shipping
* After "Received"
* Other
How I deal with order errors
* Ship correction at my cost
* Refund
* Buyer's Choice
* Other
These are the ones I can think of that could be useful. I am sure there are others,
but this would be a great start.
--
Marc.
|
I like the idea. However, how would you suggest handling the following. I charge
actual shipping plus $1. Another seller charges $2.93. So for 1-3 ounces we are
exactly the same. However, they get to check no additional fees even though they
actually do have an additional fee.
I'm not being critical, just asking.
Thanks.
Pam
|
I was thinking of continuing Bricklink's trend of not considering anything
in the Shipping field as an additional fee. So neither you nor the other seller
would list as having additional fees. I do also see the advantage of showing
"exact shipping only" or something similar as an option.
--
Marc.
|
i don't think you should put "Exact shipping only" in one of these check
box fields. Because then you will need to define it. For some people, "exact
shipping" is not the same as "exact postage".
I much prefer your original list which allows sellers to disclose the types of
fees and costs that are included in their store terms. The buyer will need to
read the terms to learn what these check boxes mean anyway.
Some of the check boxes are not really about store terms, but are just information
about practices, such as "when do I leave feedback". I hope that a seller could
select more than one checkbox in some of these categories, because sometimes
it "depends". These are not terms, and should not be a matter of a guarantee,
or a reason to cancel like a store terms. For example my preference is to leave
feedback after I ship. That is my intention and I usually do that. But sometimes
I am delayed, or forget.
In this list, I would like to see "Minimum shipping" next to "Minimum Order".
It is a short way of saying, "on some orders of small size, there is an additional
fee". As with some of the other fees, ie. lot fees, buyers still need to read
the seller's terms to see how much those fees are, and when they will be
applied.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Jul 31, 2014 21:37 | | Subject: | Re: Suggestions: checkboxes to describe sellers | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| I think some of the categories and items could use tweaking, but in general,
this is a good idea.
It does not replace a store's terms, but does highlight them in a manner
buyers can easily access. And these could become searchable fields as well.
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Jun 29, 2014 14:36 | | Subject: | Re: Temp Forum Bans | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| i did not read this as being tongue in cheek.
If it was intended to be so, then it came across as a bit harsh.
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Jun 29, 2014 14:34 | | Subject: | Re: Temp Forum Bans | | Viewed: | 23 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, tkkemp writes:
| | I think if you post too many times in a 24 hour period. You posting privileges
should be revoked for 24 hours. Until you learn how to not behave like children.
Forum fights make those involved look bad, and they are useless.
I think it's bad when 30-35% of all forum posts are coming from one person
and adding ZERO value(Speaking today of the 50 posts that pop up when I log in).
It could be a time out period.
|
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Jun 10, 2014 00:11 | | Subject: | Re: bad sellers | | Viewed: | 107 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, brix4kix writes:
| | There was a post earlier about bricklink over seeing bad sellers, I cant remember
where. I vote yes to a complaint section to have administrator's review
complaints about poor seller's. I received a order I placed a while back,
well first off I never recieved any messages back from the seller, they mailed
out the package 5days after there store terms sead they do.not usually a problem
since I typically send a message like ( hi just checking in to se if the payment
got to you thanks) the seller always contacts me back with yep got it will be
sending out soon got a little bizzy. That is no problem but from this seller
nothing.
so when the package arrived I was very unhappy now take a look at the packaging(
lack of bubble wrap ore any type of protection. But I did get some religious
propaganda that I didn't order. And yes the parts were just in thin cardboard
with tape around it from post office. I have not left feedback yet was waiting
to calm down. Will update in a bit if you want the name of the seller pm me for
now till I post the feedback.
|
You have not told what you told the seller about your dissatisfaction with your
order, or what resolution, (if any) the seller offered. That makes a lot of
difference when it comes to determining what is a "bad" seller.
That is one reason why I don't agree with many of these ideas about Bricklink
policing bad sellers - people have differences of opinion, and different expectations
about communication, packaging, etc. And some buyers will go straight to a complaints
process rather than communicate to the seller and give the seller a chance to
make things right. Who wants to be the first seller to be labelled "bad" over
a difference of opinion?
The feedback system is already there to warn other buyers about one's dissatisfaction
with a transaction, and if a seller does not ship, a few NSS's will result
in consequences.
Buyers already have tools at their disposal. I don't think that BL has the
time or the personnel to start policing all the buyers' complaints about
not liking the packaging, or that the seller didn't answer an email asking
if they received payment.
There are some really bad sellers out there - who don't ship, or who scam
people. Let BL focus on getting those bad apples out.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | May 9, 2014 13:37 | | Subject: | Re: Please Ban Mouthpiece Accounts | | Viewed: | 64 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, fosterbengoshi writes:
| | Please revise or interpret the ToS to prohibit non-buying and non-selling accounts
set up solely for supposedly representing the interests of a group of existing
BL members.
If members have anything important to say, they should man up and say it under
their member name. Doing so makes every member more accountable for what they
say. By allowing these mouthpiece PACs, members can at least partially shield
themselves from accountability for the interests and positions the mouthpiece
account advances. Thus, they can promote unpopular or controversial issues without
being held directly responsible for doing so.
Furthermore, allowing these mouthpiece accounts sets a bad precedent and, if
no action is taken, will encourage others to do the same. Mouthpiece accounts
that do no actual buying and selling themselves and exist solely for posting
in the forum will only make the Forum a more politicized and contentious place
for all, and largely without the personal accountability that would result if
an individual member posted in their own name as opposed to some group mouthpiece.
Thor
|
I agree that this is weird.
I am not going to vote on the suggestion, because it is premature to issue a
ban on mouthpiece accounts.
I don't mind a group of sellers, or buyers getting together to work on shared
interests. But I am not comfortable with people setting up a separate bricklink
account for this purpose. It does not seem to me that it is good for the community.
It could lead to factiousness, party-spirit, and divisiveness.
Why can't someone just post under his or her own account, i.e. "A bunch of
the Canadian sellers were discussing this and we think...."
I also am not comfortable with the whole idea of "key sellers" which implies
that some people's ideas have more validity than others, or should get more
attention based on store size or sales. Surely, the validity of an idea must
be based on its appeal to reason, and what is best for all of the Bricklink community.
But if this sort of thing takes off, let me know where to sign up for the Canadian
Bloc. I need to get my voice heard too! (Just joking!)
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | May 2, 2014 08:39 | | Subject: | Re: Chargebacks: Immediately Suspend Buying Privs | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, fosterbengoshi writes:
| | In Suggestions, mach1baby1973 writes:
| |
It just sucks for all of us trying to provide a service and this is the kinda
slap in the face we don't need when doing such, not to mention I'm crabby
because I'm stuck in WA state trying to pass 2 kidney stones, can't go
back to Guam because we don't have a Urologist on island currently and this
clown has to wreck an even worse mood of mine.
|
Oh man, kidney stones... You have my sympathies. That was the absolute worst
pain of my life. It was constant never-ending agony. My wife told me "Now you
have some idea of what childbirth feels like." Perhaps. But labor did not last
for 3 or 4 days without stop. Nor did it involve urinating red hot lava through
a strainer. I wish you a quick recovery.
Thor
|
I had kidney stones. Spent 13 hours in excruciating pain in an Ontario Canada
emergency waiting room before a doctor finally saw me, and did nothing but tell
me I should go home and come back tomorrow. Women friends tell me that in their
experience, kidney stones are worse than labor pains, and I believe them.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Mar 21, 2014 20:56 | | Subject: | Re: Sellers forum. Let's Keep it in the Family | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, JETTY writes:
| | To all of you Bircklinkers out there...
And especially the administrators and frequent forum posters.
Bricklink is a wonderful place where we all can enjoy our very different passions
of LEGO. We all enjoy being here, otherwise we would be some where else....
The bricklink community is very committed, and has very strong opinions about
the site that they helped to build and populate.
Times are changing, also in Bricklink, and imho its necessary, to keep BL in
the lead. For everybody's benefit.
The new owners hopefully understand that the users of BL are a very powerful
tool, that put in use the right way can be of great benefit for the site.
But my concern right now is that the very long and passionate forum treads are
harming the reputation of the site, scaring away newcomers.
The debate in the forum are necessary and understandable. But imho they are mostly
for admins and sellers, and not a benefit for the common buyer.
So this is my proposal:
Lets have a closed forum for sellers and admins, where the details of the BL
maschine room can be debated. And a forum for everybody where we can discuss
the joy of lego, help newbies and so on.
Regards Jes
(I'm not so old here, but i really enjoy being here, Its like being at a
family dinner, uncle Maxx as always talking about 3001's, uncle Thor lecturing
about decent and civilised behaviour, Mama Admin is trying to make everybody
feel at home, and behave, and so on (-: one big family..)
|
I understand where this is coming from, but I can't support it.
First of all, when I was a buyer, I found the forum to be very educational on
numerous levels. I learned everything I needed to know about being a seller here
from those lively discussions.
Instead, I depend on all forum posters to show decorum in their postings. And
they do, almost all of the time. This is a very polite forum, even if there
are moments of outrage and catastrophizing at times. Perhaps the level of decorm
we do experience is based on the knowledge that buyers and visitors are reading.
As a seller, I don't think I would enjoy reading a forum of unrestrained,
no-holds-barred seller demagoguery.
I really hope that the recent trend of information sharing by admins will be
the best means to help tone down the more recent anxiety and passion driven posts.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Jan 27, 2014 14:57 | | Subject: | Re: Seller Assistance Program | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| As I see it, there are two needed levels of seller assistance. One of them is
easy, and the other is hard.
The easy level is what we see in the forum here. Someone is confused, or inexperienced,
and the good folk here chime in with a variety of advice and points of view.
The original seller may, or may not use any of that advice, and you will probably
never know how things went.
The hard level of assistance is closer to what you are doing. In this case someone
needs more "hand-holding", or deeper levels of understanding. They also do
not need, (or as is more likely cannot assimilate) all the variet of different
advice. It is true that what might work for a large store may be different than
for a small store, but some sellers can't figure out what will work for them.
So you are talking about some real step by step guidance here. By the way, this
may be useful for people who are not even having trouble in their store, but
who want specific help in changing their store, or how to manage exponential
growth in inventory.
For this second level of assistance, I think that something much more personal
than forum advice would be necessary. It would need more direct contact between
the seller and the mentor. It would be more like business consultation. (Foster
will likely tell us that there is all sorts of potential liability in that level
of consultation.) Such business mentoring should be more formal than the forum.
It should have some sort of agreement that makes clear how much "support" can
be offered, for how long, and that if, after following the consultant/mentor's
advice, your store still goes bust, then the seller assistance program is not
responsible or liable.
Some of the expert sellers here might also think that this level of business
to business consultation is worth some sort of fee.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Jan 23, 2014 13:21 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, fosterbengoshi writes:
| | There are legal risks to BrickLink if it adopts any verification system BrickLink
itself controls or operates. Right now, BL tries to avoid that legal risk by
neatly saying, in effect: "You are on your own. Caveat emptor. We are not responsible
for and cannot vouch for any seller or buyer on this site. Use this site and
deal with its members at your own risk."
So, legally, once BL starts doing more to vet or verify sellers for the express
purpose of making and promoting this site as more safe, BL ironically subjects
itself to more risk and responsibility if anyone slips through the cracks. It
may, in fact, be less risky - legally - for BL to allow a third party to do this
vetting or verification.
To complicate things even further, however, BL already does some vetting and
verification and other things to prevent fraud(1), all of which are relied upon
by BL's members - which BL knows and fully intends. So, legally, it could
already be argued that despite the disclaimer in its ToS, BL has already assumed
some risk and responsibility for protecting its members. If in for a penny, perhaps
it might as well be in for a pound.
|
While it is true that Bricklink should not want to imply a guarantee against
all sorts of undesired seller behaviours, or problems in interactions, the issue
here is prevention of fraud against buyers.
I think the OP solution is focused on that. Having the verification suggested
would discourage attempts at criminal activity, and could help scammed buyers
get justice.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 13:24 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| I remember the incident. What a double embarrassment it was to see the fraud
criminal was a Canadian.
In Suggestions, Locutis writes:
| | Back in the fall of 2010, I was a victim of a scam among a list of 25+ people
who were also scammed:
http://www.bricklink.com/feedback.asp?u=champdebataille
I was persistent in bringing this to the attention of others, and trying to get
our items/money out of the scammer. I maintained a spreadsheet and contact with
each person that was scammed by the seller, and the total value was over $10,000
USD.
At the time, when others and myself placed orders with this seller, he did NOT
have any negative feedback. I was posting in the forums and sending reports
to admin to have him suspended and investigated, and people and admins were so
nonchalant about it I began to wonder about Bricklink in general. They weren't
concerned.
It wasn't until I compiled a huge list, and presented it to admin, that his
account was suspended. By then it was much too late. I discovered at the time
that scam sellers were actually quite common on Bricklink. I pointed out several
potential scam sellers on the forums and to admin and on the forums, only to
be shot down as being too "trigger happy". Turns out I was right in several
cases.
Back then I was attempting to spearhead a campaign to have more rigid requirements
to selling on Bricklink besides just an email address. I was shot down from
so many sellers, for so many "reasons", I just gave up. Turns out Bricklink
doesn't exist for the buyers, it exists for the sellers. Anything to make
it easy for people to sell and Bricklink to make money. Buyers? They are a
dime-a-dozen.
I lost over $500 of my sons allowance, Christmas, and birthday money that fall.
All people cared about was "you shouldn't have sent money to someone with
negative feedback as a seller - you were stupid". Some even sent me emails saying
I was in on the scam. Seriously??? The seller at the time had 5 feedback, which
to me was an acceptable start. Turns out they were just to make them look okay,
before the scamming began. When I was shopping the Bricklink website, I was
a new user and thought that Bricklink must somehow verify sellers and that this
community wouldn't have the scams like eBay. Boy was I wrong. After our
incident I decided to setup my own store to see how easy it was, and boy was
it easy. Too easy.
One scammer, over 25 people scammed, over $10,000 USD, in one month. I'm
pretty confident this happens ALL THE TIME. If you look at the feedback of the
seller, some of the people never bought from Bricklink again. Those were lost
customers, lost revenue for sellers. Lost confidence in Bricklink. Some were
parents, who lost money for their children, too. How many of these kids have/will
grow up with the knowledge they were scammed on Bricklink, and avoid it? How
many will talk to others and tell them to be very careful or even avoid Bricklink?
I have told many people over the years, if you find something on Bricklink,
unless they have a significant feedback over many years, DON'T BUY THERE.
I've probably helped out in the downturn of some sales, because I was responsible
for people not buying here. So be it.
The argument that requiring some sort of verification in order to sell would
scare away sellers is offset with the argument that new users come here, get
scammed, and never buy here again. However, would you rather have an environment
where the scammers are the ones who get away with it, or one where all of the
sellers are reviewed prior to selling?
Here is and was my proposal at the time:
- require a credit card or PayPal account for new sellers, have Bricklink charge
the card/PayPal $5 to verify the account is good, and do a name/address verification
on the account. If the account doesn't work, or the name and address doesn't
match the account, close the store
- with some of the proceeds of the $5 charge, send a card in the mail, with a
code on it which is required to complete store setup. Once the seller receives
the code in the mail, they can authenticate themselves, and start selling.
- hold $3 of the $5 charged as an advance payment for sellers' fees, so they
get the fee back when they sell an item here, essentially.
Now, you don't need to necessarily do this for EVERY seller. Set a threshold.
Make a formula that identifies potential scammers and allow the site to enforce
them through software. It's NOT hard. I've done it myself at the company
I work for. We were being scammed almost every week for $700+ orders for a period
a few years ago, so I examined the similarities, and wrote a software algorithm
to analyze each internet order and determine it's possibility for fraud.
Since then, we have been scammed 0 times. Sure, maybe we lost 1 or 2 legitimate
orders since, but the money we didn't lose to fraud far outweighs that.
I know I'm unpopular in the forums because of my view on this, but I still
believe Bricklink should do more than they currently do. Maybe enough time has
passed that this should be looked at again?
Locutis
Resistance is futile.
|
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2014 13:20 | | Subject: | Re: Verification of new seller for possible fraud | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| I am going to say yes to this suggestion. Probably there are additional nuances
and issues to work out with the fine details of how to administer the proposed
solution.
When I think of how I started my store, yes, it would have been more difficult
if I had to prove somehow that I was a bonafide person, not a scammer.
But because I was serious, becoming a seller was not a spur of the moment impulse.
I tried to do my homework and to learn as much as I could about Bricklink and
how it worked. I trolled the forum to pick up all the tips on successful selling,
before opening my store. So I believe that my serious interest would have eventually
overcome any modest barriers to becoming a seller.
If other prospective sellers had to be similarly careful, it could be a good
thing for the quality of selling as a whole. Someone might argue that "This
would keep out the small seller who only wants to clear out a few pieces of their
personal collection". Yes, maybe it would. But that is not a hardship to Bricklink
if those small temporary sellers are just looking to sell quick without considering
the needs of customer service.
We see it here on the forum from time to time: new sellers, with zero feedback
who are excited about opening a store but who have no idea about part quality,
shipping costs, store terms, extra fees etc. Those people are not scammers, but
they might be jumping in to selling without sufficient regard to what it takes
to be a good seller. If a verification process makes them do a bit more homework
in order to sell off a couple of sets, then so much the better.
My first caveat to accepting the proposal is that no one should be under any
illusions that any system will prevent all fraud attempts. (Yes, a scam is a
fraud!) But just because we can't fix everything does not mean we should
do not do anything.
My second is that I am not in favour of any additional barriers or verifications
for buyers. Anything that will make it easier for buyers of all types to spend
their money on Bricklink is fine with me. But I can get behind ideas to improve
the quality of sellers to help buyers.
I hope that Bricklink management will give consideration and work out the details
in the best manner possible for all concerned.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Dec 16, 2013 08:08 | | Subject: | Re: Sort Your Inventory By Part # Or Color? | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, BinOfBlocks.Com writes:
| | Some of you that have stores, have you found it better to sort your inventory
by the part # or by color?
|
It seems that buyers might sort by colour. But sellers sort by type/part.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Jun 16, 2013 21:42 | | Subject: | Re: Thoughts on instant checkout & postage... | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| "On countries where you have dimension limits,that could be hard to implement."
What you say there is a problem. The shipping cost for almost all of my orders
is dependent on the dimensions, in particular a maximum two centimeter thickness.
If your suggestion is implemented without an opt out clause, everything I send
would automatically be invoiced at the much higher parcel rate, and the sticker
shock would likely result in a cancelled order and lost business.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Nov 17, 2011 21:56 | | Subject: | Re: Differentiate private and business sellers | | Viewed: | 88 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, bagelboybugle writes:
| | Presently, the only time we can be certain that a seller is running a business
is if they openly declare it in big writing (preferably with some bells and stuff)
or is registered for VAT. It is generally impossible to distinguish between part
time pro and heavily stocked amateur, particularly when so many amateur stores
appear professional with their branding and general splash design. For many it
wont matter, but for some, it may.
Now, regardless of the ethical and contractual debates about who is to blame
when, In the EU (and other places too), business sellers have certain legal obligations
that hobby sellers don't, it is for this reasons that some buyers may prefer
to purchase only from business sellers. The detail of law isnt particularly relevant
to this suggestion (mainly because they vary depending upon your country).
What I propose, therefore is that there be a subtle but clear visible (or at
least findable if someone wants to look for it) difference between the stores
of business sellers and private sellers.
This has the following key benefits
1) Allows buyers to identify which sellers are hobbyists and which are professional
in a standardised way and make an informed choice on this basis. Whether a buyer
prefers a hobbyist or a pro, this will make it easier for them to make that choice.
2) It helps to clarify on the rare occasion that there is a dispute, which, if
any law(s) may be applicable. Some laws for example only apply business to consumer
and not business to business or consumer to consumer.
3) By clearly defining the two, it helps to manage buyer expectations, fewer
people will be upset when a hobbyist takes a day longer to invoice than the pro-seller
they bought from the week before, because they know its not a pro
4) Due to buyer expectations I believe it would lead to a rise in standards amongst
business sellers (most are very high anyway) which would in turn lead to a rise
in standards amongst hobby sellers too. and anything that encourages a rise in
standards can only be good for us all.
Generally speaking I think any movement in this direction should try to remain
true to the bricklink vision by making site features available to all sellers
regardless of status. Exceptions would only be things which only businesses would
have a need to use, such as VAT settings (thats the only one I can think of)
I dont have a particular vision on how to implement it, but I dont think any
change needs to be significant. It could simply be an icon displayed at the top
of the store and on the wanted list by shop page or the word "business" or "hobby"
written somewhere or a different design to the store visitor counter. I certainly
do not advocate pro and amateur stores having radically different layouts by
design. Just a small but noticable difference that buyers can search for according
to their own individual preference.
Admittedly, there are hundreds of sellers here who are technically (under tax
laws of wherever they live) business sellers but who would never admit it.
Gareth
|
For all the orders i have purchased through Bricklink, I must say that I am unable
to differentiate between any sellers who were "Pros" and which ones were "heavily
stocked amateur" I could not tell it from the timeliness of the service, or
the accuracy of the order, or the quality of the lego, shipping, etc.
If Bricklink were to allow some sellers to describe themselves as "Pros" then
wouldn't Bricklink also have to enforce a standard of business practice so that
buyers would know what made them different from an amateur? Actually Bricklink
does have a standard: the terms of service, and I am quite happy that it applies
to all Bricklink sellers. I don't want to encourage anyone to think that a "lower"
standard of service is acceptable.
I do want to see sellers improve their standards. But I think that should be
done by the market place. If people don't buy from unscrupulous or careless sellers
the standard will eventually improve.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Jul 14, 2011 11:36 | | Subject: | Re: Blocked user? Block feedback too! | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, StarBrick writes:
| | When a user has its buying privileges revoked, it should automatically revoke
its feedback privileges. This in order to prevent retaliatory actions from buyer
and seller.
Please keep this place tidy
|
I feel that feedback is about the transaction. If a transaction took place then
both participants should be able to leave appropriate (and honest) feedback.
That is what serves the community best.
|
|
| Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | Jan 28, 2011 12:07 | | Subject: | Re: Credit Card required to sell on BrickLink | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| No. I have a hobby. Not a business. One of the things I greatly appreciate about
Bricklink is the simplicity relative to other sites. Please keep this a simple
arrangement. I am always dubious about suggestions that Bricklink Admins do much
more than arrange a place where buyers and sellers can meet to conduct business.
I will say that as a buyer, I have not had a single negative experience here
on Bricklink. This is a safe place for buyers, and there is also good support
for sellers.
In Suggestions, locutis writes:
| | BrickLink should setup a system where a seller would need to have a credit card
to sell on BL, and BL charges the seller a small amount (say $5) to setup the
store, and activate it, and verify the seller's information that is on BL against
the credit card.
The $5 would offset any costs associated with checking names/addresses. Once
BL has a card # and a charge on it, they can verify the name and address to the
card, and they know that they are dealing with a real person, at a real address.
Or, maybe make this an option, and have a store icon that shows that the seller
is verified.
Or, perhaps make this a requirement only if the seller wishes to sell high value
products, or lots of items valued at a high value.
I would gladly do this for my store, to show that I'm legit and serious about
selling.
Locutis
Resistance is futile.
|
|
|
|
Canada, Ontario
