Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | Rick_S.  | | Posted: | Jul 2, 2020 12:53 | | Subject: | Re: Sprues | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Teup writes:
| | In Catalog, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Catalog, Leftoverbricks writes:
| | Are sprues like the one from
[p=x8] in the catalog?
If yes: how to find?
If no: why not?
|
The sprue is just a piece that held this part, it has no other function outside
of that.
|
https://youtu.be/PjZHVRKSjyc?t=76
|
and i've seen people use non-LEGO pieces in LEGO construction, should we
add those in too ?
|
 |
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jul 2, 2020 11:22 | | Subject: | Re: Coral part should not be in the Plant Section | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, jennnifer writes:
| | In Catalog, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Catalog, jennnifer writes:
| | In Catalog, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Catalog, jennnifer writes:
| | In Catalog, superchicken77 writes:
| | This is an interesting topic. One one hand I'm reading that people want
the catalog to be accurate. However, nobody has considered what most people (not
BL experts) will identify that part as or how they will search for it.
In coral colour, I would be searching for coral. In dark turquoise, I would
be searching for seaweed. As it stands now, I wouldn't find that part in
coral. Perhaps an extended description or additional tag to include coral?
|
Agreed! I have submitted a name change for the catmins to review.
Jen
|
I disagree since LEGO calls this part plant, so if people are looking for this
part based on what LEGO has and has sold I'd be looking for plant, this is
called part continuation between sites, there is also the fact LEGO owns this
place and if they are gonna call it plant there, they can call it plant here.
|
That is ridiculous. Do you have any idea how many things we classify here according
to our names or names that are in common usage? The point is that people will
be able to search for and find this part when they need to. LEGO parts can all
be used in a vast variety of ways, but now we need to restrict classification
for just this one part because LEGO said so?? It should be called Plant and Seaweed
and Coral and whatever else is practical for sellers and buyers to find it when
needed.
Jen
|
no my point is we need to keep the plant name in.
|
My apologies for speaking harshly. Not a good day for me today. 
The change I submitted was simply to change it to
Plant Thallus, Seaweed, Coral
Jen
|
well then the error was on my behalf since I thought you meant to change it from
plant to coral.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jul 2, 2020 10:58 | | Subject: | Re: Sprues | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Miro78 writes:
| | In Catalog, hpoort writes:
| | In Catalog, Leftoverbricks writes:
| | Are sprues like the one from
[p=x8] in the catalog?
If yes: how to find?
If no: why not?
|
I would have been interested in buying them when I first discovered their use
in MOCs. I had to buy new leaves instead, in the hope they would include the
sprues.
This might be one of those cases where it would be good to make an exception
and include it in the catalogue. You could try to add it and see what the catmins
think of it. Whether the sprue alone stands a chance, I don't think so, but
the 'leaves on sprue' part has precedents in the flowers, coins and keys.
|
I save my sprues from this plant element. I have used them here and there, but
not in great quantity. If I was still selling parts, I would have sold them.
On the flip side, the PAB cups and the BAM plastic cases are sold here. They
are in a sense a conduit in getting the part to your home, much like the sprue
on this plant piece.
Miro
|
yes and no, the cups are not sold as parts (that I know of), just like this site
sells boxes, but are not sold as parts.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jul 2, 2020 10:54 | | Subject: | Re: Coral part should not be in the Plant Section | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, jennnifer writes:
| | In Catalog, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Catalog, jennnifer writes:
| | In Catalog, superchicken77 writes:
| | This is an interesting topic. One one hand I'm reading that people want
the catalog to be accurate. However, nobody has considered what most people (not
BL experts) will identify that part as or how they will search for it.
In coral colour, I would be searching for coral. In dark turquoise, I would
be searching for seaweed. As it stands now, I wouldn't find that part in
coral. Perhaps an extended description or additional tag to include coral?
|
Agreed! I have submitted a name change for the catmins to review.
Jen
|
I disagree since LEGO calls this part plant, so if people are looking for this
part based on what LEGO has and has sold I'd be looking for plant, this is
called part continuation between sites, there is also the fact LEGO owns this
place and if they are gonna call it plant there, they can call it plant here.
|
That is ridiculous. Do you have any idea how many things we classify here according
to our names or names that are in common usage? The point is that people will
be able to search for and find this part when they need to. LEGO parts can all
be used in a vast variety of ways, but now we need to restrict classification
for just this one part because LEGO said so?? It should be called Plant and Seaweed
and Coral and whatever else is practical for sellers and buyers to find it when
needed.
Jen
|
no my point is we need to keep the plant name in.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jul 2, 2020 10:53 | | Subject: | Re: Sprues | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | In Catalog, hpoort writes:
| | In Catalog, Leftoverbricks writes:
| | Are sprues like the one from
[p=x8] in the catalog?
If yes: how to find?
If no: why not?
|
I would have been interested in buying them when I first discovered their use
in MOCs. I had to buy new leaves instead, in the hope they would include the
sprues.
This might be one of those cases where it would be good to make an exception
and include it in the catalogue. You could try to add it and see what the catmins
think of it. Whether the sprue alone stands a chance, I don't think so, but
the 'leaves on sprue' part has precedents in the flowers, coins and keys.
|
If that one is allowed, then all the others should be allowed too. Some of them
have uses, or may have uses in the future.
|
yeah I always used the sprue from the gold coins to build up my gold horde in
my customs and such.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jul 2, 2020 10:41 | | Subject: | Re: Sprues | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, hpoort writes:
| | In Catalog, Leftoverbricks writes:
| | Are sprues like the one from
[p=x8] in the catalog?
If yes: how to find?
If no: why not?
|
I would have been interested in buying them when I first discovered their use
in MOCs. I had to buy new leaves instead, in the hope they would include the
sprues.
This might be one of those cases where it would be good to make an exception
and include it in the catalogue. You could try to add it and see what the catmins
think of it. Whether the sprue alone stands a chance, I don't think so, but
the 'leaves on sprue' part has precedents in the flowers, coins and keys.
|
I think this exact thing was argued over before, and was denied since it is not
an official LEGO part or such thing, but not sure?
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jul 2, 2020 10:32 | | Subject: | Re: Coral part should not be in the Plant Section | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | In Catalog, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | The part in question just reminds me a lot of the fire corals and elkhorn corals
I use to snorkel around when I was younger.
|
yes and on first impression i'd say it is a coral, but LEGO calls it a plant
and considering LEGO owns this site and to keep part name continuation between
sites I think we should also call it a plant 
|
Torso and other printed part searches are going to be horrendous if you stick
to the line that LEGO owns the site and their terminology should be used.
|
yeah but my insinuation is to not remove the plant name part.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jul 2, 2020 10:27 | | Subject: | Re: Sprues | | Viewed: | 58 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Leftoverbricks writes:
| | Are sprues like the one from
[p=x8] in the catalog?
If yes: how to find?
If no: why not?
|
The sprue is just a piece that held this part, it has no other function outside
of that.
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jul 2, 2020 10:26 | | Subject: | Re: Coral part should not be in the Plant Section | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | The part in question just reminds me a lot of the fire corals and elkhorn corals
I use to snorkel around when I was younger.
|
yes and on first impression i'd say it is a coral, but LEGO calls it a plant
and considering LEGO owns this site and to keep part name continuation between
sites I think we should also call it a plant
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jul 2, 2020 10:05 | | Subject: | Re: Coral part should not be in the Plant Section | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, jennnifer writes:
| | In Catalog, superchicken77 writes:
| | This is an interesting topic. One one hand I'm reading that people want
the catalog to be accurate. However, nobody has considered what most people (not
BL experts) will identify that part as or how they will search for it.
In coral colour, I would be searching for coral. In dark turquoise, I would
be searching for seaweed. As it stands now, I wouldn't find that part in
coral. Perhaps an extended description or additional tag to include coral?
|
Agreed! I have submitted a name change for the catmins to review.
Jen
|
I disagree since LEGO calls this part plant, so if people are looking for this
part based on what LEGO has and has sold I'd be looking for plant, this is
called part continuation between sites, there is also the fact LEGO owns this
place and if they are gonna call it plant there, they can call it plant here.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jul 2, 2020 10:03 | | Subject: | Re: Coral part should not be in the Plant Section | | Viewed: | 23 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:
On the other hand, it also comes in the Coral colour (⅓ Coral, ⅔ Dark Turquoise).
On the other other hand, plants can be orangish.
And if you put it flat, it looks like lichen….
|
Oh, and if it’s coral, is it the microscopic animal or its mineral exo-skeletton?
 
|
It's definitely the mineral exoskeleton of coral polyps. I don't see
how it can possibly be seaweed.
|
haven't seen much seaweed before have you?
|
Actually, I saw quite a bit of both growing up along the south-eastern coast
of Florida. So, yeah, I've seen seaweed, and it is usually a bit more "leafier"
than that part.
|
so only seen seaweed in one general location then ?
|
Nope. I have seen seaweed in other places, also.
| | let us take one example shall
we, how about this type of red seaweed which a picture of it is enclosed, now
tell me does that look like the seaweed you know? or? seaweed comes in all shapes
and colors and designs and what not. the leafy stuff is just the most commonly
known stuff.
|
Reread what I wrote. I said seaweed is "usually a bit more 'leafier'".
I didn't say seaweed is *always* a bit more leafier.
The part in question just reminds me a lot of the fire corals and elkhorn corals
I use to snorkel around when I was younger.
Interesting thing though... I just learned that fire corals aren't true corals,
but are hydrocorals. Neat!
|
yeah but several things to consider, 1: LEGO calls this a plant, and whoever
put the description plant thallus would have been more correct in the plant family
since it does appear to display what a thallus would look like, also you have
to take into consideration some of LEGO's examples of tree branches and such
are not what I would call spot on or leafy
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jul 2, 2020 02:35 | | Subject: | Re: Coral part should not be in the Plant Section | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:
On the other hand, it also comes in the Coral colour (⅓ Coral, ⅔ Dark Turquoise).
On the other other hand, plants can be orangish.
And if you put it flat, it looks like lichen….
|
Oh, and if it’s coral, is it the microscopic animal or its mineral exo-skeletton?
|
It's definitely the mineral exoskeleton of coral polyps. I don't see
how it can possibly be seaweed.
|
haven't seen much seaweed before have you?
|
Actually, I saw quite a bit of both growing up along the south-eastern coast
of Florida. So, yeah, I've seen seaweed, and it is usually a bit more "leafier"
than that part.
|
so only seen seaweed in one general location then ? let us take one example shall
we, how about this type of red seaweed which a picture of it is enclosed, now
tell me does that look like the seaweed you know? or? seaweed comes in all shapes
and colors and designs and what not. the leafy stuff is just the most commonly
known stuff.
|
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jul 1, 2020 21:57 | | Subject: | Re: Coral part should not be in the Plant Section | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:
On the other hand, it also comes in the Coral colour (⅓ Coral, ⅔ Dark Turquoise).
On the other other hand, plants can be orangish.
And if you put it flat, it looks like lichen….
|
Oh, and if it’s coral, is it the microscopic animal or its mineral exo-skeletton?
|
It's definitely the mineral exoskeleton of coral polyps. I don't see
how it can possibly be seaweed.
|
haven't seen much seaweed before have you?
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 25, 2020 14:21 | | Subject: | Re: Darth Vader Head Mold Variance | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, M.Boss writes:
| |
When comparing two Darth Vader figures I had, I discovered a mold variance between
two helmets. The "old" type came likey was made from 1999-2014, while The "new"
type appeared in the 2019 20th Anniversary Clone Scout Walker I think
this new mold was created because in order to create the anniversary figure lego
wanted to use a 1 piece Vader helmet, as opposed to the 2 piece helmets they
switched to a couple of years ago. This mold variation deserves a note in the
catalog entry for the helmet,, or a variant added to the catalog, but I'm
not sure which. If someone wants to take the appropriate action from here, please
go ahead. See the attached image for the differences between the two.
|
think one on right is a chinese knock off.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 20:29 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, tEoS writes:
| | Recheck the facts, then reread your full report of the incident. Then maybe
you will see the error.
In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, tEoS writes:
| | Buyer left neutral feedback = error in what you wrote
| | Actually there is no error, the synopsis is based on available data. but that
is just one incident it still brings up the issue that retaliatory feedback cannot
be removed and in that, it can cause more issues down the road. and it also prevents
buyers from leaving honest feedback in fear they will receive retaliatory feedback
in response.
|
|
Wrong again: it was negative, you notice the negative feedback they left for
Sludgemonster?
https://www.bricklink.com/feedback.asp?fdbType=2&p=mjsheller
and it seems this seller is pretty notorious in not being a great seller and
leaving retaliatory feedback too.
|
|
Yes buyer left neutral, but still does not excuse the negative left by the seller.
and the way the rules are written the seller could do nothing about it. since
the rules were very specific on what reasons feedback could be removed. and that
is what I want changed since they are not the only reasons, since retaliatory
feedback has been removed before and so forth. (in fact he has already contacted
the admins about getting the feedback removed)
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 17:53 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | […]
ShakeyShuffle was a character.
|
But that doesn’t prevent a member using “ShackyShuffle” (with or without the
‘e’) for their ID here.
Are you Ricky Stratton from Silver Spoons?
|
Nope
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 16:35 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Suggestions, tEoS writes:
| | Was ShackyShuffle also HoL? I recall them having similar issues.
|
I don’t remember that name.
And, of course, the forum history has been long purged.
Not long ago, HouseOfLogos was still listed as a member (I’m not sure if they
were still registred but their name was searchable: I did search because I never
remember if it was Logo or Logos).
But now these members must have become BLUSERs: can’t buy, can’t sell, no reasons
to log in to accept the new ToS.
“Dust: this is carpet; carpet, this is dust. You’ll spend a long time together.”
|
ShakeyShuffle was a character.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 16:34 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, infinibrix writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| |
problem is it is not just bad buyers but bad sellers, my suggestion here was
made because of a seller who left retaliatory feedback for a deserved negative
they had received from a buyer.
|
But that’s just my point with the ebays feedback system Sellers can’t leave negative
feedback for buyers which means they can’t leave retaliatory feedback in any
shape or form! Meaning the buyer is able to give their honest opinion without
fear of retaliatory feedback!
It’s a change I’ve been calling for some time:-
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1168664
I feel its only important that we understand how a seller performs(Feedback wise!)
because it goes without saying that there will always be a few difficult customers
and its how sellers deal with those tricky customers that’s important and for
those customers that are impossibly unreasonable they can be reported and dealt
with by Bricklink!
|
While I do agree such a system would be useful it could also have drawbacks too.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 16:31 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, tEoS writes:
| | Buyer left neutral feedback = error in what you wrote
| | Actually there is no error, the synopsis is based on available data. but that
is just one incident it still brings up the issue that retaliatory feedback cannot
be removed and in that, it can cause more issues down the road. and it also prevents
buyers from leaving honest feedback in fear they will receive retaliatory feedback
in response.
|
|
Wrong again: it was negative, you notice the negative feedback they left for
Sludgemonster?
https://www.bricklink.com/feedback.asp?fdbType=2&p=mjsheller
and it seems this seller is pretty notorious in not being a great seller and
leaving retaliatory feedback too.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 16:03 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, tEoS writes:
| | Get your facts straight. You even have an error in the incident.
You come back to the forum after all these years and pretend like no one is aware
of what is going on. I read the suggestion and do not see its merits.
The problem is not retaliatory feedback, it is with certain members.
| | didn't read the suggestion did ya? the suggestion is to have the opportunity
to have what is known as retaliatory feedback removed, this was brought about
because of an incident that happened which went like this:
|
|
Actually there is no error, the synopsis is based on available data. but that
is just one incident it still brings up the issue that retaliatory feedback cannot
be removed and in that, it can cause more issues down the road. and it also prevents
buyers from leaving honest feedback in fear they will receive retaliatory feedback
in response.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 15:03 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, tEoS writes:
| | Voted no. I don't believe this is the solution to the problem.
The problem, as I see it, is two-fold (or maybe more) and is related to human
behavior:
1) The desire to be viewed as perfect. Further derived from one's careful
approach to their online persona (ie: through Facebook, etc. where you only see
one's "good" side or positive achievements).
2) Inability to view one's mistakes as an opportunity to learn and grow.
Blames others for their own shortcomings. Ties into ego, above.
Of course, I think these are experienced in varying degrees by at least most
individuals. The more extreme of which behave in aggressive selling practices.
|
didn't read the suggestion did ya? the suggestion is to have the opportunity
to have what is known as retaliatory feedback removed, this was brought about
because of an incident that happened which went like this:
Buyer buys items from seller
Seller ships items, but then discovers he "forgot" 3 .07 cent tires
Seller decides to refund the .21 cents without contacting buyer and getting their
input
Buyer is miffed and rightly so and leaves negative feedback
Seller turns around and leaves negative feedback for the buyer even though the
buyer did nothing wrong
Buyer is unable to have feedback removed because of the current rules
Buyer goes with only option to remove feedback and that is to file an NSS
The NSS will get dropped since the buyer was refunded but not at his request.
As it goes do you feel it is justified for said buyer to have said negative feedback
even though they did nothing wrong to deserve it? do you believe it is ok for
anyone to leave retaliatory feedback because they got a deserved negative?
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 14:28 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:
| | In Suggestions, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Suggestions, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:
| | […]
Part of the problem is buyers keep buying from sellers with relatively poor feedback,
suggesting (some) buyers don't care.
|
I think it’s more a “it won’t happen to me” attitude.
Remember HouseOfLogo (and what a real mess it was).
|
Yes, and it was a huge ordeal to get that store shut down. I have often thought
of establishing some kind of disciplinary board to handle these high profile
cases. But regardless of the mechanism, honest data from users would be a big
help.
|
If you want honest feedback from buyers, then remove feedback for buyers. That
way, they don't have anything to lose by being honest (not that a buyer's
feedback matters anyway). Buyers getting only positives like at ebay is pointless.
You might as well just use the buyer order count instead, it amounts to the same
thing and saves a seller the time of leaving positive feedback.
It would be nice though to have a buyer score based not on the feedback they
received, but the feedback they left. If a buyer continuously leaves negatives
or neutrals as they feel they have the power to do so with no comeback, then
they are the problem. It should not be anonymous either. If they leave a seller
a negative (or multiple negatives), then the seller should have the right to
ban them from continuing to purchase and continue to leave poor feedback. If
a buyer has a problem with say 1 in every 20 orders, then leaving negative feedback
on that scale is fine. However, if they claim they have negative experiences
in 1 in every 2 orders then I imagine they will get added to many stoplists and
should probably be banned themselves.
I think you have to be careful though, giving lots of power to buyers might actually
reduce standards. If a buyer says they have a problem and is probably going to
leave negative feedback anyway no matter what the seller does, then the seller
has no incentive to put things right. And in a similar way, if negatives become
more common and there is some threshold set then there is less of an incentive
to maintain an excellent record when good enough is still enough to keep selling.
I think there is a better way for you to maintain standards than through feedback
though and that is through NSS claims. Not completed ones, but claims. For example,
if a seller continually fails to deliver but refunds when caught and does this
time and time again, why are they allowed to continue getting away with it? Just
refunding when they get a complaint does not mean they are a good seller.
You could always have another box for buyers to fill in when leaving feedback
- asking did you get everything in your order in the stated condition. If a seller
gets below a certain percentage for those, they should be warned. If they continue
to get very low ratings, then they should be banned. Of course, it should only
count if a buyer fills in this information for all of their orders.
|
I'd disagree with that assumption, since right now the only negative feedback
I have is as a buyer and I did deserve it I failed in my obligation to the seller.
and as to feedback I have left as both a buyer and seller, they were deserved.
in fact in one case where I was the buyer my feedback along with others helped
to inform the public the seller was a serious problem and even then it took awhile
to get rid of them. https://www.bricklink.com/feedback.asp?viewType=&u=lego_police2
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 11:12 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, infinibrix writes:
| | In Suggestions, Admin_Russell writes:
| | That, of course, is the real issue. IMO we need an auxiliary buyer feedback system
that is completely anonymous, where the results are amalgamated before presenting
them (privately) to the seller. These results could then be used to weed out
sellers who consistently perform poorly and lower the reputation of the site.
I have always felt that public feedback was not enough to raise the selling standards
of the site. For many BrickLink sellers, their standards are sky-high and represent
their passion for the hobby. For others, they do nothing but dull the effect
of the excellent sellers, cause problems for us in the Help Desk, and in general
apply a lot of pressure on us to implement a heavy-handed "sellers will only
get paid when the buyer is happy" system where BrickLink controls all the money.
|
The only problems I have with anonymous feedback is that think it may head in
a direction where the feedback left may become even more sinister!
The thing is there are always people out there that look to destroy and ruin
things simply because they can and/or they get a kick out of doing things like
that and similarly there are people who I’m sure would love to put a neutral/negative
against a sellers otherwise flawless feedback simply because they can and have
the power to do so without being bought to task about why they did this?
There may be others that begrudge a seller somewhat simply because they didn’t
agree to discount something when asked? and then you may have other competitor
sellers who may be looking to bring a high performing seller down a few pegs?
From a sellers point of view if I make a right hash of an order or end up
non-intentionally messing the customer around with mistakes, oversights or forgetting
to ship their order and I get a negative then I guess I have to just take that
on the chin but if a buyer leaves what I consider to be unfair negative then
I would at least like to be able to see who has complained and what I have done
wrong so that I can improve or choose to block the buyer if I don’t feel its
justified!
In fact I would also say that perhaps make it common knowledge to everyone using
Bricklink that by choosing to leave a negative for someone you are also choosing
to never deal with that store/person again and so perhaps put in place an auto-blocking
feature?
Presumably if someone leaves a negative they are unhappy with the way a store
performs and in which case for that same person to continue to shop in your store
for a second time would seem a bit sinister to me or am I wrong here?
Either way in some cases I’m sure people will be able to work out who left the
negative feedback anyway based on the feedback comments or the way an email conversations
went beforehand but on the other hand what if a buyer complains and still leaves
positive and yet the seller receives a negative from someone else and wrongly
assumes it’s the buyer who complained meaning you still end up with some retalitory
feedback injustices!
The only way I think this really works is as I’ve mention before with the ebay
style where sellers can’t leave anything but positive feedback for buyers and
buyers can leave whatever they feel appropriate so that the feedback system is
used to help keep all sellers on their toes and performing to high standards.
At the end of the day if there are severe feedback injustices left by buyers
I’m sure they can be reported and removed by admins where appropriate and rather
than rely on sellers feedback to attempt to tackle bad buyers, I’m sure if these
buyers are that that bad it should just be a case of reporting any outrageous
buyer behaviour to the admins so that with enough reported incidents they can
be weeded off the site for good and with it all the feedback they've left
for people!
|
problem is it is not just bad buyers but bad sellers, my suggestion here was
made because of a seller who left retaliatory feedback for a deserved negative
they had received from a buyer.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 01:35 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | I basically told him the same thing, but the core issue is the buyer has no recourse
to get what is obviously retaliatory feedback removed.
which brings into question how can buyers leave honest feedback when they face
the potential of retaliatory feedback that cannot be removed? such a situation
is a threat to what the feedback system is.
|
That, of course, is the real issue. IMO we need an auxiliary buyer feedback system
that is completely anonymous, where the results are amalgamated before presenting
them (privately) to the seller. These results could then be used to weed out
sellers who consistently perform poorly and lower the reputation of the site.
I have always felt that public feedback was not enough to raise the selling standards
of the site. For many BrickLink sellers, their standards are sky-high and represent
their passion for the hobby. For others, they do nothing but dull the effect
of the excellent sellers, cause problems for us in the Help Desk, and in general
apply a lot of pressure on us to implement a heavy-handed "sellers will only
get paid when the buyer is happy" system where BrickLink controls all the money.
|
Unfortunately such a system would not work well with the seller waiting for money
till buyer receives item, sounds good in theory, but in practice not so well,
one of the things that could be added is like eBay's star system or with
holding feed back till both parties give feedback with neither knowing the other,
then it would be honest feedback from both sides. if neither party is happy then
they can communicate with the other party on getting the feedback removed. which
can only be removed if both parties agree.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 00:49 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | As it goes a rule not allowing retaliatory feedback should also be added for
removal of said feedback since as the rules stand retaliatory feedback is allowed:
Feedback you Received:
The following are currently the only valid reasons for which you can request
feedback you received to be removed:
Feedback you received contains vulgar language.
Feedback you received contains personally identifying information including your
name, address, e-mail address or telephone number.
You are the seller and the buyer has not paid. Non-Paying Buyer Alert has been
completed or the buyer has accepted the NPB penalty via NPX.
You are the buyer and the seller has not responded or shipped. Non-Responding
Seller Alert or Non-Shipping Seller Alert has been completed.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who had their
membership terminated.
Feedback you received was posted by a duplicate account of a user who was on
your Stop List before the order was placed.
If you're requesting feedback to be removed for the last 2 reasons above,
you should contact the Help Desk before you submit the request and let us know
the original username of the duplicate account.
Requests can be submitted until the order is purged from the system - up to 6
months from the order date. Requests are submitted to the BrickLink Administration
for approval. If the feedback is removed, it cannot be reposted. Each request
has a status:
|
I understand the frustration of getting a retaliatory feedback BUT i don't
support interjecting the BL admins into disputes over feedback.
The BL team has enough to do without this added task which is not a revenue producing
nor a productive use of their time.
Having the admin being a referee between two disputing users may result in one
of those users leaving the site which will not be beneficial for the greater
good.
Retaliatory feedback is easy to spot and usually hurts the image of the user
who left it more than the user who received it.
|
oh wouldn't be surprised if the seller made it onto a lot of peoples do not
buy from lists since his actions are not those of a good seller. but the whole
reason behind admins and moderators is to moderate between 2 parties, instead
the buyer was forced to file an NSS so as to remove said feedback, do you think
that is better?
|
An NSS like that will never stand. It is abuse of the system and admin will remove
it immediately upon notice.
|
I basically told him the same thing, but the core issue is the buyer has no recourse
to get what is obviously retaliatory feedback removed.
which brings into question how can buyers leave honest feedback when they face
the potential of retaliatory feedback that cannot be removed? such a situation
is a threat to what the feedback system is.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 22:26 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | curious how many of those mods are still active moderating?
|
All of them are.
|
are they? when a couple scam reported posts are still up most of the day after
being reported it just tells me there is not a good spread of mods to cover all
time zones.
|
They are volunteers. They aren't required to be here around the clock.
|
yeah but it can be worrisome since if someone posts something that is not to
be posted of an illegal nature and there is no one around to remove it, it can
cause problems for this site, like it did for Majhost.
|
So you want someone standing by in the forums 24/7/365 to make sure that a couple
of spam posts do not last on the forums for more than a little while? I am sorry,
but I don't need BrickLink to be a nanny for everything. People are supposed
to be adults here, and adults can take the time to figure out if something is
legitimate or not. I don't need BrickLink making sure that a "hall monitor"
is staffed all hours of the day, and I don't want the fees that sellers pay
to increase due to the need for said "hall monitor". Not to mention that spam
posts are so rare around here.
|
Spam posts are not my concern you should learn what happened to Majhost and almost
happened to Brickshelf because they lacked proper moderation. and then you will
understand my concern since I have seen some issues like that on other sites
happen of late.
|
in fact people don't remember but we also had issues almost like that here
too, but had a more active moderation team at that time.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 22:24 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | curious how many of those mods are still active moderating?
|
All of them are.
|
are they? when a couple scam reported posts are still up most of the day after
being reported it just tells me there is not a good spread of mods to cover all
time zones.
|
They are volunteers. They aren't required to be here around the clock.
|
yeah but it can be worrisome since if someone posts something that is not to
be posted of an illegal nature and there is no one around to remove it, it can
cause problems for this site, like it did for Majhost.
|
So you want someone standing by in the forums 24/7/365 to make sure that a couple
of spam posts do not last on the forums for more than a little while? I am sorry,
but I don't need BrickLink to be a nanny for everything. People are supposed
to be adults here, and adults can take the time to figure out if something is
legitimate or not. I don't need BrickLink making sure that a "hall monitor"
is staffed all hours of the day, and I don't want the fees that sellers pay
to increase due to the need for said "hall monitor". Not to mention that spam
posts are so rare around here.
|
Spam posts are not my concern you should learn what happened to Majhost and almost
happened to Brickshelf because they lacked proper moderation. and then you will
understand my concern since I have seen some issues like that on other sites
happen of late.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 21:46 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | curious how many of those mods are still active moderating?
|
All of them are.
|
are they? when a couple scam reported posts are still up most of the day after
being reported it just tells me there is not a good spread of mods to cover all
time zones.
|
They are volunteers. They aren't required to be here around the clock.
|
yeah but it can be worrisome since if someone posts something that is not to
be posted of an illegal nature and there is no one around to remove it, it can
cause problems for this site, like it did for Majhost.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 21:43 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, qwertyboy writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | the incident is over a seller not shipping a full order, which the buyer left
negative feedback then the seller left retaliatory feedback and the only option
the buyer had was to file an NSS.
|
I get that the buyer wants to have the neg removed, and I am not condoning seller's
behaviour, but posting an NSS just to get rid of a FB is not the way to go. It
is a mis-use of the system. According to the rules, seller did refund the missing
parts, so an NSS is simply not applicable.
Niek.
|
I agree an NSS was excessive, but the way the rules are written for removing
negative feedback, that was the buyers only option, since he cannot have retaliatory
feedback removed.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 20:38 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
| | I don’t think it’s fair but I also don’t think that merits an intervention or
an investment of resources.
The retaliatory feedback reflects worse on the person who left it.
As a seller, this feedback wouldn’t cause me to block the buyer- specially considering
the seller who left it has a bad track record.
This has no impact on the buyer, it impacts the seller negatively as it should-
seems like it’s working okay.
It’s not perfect but it doesn’t merit investment of resources.
|
Actually you would be wrong, how do people not know the buyer was very difficult
or made outrageous demands or such? you don't all you know is the buyer got
a negative feedback which reflects on him in the negative and you are saying
he has to suffer with it. wouldn't be surprised if this keeps up this site
may lose many potential buyers because they are not allowed to change a grave
injustice to their reputation and you are ok with that.
|
Your insinuation of me not caring about buyers experience is a good point for
me to tag out and not waste any further time debating you.
good luck.
|
But it is true, you say he should just keep the negative feedback, it is like
you do not care and think nothing should be done about and that I disagree with.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 20:09 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Heartbricker writes:
| | I don’t think it’s fair but I also don’t think that merits an intervention or
an investment of resources.
The retaliatory feedback reflects worse on the person who left it.
As a seller, this feedback wouldn’t cause me to block the buyer- specially considering
the seller who left it has a bad track record.
This has no impact on the buyer, it impacts the seller negatively as it should-
seems like it’s working okay.
It’s not perfect but it doesn’t merit investment of resources.
|
Actually you would be wrong, how do people not know the buyer was very difficult
or made outrageous demands or such? you don't all you know is the buyer got
a negative feedback which reflects on him in the negative and you are saying
he has to suffer with it. wouldn't be surprised if this keeps up this site
may lose many potential buyers because they are not allowed to change a grave
injustice to their reputation and you are ok with that.
|
|
| 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: | 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: | 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: | 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: | 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: | 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: | 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: | 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: | 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: | 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.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 13:44 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 17 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | I feel we should get a report post button added since trying to find that page
is very not user friendly.
|
This was suggested before.
The Problem Center is below the page. Click forum, then enter the message number.
|
yeah but a bit redundant when you have to go thru 3 clicks just to get tot the
report post section.
|
sorry make that 4 clicks before you get to the page where you give the post number
and reason.
|
Yes, it's a lot of clicks and copy/paste. Not easy on a mobile phone.
|
while a simple report post button on the post itself would make it so much easier
|
It would probably also lead to accidentally clicked reports.
I prefer a more visible button with two-step verification to report a message.
|
well when you have to click the button on the post then fill in the info and
click report that would be like a 2-step verification. my suggestion would be
to have the button on the post go right to the report function, avoiding all
those extra steps and such to get there. in other words the button on the post
would take you here https://www.bricklink.com/problemMessage.asp
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 13:23 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | I feel we should get a report post button added since trying to find that page
is very not user friendly.
|
This was suggested before.
The Problem Center is below the page. Click forum, then enter the message number.
|
yeah but a bit redundant when you have to go thru 3 clicks just to get tot the
report post section.
|
sorry make that 4 clicks before you get to the page where you give the post number
and reason.
|
Yes, it's a lot of clicks and copy/paste. Not easy on a mobile phone.
|
while a simple report post button on the post itself would make it so much easier
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 02:11 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | I feel we should get a report post button added since trying to find that page
is very not user friendly.
|
This was suggested before.
The Problem Center is below the page. Click forum, then enter the message number.
|
yeah but a bit redundant when you have to go thru 3 clicks just to get tot the
report post section.
|
sorry make that 4 clicks before you get to the page where you give the post number
and reason.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2020 02:09 | | Subject: | Re: Report post button | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | I feel we should get a report post button added since trying to find that page
is very not user friendly.
|
This was suggested before.
The Problem Center is below the page. Click forum, then enter the message number.
|
yeah but a bit redundant when you have to go thru 3 clicks just to get tot the
report post section.
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 22, 2020 23:44 | | Subject: | Report post button | | Viewed: | 164 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | | Status: | Open | | Vote: | [Yes|No] | |
|
| I feel we should get a report post button added since trying to find that page
is very not user friendly.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 17, 2020 13:43 | | Subject: | Re: Pickable Models and In-Store Builds | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, bje writes:
| | Can I resubmit my pickable models from 2012 or are you just going to change
the instruction entries to sets?
|
It doesn't appear to cause any problems to change instructions to
sets, so for existing instructions this is probably what will occur - except
possibly in cases where there are large numbers of items for sale.
Here's one changed:
|
I tried listing those instructions when I listed the sticker sheet for the set
and it got denied, guess rules changed?
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jan 28, 2020 16:53 | | Subject: | Re: Attack of the Blusers | | Viewed: | 78 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, BLUSER13161 writes:
| | In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:
| | bluser numbers assigned already
but just happen to be known by our chosen usernames instead.
|
Yes, your bluser number can be seen by going to your Account Info page. The
second bit of information there is titled User ID. That's your bluser number.
Someday in the distant future, when we're all dead, they'll eject us
from the system and make us blusers, too. Not too fond of the idea, as I'd
rather be remembered as StormChaser, not BLUSER_13161.
Doesn't matter what I want, though.
|
I'm BLUSER 9140
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Apr 6, 2017 20:54 | | Subject: | Re: Add Bricklinked/Not original in Sales | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Kael944 writes:
| | We need to add a new category to the sales process, i.e. Bricklinked/Not Original.
It would weed out false hits for those of us who only seek original sets!
|
you can add the category but if there is a price discreprency don't count
on many using it, furthermore some of them resell sets so no clue if those sets
are bricklinked either.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Apr 5, 2017 10:09 | | Subject: | Re: Ban selling custom parts | | Viewed: | 65 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, metropolis1927 writes:
| | OK, didn't know LEGO build custom parts, off catalog stuff. That's different
"pair of sleeves". And think that that parts can easy be checked, they have letters
LEGO marks. TLG guarantee for plastic and print that are not toxic and harmful.
I was referring to fake LEGO brands and custom parts build in "garage". I don't
say that there's no quality custom parts, but who can say that this and this
custom part is of good quality and this and this isn't (and everything that
came with it; durability, paint peeling, what king of plastic and paint, how
safe are for kids to play with them...). All sellers of those parts will write
that their parts are high quality.
Example, you all heard of custom minifigs from Christo7108, that are praised.
But he has some custom parts (and prints) that are copied by others like Sheng
Yuan (fake Lego brand), like Flash's helmet (SY269), see pics.
I'm for banning all, as 1974 write, 3rd party stuff.
Marko
|
not all LEGO is marked LEGO.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Apr 3, 2017 10:13 | | Subject: | Re: Ban selling custom parts | | Viewed: | 62 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Brettj666 writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, metropolis1927 writes:
| | Hello
I suggest to ban selling custom parts from bricklink that aren't official
LEGO parts.
LEGO guarantee for quality of their parts and we can't know of what kind
of plastic are made custom parts. Plastic maybe toxic or another way harmful.
And what guarantee we have that those parts aren't from fake LEGO brands
like Lepin or similar.
Let those fake parts be on ebay and other sites, let bricklink be just for LEGO
and not for "Lego".
Cheers
Marko
|
I see this is still being discussed and has been discussed over so long, now
if you wanted to ban items that are duplicate of LEGO items I might be behind
it, but alas LEGO does not make all things many seek to obtain and custom parts
makers do fill that niche, while also giving good quality items.
|
So, any piece that Tyco or Megablocks make which Lego hasn't, should be fair
game?
|
no since I consider Tyco and Megablock competition with LEGO while customizers
and their parts are not, they accentuate LEGO.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Apr 3, 2017 10:04 | | Subject: | Re: Ban selling custom parts | | Viewed: | 80 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, metropolis1927 writes:
| | Hello
I suggest to ban selling custom parts from bricklink that aren't official
LEGO parts.
LEGO guarantee for quality of their parts and we can't know of what kind
of plastic are made custom parts. Plastic maybe toxic or another way harmful.
And what guarantee we have that those parts aren't from fake LEGO brands
like Lepin or similar.
Let those fake parts be on ebay and other sites, let bricklink be just for LEGO
and not for "Lego".
Cheers
Marko
|
I see this is still being discussed and has been discussed over so long, now
if you wanted to ban items that are duplicate of LEGO items I might be behind
it, but alas LEGO does not make all things many seek to obtain and custom parts
makers do fill that niche, while also giving good quality items.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Aug 29, 2015 20:32 | | Subject: | Re: Prohibit Vigilante Orders | | Viewed: | 57 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Leftoverbricks writes:
| | +1
I notice by myself that I'm getting more and more irritated by lengthy posts
from 'sellers' who have nothing to sell, yet they have very strong opinions
on everything going on here on BL. Not only Thor, but Rick_S as well.
To those people I would say: go on with your life and have fun with LEGO - but
not in this forum...
Best wishes,
Martin
|
seriously you just said that? lets look at your feedback, hmm smaller then mine,
hmm lets see your start date, wow a recent date, maybe BL should ban all members
with less then 5 or 10 years from posting? and lets see I've sold a lot here
before, did rather well, helped with other things on this site, your comment
would be akin to say ignore the old or those over 40 years of age or 50 or 60
since they do nothing, congrats you made my stoplist for being insulting.
|
my bad your already on it for stoplisting me
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Aug 29, 2015 20:31 | | Subject: | Re: Prohibit Vigilante Orders | | Viewed: | 57 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Leftoverbricks writes:
| | +1
I notice by myself that I'm getting more and more irritated by lengthy posts
from 'sellers' who have nothing to sell, yet they have very strong opinions
on everything going on here on BL. Not only Thor, but Rick_S as well.
To those people I would say: go on with your life and have fun with LEGO - but
not in this forum...
Best wishes,
Martin
|
seriously you just said that? lets look at your feedback, hmm smaller then mine,
hmm lets see your start date, wow a recent date, maybe BL should ban all members
with less then 5 or 10 years from posting? and lets see I've sold a lot here
before, did rather well, helped with other things on this site, your comment
would be akin to say ignore the old or those over 40 years of age or 50 or 60
since they do nothing, congrats you made my stoplist for being insulting.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Aug 25, 2015 13:46 | | Subject: | Re: Ranking up ideas to slow down potential SCAM | | Viewed: | 64 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
|
My one suggestion was to verify they are who they say they are thru payment from
a verifiable source like PayPal and such, where a new seller would pay a $5 fee
thru PayPal or such which admin would then apply towards their account to pay
their fees.
paying money will deter many scammers, paying thru a site like PayPal verified
will also verify the seller is who they say they are.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2015 19:46 | | Subject: | Re: Display number of orders store is yet to proc | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, activoice writes:
| | I find that some stores process orders a lot faster than other stores. Most
of the time this is proportionate to the number of outstanding orders that the
store has yet to fill (IE how backlogged they are)
In some cases I've waited 3 weeks from the day I paid for an order until
it was actually shipped.
From a buyers perspective if I knew how many orders there were ahead of mine
it would help me make a decision as to whether or not I was going to order from
this store or not... (in many cases you have no choice because you are selecting
the store because they have most of the items on your wanted list)
But at least if I knew that the store had 100 orders ahead of mine I could make
an informed decision whether I wanted to buy from them or if I would be better
off splitting my order across a few stores that have much fewer orders ahead
of mine.
In the brick and mortar world it's like being in a food court... I could
really want Chipotle, but I can see they've got a huge line... but hey there's
no line at Subway... that's good enough... I'll go there...
So what would count against the seller would be things like
- Order Placed but not yet invoiced
- Orders Paid for by the buyer but not yet shipped
Things that would not count against the seller
- Orders invoiced but not yet paid for by the buyer
You could even display an average for number of days from the day the Buyer marks
the invoice as PAID to the day the SELLER sets the status to SHIPPED. This would
be simpler and tell you how fast a SELLER processes orders on average.
(Hopefully most people are honest... once again I've had a seller outright
lie and tell me that they shipped something out, but when I actually received
the item I can see what date it was post marked, and it's more than 2 weeks
later.. I understand people get busy and they have lives... but at least be
honest about it)
|
I would rather see a turn around average per order listed.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2015 19:44 | | Subject: | Re: Display number of orders store is yet to proc | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Miro78 writes:
| | I see your point here, but generally speaking, feedback comments tell you a lot
in regards to level of service a store provides (speed, packing, part quality,
communication, etc). Your suggestion would hurt those stores that allow buyers
to hold orders open while the buyer takes more time to add additional items over
a course of few days. That's just one example. Some of the big stores state
in their TOS and/or Splash page about their turn around time. Not all, but over
time you will see which ones are honest and speedy. I have my favorite go to
stores for when I need stuff fast.
Miro
|
well doubt buyer feedback is being honest considering you have sellers who leave
a negative feedback when a buyer leaves a neutral because of slow shipping (6
days for a 1 part order).
the way this system is designed sellers can hold feedback hostage, plain and
simple as a buyer I do not leave feedback till after the seller does, regardless
of how the order went, as a seller I leave feedback once the order is shipped,
but that is because I have faith in how I process and ship orders and my feedback
speaks to that(not a single neutral or negative feedback ever received as a seller).
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 28, 2015 11:10 | | Subject: | Re: Dealing with orders | | Viewed: | 73 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, fosterbengoshi writes:
| | In Suggestions, tsrplatelayer writes:
I don't know what is in that link, but it made my computer go absolutely
bonkers! It also caused me to lose work I had been doing for the past hour. Aaarrrggghhh!!!
Thor
|
which is why I make it a habit of not clicking links to unknown sites
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 26, 2015 16:15 | | Subject: | Re: Note Whether Official or Non-Official Post | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, RobErNat writes:
| | In Suggestions, fosterbengoshi writes:
| | In Suggestions, therobo writes:
Is that no in your official capacity as BrickLink Catalog Administrator or in
your capacity as therobo, owner of Area of Bricks n' Studs?
Thor
|
To quote yourself:
you try to make something that is grey into a black and white issue
voted NO as well, as it's usually clear when an Admin expresses his/her personal
opinions, compared to 'official' statements.
|
actually its not so clear, I've always been of the opinion that a moderator
should only have one opinion, that of the site, not their own.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 26, 2015 16:14 | | Subject: | Re: Note Whether Official or Non-Official Post | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, fosterbengoshi writes:
| | Forum moderators are not just forum moderators. They are sellers, buyers, BL
members and AFOLs just like the rest of us. And they have their own personal
opinions on many things, just like the rest of us. However, it is sometimes confusing
to know whether a forum moderator is posting in their official capacity as a
BrickLink forum moderator or in their own personal capacity as a seller, buyer,
member or AFOL. Therefore, I propose having a checbox moderators should check
only if they are posting in their official capacity as a BrickLink forum moderator.
If the box is not checked, then their post can be considered their own opinion
or comment, rather than BrickLink's. Of course, for this to work, we need
a little icon next to their name if this checkbox has been checked.
Come to think of it, this suggestion might equally apply to other BrickLink admins
and sub-admins as well. It would be helpful and will avoid misunderstandings
to know if someone with dual capacity as an official BrickLink representative
and private BL member is posting on behalf of BrickLink or themselves. Among
other things, this may help BrickLink avoid legal issues, such as being held
accountable for the personal comments of its representatives.
Thor
|
to be honest I think the BL members account and moderator account should be separate,
in other words they would be anonymous they would log under a Moderator account
for moderating and their own account for their own stuff.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 26, 2015 12:10 | | Subject: | Re: Ability to duplicate Wanted list | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, therobo writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | Ok this just might be me, but i'd like to have the ability to duplicate my
wanted lists, so if I have a wanted list and want another or two or so of
the same list for the same project but multiples of i'd like to be able to
make a copy of my list into another wanted list without having to make the list
all over again.
|
Select Copy below the page.
|
wheres that? or is that to copy the page on paper?
|
oh your talking on the edit screen, problem is you still need to transfer each
item individually, I'd like to transfer the whole list in one click and not
hundreds of clicks.
|
You can select the whole "Move" column at the top of the list, set it to 50 items
per page, then select "copy" on the bottom. That makes about 30 clicks and you
have copied all items.
|
been doing that still 10 pages at 50 items per page x 5, and already screwed
up and clicked move instead of copy, this way is redundant.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 26, 2015 11:53 | | Subject: | Re: Ability to duplicate Wanted list | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | Ok this just might be me, but i'd like to have the ability to duplicate my
wanted lists, so if I have a wanted list and want another or two or so of
the same list for the same project but multiples of i'd like to be able to
make a copy of my list into another wanted list without having to make the list
all over again.
|
Select Copy below the page.
|
to give you a better understanding of what I mean I have a wanted list which
consists of 23 pages at 20 items per page that I want to make 5 of (yes big projects)
to currently do this I have to do one page at a time and copy them 5 times, so
i'm going to have to click the move all button (all on page) 23 times, move
the scroll from move to copy 23 times and click the new folder 23 times and I
have to do that 5 times, that's a lot of clicking i'm doing right now.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 26, 2015 11:39 | | Subject: | Re: Ability to duplicate Wanted list | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | Ok this just might be me, but i'd like to have the ability to duplicate my
wanted lists, so if I have a wanted list and want another or two or so of
the same list for the same project but multiples of i'd like to be able to
make a copy of my list into another wanted list without having to make the list
all over again.
|
Select Copy below the page.
|
wheres that? or is that to copy the page on paper?
|
oh your talking on the edit screen, problem is you still need to transfer each
item individually, I'd like to transfer the whole list in one click and not
hundreds of clicks.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 26, 2015 11:35 | | Subject: | Re: Ability to duplicate Wanted list | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | Ok this just might be me, but i'd like to have the ability to duplicate my
wanted lists, so if I have a wanted list and want another or two or so of
the same list for the same project but multiples of i'd like to be able to
make a copy of my list into another wanted list without having to make the list
all over again.
|
Select Copy below the page.
|
wheres that? or is that to copy the page on paper?
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 26, 2015 11:24 | | Subject: | Ability to duplicate Wanted list | | Viewed: | 83 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | | Status: | Implemented | |
|
| Ok this just might be me, but i'd like to have the ability to duplicate my
wanted lists, so if I have a wanted list and want another or two or so of
the same list for the same project but multiples of i'd like to be able to
make a copy of my list into another wanted list without having to make the list
all over again.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 23, 2015 19:48 | | Subject: | Re: Add 'Customs Fraud' to option to cancel order | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, blackballoon writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, kzinti writes:
| | Is a law any less a law because you don't agree with it? I concur that a
witch hunt is not called for, however, could we simply agree that it is illegal
and that Buyers should stop asking?
US Code Title 13 Chapter 9 Section 305: Penalties for unlawful export information
activities:
(a) CRIMINAL PENALTIES.—
(1) FAILURE TO FILE; SUBMISSION OF FALSE OR
MISLEADING INFORMATION.—Any person who
knowingly fails to file or knowingly submits
false or misleading export information
through the Shippers Export Declaration
(SED) (or any successor document) or the
Automated Export System (AES) shall be subject
to a fine not to exceed $10,000 per violation
or imprisonment for not more than 5
years, or both
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2010-title13/pdf/USCODE-2010-title13-chap9.pdf
|
True alright. But still, someone simply.. disagree  Law itself doesn't
impress me (e.g. during WW2 hiding people was
We can initate heated debates over following law vs. acting on personal persuasion,
but at the end of the day, there'll always be those two kinds of people.
The one who says 'I'll have to ship this in two batches to keep it below
the critical value', and the other who says 'nobody would benefit from
that' might as well ship it at once and write down half the value on it.
It shouldn't really matter what someone's position on law is. I've
noticed that to some people here that's hard to swallow an law is almost
holy, but.. really. I'm not saying you have to condone the other, but a simple
refusal should suffice. Nobody should of course do anything against their principles.
I always get a bit uneasy when these kinds of topics arise, because I feel people
get judged overly harsh. Many people just got out of their dark age, are young,
and are not aware that what they're asking is considered by some people to
be very malicious. Or people live in a country where parcels get stolen if they're
valuable, and they really want to have Lego as a hobby. It's easy for us
to judge people in that situation. And there could be other reasons.
From my point of view, for example, fishing is barbarous and immoral, but I'm
still able to be on perfectly fine civil terms with Americans who like to go
fishing with their son and I appreciate that's considered a nice and bonding
family activity. I wouldn't want "buyer participates in fishing" as a reason
to cancel an order either Let's just disagree with each other whenever
we feel like it and focus on getting the Lego from the one end to the other.
Once a point is reached where a mutual deal cannot be reached and someone is
getting forced to break their own principles, it's time to resort to cancellation.
|
sure, lie on the customs form its no risk to the buyer, all the risk is on the
seller, how would you feel if you receiving the package took on all the risk?
but until then I'm not breaking the law and taking such a huge risk because
a buyer wants to save a few bucks.
|
Actually the reality is the exact opposite. Putting aside all the legalese and
"technical" legal ramifications, this is the risk in reality:
1) Buyer has to pay the full customs duties owed
2) Buyer risks being known by local postal workers to receive many underdeclared
packages, so they may scrutinize his items more closely
3) The package could potentially be returned, in which case the buyer may have
to pay to have it shipped again.
Since no one is going to arrest or report or bring any legal action whatsoever
over a $100 package (it just does not happen in the real world. Regulators are
concerned about nabbing the $100 million corporate export cheaters instead),
the seller faces no practical risk whatsoever.
So really, the buyer bears all the risk. Seller faces no practical risk. You
might say "But...but... but... legally...technically... its still.... but but
but!"
To which i say, nice tinfoil hat. Have fun standing in your own way of making
a profit.
INTERNATIONAL BUYERS ALWAYS WELCOME IN MY STORE. CONTACT ME FOR SPECIAL SHIPPING
QUOTES
|
i'm not gonna bother with you, you will ignore the facts and when you finally
get popped you can cry its the buyers fault all you want, but your the one who
will suffer, since the buyer will deny anything about the reduced amount while
you the seller is the one who committed the crime, its a sorry state of affairs
how our education system has sunk so low that the results are a joke. good luck
and welcome to my ignore list.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 23, 2015 13:10 | | Subject: | Re: Add 'Customs Fraud' to option to cancel order | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, blackballoon writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, blackballoon writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, blackballoon writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, LordSkylark writes:
| | Please add
"Buyer wanted seller to lie on custom's form"
as an option for the seller to cancel the order.
Andy
|
I take it you meant
"Buyer demanded"
I think that's an important difference. Just asking for it shouldn't
be cause for a seller to freak out and cancel the order. If a buyer demands it
(like demanding a lower price. which is already in there as one of the reasons)
then that is a legitimate deal breaker.
|
Has that ever stopped the thought police from trying to regulate our speech ?
Pretty soon they will be calling for a checkbox to cancel an order if the buyer
asks about the weather in the seller's country.
Customs fraud is law made and enforced by government(s). Bricklink is not a
government. Even if a buyer breaks a legal contract here on bricklink, it would
be a matter for the courts to handle, not bricklink.
Since when is asking a question a crime ? Last i checked, you usually have to
act in order to face consequences. Besides, the seller already has the ability
to cancel an order for almost any reason they desire, so long as it is part of
their store terms.
|
http://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=1919
part 13:
General Compliance with Laws:
You shall comply with all applicable laws, statutes, ordinances and regulations
regarding your use of our service and your listing, purchase and sale of items.
part 9:
Breach:
We reserve the right to terminate your membership, delete all of your data and
deny you access to any or all of your data stored at BrickLink.com if you breach
this Agreement or if we are unable to verify or authenticate any information
you provide to us. We also reserve the right to terminate your membership, delete
all of your data and deny you access to any or all of the site's features
at any time for any reason without prior notice.
So by BL's ToS by asking someone to break the law BL could find you in breach
of the contract and delete your account.
|
That is a default website disclaimer, bringing that up is an argument that could
be used to defend any reason to punish a buyer under discussion. Yes,
your membership can be terminated for any reason whatsoever, fair or unfair,
logical or unlogical, that's true.
The again, a forum topic on customs fraud has previously been censored by the
moderators, so it wouldn't surprise me if they'd ban someone for it.
|
its clear and simple, customs fraud is against the law, so don't ask, plain
and simple.
|
Committing customs fraud is against the law. You are free to ask
for it all day long.
|
no, it is against the law to solicit a criminal act. in other words asking someone
to commit a crime is against the law, only difference is in soliciting the person
asking is committing the crime, committing the crime is the one doing it.
|
Alright, well i can see you are just going to keep responding with more and more
outlandish replies and legal definitions and fine print. I am not a lawyer,
but usually what you are talking about refers to much more well defined contracts
for prostitution or murder etc. Here on bricklink, we buy and sell typically
low value lego orders. No one is getting their account terminated,no one is
going to jail, no one is i plementing any checkboxes for asking questions, so
all of this is overblown moot discussion nonsense
Please reserve the forum for serious discussion that actually impacts us....
thank you....
|
actually the solicitation of a criminal act is serious believe it or not and
asking someone to lie on an official government form is also very serious too
and a crime.
|
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 23, 2015 12:57 | | Subject: | Re: Add 'Customs Fraud' to option to cancel order | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, blackballoon writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, blackballoon writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, LordSkylark writes:
| | Please add
"Buyer wanted seller to lie on custom's form"
as an option for the seller to cancel the order.
Andy
|
I take it you meant
"Buyer demanded"
I think that's an important difference. Just asking for it shouldn't
be cause for a seller to freak out and cancel the order. If a buyer demands it
(like demanding a lower price. which is already in there as one of the reasons)
then that is a legitimate deal breaker.
|
Has that ever stopped the thought police from trying to regulate our speech ?
Pretty soon they will be calling for a checkbox to cancel an order if the buyer
asks about the weather in the seller's country.
Customs fraud is law made and enforced by government(s). Bricklink is not a
government. Even if a buyer breaks a legal contract here on bricklink, it would
be a matter for the courts to handle, not bricklink.
Since when is asking a question a crime ? Last i checked, you usually have to
act in order to face consequences. Besides, the seller already has the ability
to cancel an order for almost any reason they desire, so long as it is part of
their store terms.
|
http://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=1919
part 13:
General Compliance with Laws:
You shall comply with all applicable laws, statutes, ordinances and regulations
regarding your use of our service and your listing, purchase and sale of items.
part 9:
Breach:
We reserve the right to terminate your membership, delete all of your data and
deny you access to any or all of your data stored at BrickLink.com if you breach
this Agreement or if we are unable to verify or authenticate any information
you provide to us. We also reserve the right to terminate your membership, delete
all of your data and deny you access to any or all of the site's features
at any time for any reason without prior notice.
So by BL's ToS by asking someone to break the law BL could find you in breach
of the contract and delete your account.
|
That is a default website disclaimer, bringing that up is an argument that could
be used to defend any reason to punish a buyer under discussion. Yes,
your membership can be terminated for any reason whatsoever, fair or unfair,
logical or unlogical, that's true.
The again, a forum topic on customs fraud has previously been censored by the
moderators, so it wouldn't surprise me if they'd ban someone for it.
|
its clear and simple, customs fraud is against the law, so don't ask, plain
and simple.
|
Committing customs fraud is against the law. You are free to ask
for it all day long.
|
no, it is against the law to solicit a criminal act. in other words asking someone
to commit a crime is against the law, only difference is in soliciting the person
asking is committing the crime, committing the crime is the one doing it.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 23, 2015 12:54 | | Subject: | Re: Add 'Customs Fraud' to option to cancel order | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, blackballoon writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, blackballoon writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, blackballoon writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, LordSkylark writes:
| | Please add
"Buyer wanted seller to lie on custom's form"
as an option for the seller to cancel the order.
Andy
|
I take it you meant
"Buyer demanded"
I think that's an important difference. Just asking for it shouldn't
be cause for a seller to freak out and cancel the order. If a buyer demands it
(like demanding a lower price. which is already in there as one of the reasons)
then that is a legitimate deal breaker.
|
Has that ever stopped the thought police from trying to regulate our speech ?
Pretty soon they will be calling for a checkbox to cancel an order if the buyer
asks about the weather in the seller's country.
Customs fraud is law made and enforced by government(s). Bricklink is not a
government. Even if a buyer breaks a legal contract here on bricklink, it would
be a matter for the courts to handle, not bricklink.
Since when is asking a question a crime ? Last i checked, you usually have to
act in order to face consequences. Besides, the seller already has the ability
to cancel an order for almost any reason they desire, so long as it is part of
their store terms.
|
Yup, rather than defining the buyer, maybe we should have a checkbox "seller
flips out when asked to commit customs fraud". That'd solve everything, the
sellers who get offended by the question can check that box and will not get
it that often anymore. And when they do they can point to the checkbox and get
legitimately angry and stoplist the buyer
But you're right, asking this should never be punished. It's not an illegal
action, it's not a faillure to reach an agreement at the point of asking,
and it is not a personal insult.
|
so when a person asks another person to kill someone, that's not against
the law? even though no crime has been committed?
|
i am not a lawyer but i am pretty sure you would need a consiberable amount of
court-admissible evidence to convict someone based on just asking another person
to kill somebody, if no killing or attempt to kill has taken place. For all you
know, the person might just be joking.
|
you would be surprised, you should watch the news more often.
|
OK mr. tinfoil hat
|
actually its called criminal solicitation, and while not as severe as the actual
crime, it is a crime.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 23, 2015 12:53 | | Subject: | Re: Add 'Customs Fraud' to option to cancel order | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, blackballoon writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, LordSkylark writes:
| | Please add
"Buyer wanted seller to lie on custom's form"
as an option for the seller to cancel the order.
Andy
|
I take it you meant
"Buyer demanded"
I think that's an important difference. Just asking for it shouldn't
be cause for a seller to freak out and cancel the order. If a buyer demands it
(like demanding a lower price. which is already in there as one of the reasons)
then that is a legitimate deal breaker.
|
Has that ever stopped the thought police from trying to regulate our speech ?
Pretty soon they will be calling for a checkbox to cancel an order if the buyer
asks about the weather in the seller's country.
Customs fraud is law made and enforced by government(s). Bricklink is not a
government. Even if a buyer breaks a legal contract here on bricklink, it would
be a matter for the courts to handle, not bricklink.
Since when is asking a question a crime ? Last i checked, you usually have to
act in order to face consequences. Besides, the seller already has the ability
to cancel an order for almost any reason they desire, so long as it is part of
their store terms.
|
http://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=1919
part 13:
General Compliance with Laws:
You shall comply with all applicable laws, statutes, ordinances and regulations
regarding your use of our service and your listing, purchase and sale of items.
part 9:
Breach:
We reserve the right to terminate your membership, delete all of your data and
deny you access to any or all of your data stored at BrickLink.com if you breach
this Agreement or if we are unable to verify or authenticate any information
you provide to us. We also reserve the right to terminate your membership, delete
all of your data and deny you access to any or all of the site's features
at any time for any reason without prior notice.
So by BL's ToS by asking someone to break the law BL could find you in breach
of the contract and delete your account.
|
That is a default website disclaimer, bringing that up is an argument that could
be used to defend any reason to punish a buyer under discussion. Yes,
your membership can be terminated for any reason whatsoever, fair or unfair,
logical or unlogical, that's true.
The again, a forum topic on customs fraud has previously been censored by the
moderators, so it wouldn't surprise me if they'd ban someone for it.
|
its clear and simple, customs fraud is against the law, so don't ask, plain
and simple.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 23, 2015 12:50 | | Subject: | Re: Add 'Customs Fraud' to option to cancel order | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, blackballoon writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, blackballoon writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, LordSkylark writes:
| | Please add
"Buyer wanted seller to lie on custom's form"
as an option for the seller to cancel the order.
Andy
|
I take it you meant
"Buyer demanded"
I think that's an important difference. Just asking for it shouldn't
be cause for a seller to freak out and cancel the order. If a buyer demands it
(like demanding a lower price. which is already in there as one of the reasons)
then that is a legitimate deal breaker.
|
Has that ever stopped the thought police from trying to regulate our speech ?
Pretty soon they will be calling for a checkbox to cancel an order if the buyer
asks about the weather in the seller's country.
Customs fraud is law made and enforced by government(s). Bricklink is not a
government. Even if a buyer breaks a legal contract here on bricklink, it would
be a matter for the courts to handle, not bricklink.
Since when is asking a question a crime ? Last i checked, you usually have to
act in order to face consequences. Besides, the seller already has the ability
to cancel an order for almost any reason they desire, so long as it is part of
their store terms.
|
Yup, rather than defining the buyer, maybe we should have a checkbox "seller
flips out when asked to commit customs fraud". That'd solve everything, the
sellers who get offended by the question can check that box and will not get
it that often anymore. And when they do they can point to the checkbox and get
legitimately angry and stoplist the buyer
But you're right, asking this should never be punished. It's not an illegal
action, it's not a faillure to reach an agreement at the point of asking,
and it is not a personal insult.
|
so when a person asks another person to kill someone, that's not against
the law? even though no crime has been committed?
|
i am not a lawyer but i am pretty sure you would need a consiberable amount of
court-admissible evidence to convict someone based on just asking another person
to kill somebody, if no killing or attempt to kill has taken place. For all you
know, the person might just be joking.
|
you would be surprised, you should watch the news more often.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 23, 2015 12:40 | | Subject: | Re: Add 'Customs Fraud' to option to cancel order | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, blackballoon writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, LordSkylark writes:
| | Please add
"Buyer wanted seller to lie on custom's form"
as an option for the seller to cancel the order.
Andy
|
I take it you meant
"Buyer demanded"
I think that's an important difference. Just asking for it shouldn't
be cause for a seller to freak out and cancel the order. If a buyer demands it
(like demanding a lower price. which is already in there as one of the reasons)
then that is a legitimate deal breaker.
|
Has that ever stopped the thought police from trying to regulate our speech ?
Pretty soon they will be calling for a checkbox to cancel an order if the buyer
asks about the weather in the seller's country.
Customs fraud is law made and enforced by government(s). Bricklink is not a
government. Even if a buyer breaks a legal contract here on bricklink, it would
be a matter for the courts to handle, not bricklink.
Since when is asking a question a crime ? Last i checked, you usually have to
act in order to face consequences. Besides, the seller already has the ability
to cancel an order for almost any reason they desire, so long as it is part of
their store terms.
|
Yup, rather than defining the buyer, maybe we should have a checkbox "seller
flips out when asked to commit customs fraud". That'd solve everything, the
sellers who get offended by the question can check that box and will not get
it that often anymore. And when they do they can point to the checkbox and get
legitimately angry and stoplist the buyer
But you're right, asking this should never be punished. It's not an illegal
action, it's not a faillure to reach an agreement at the point of asking,
and it is not a personal insult.
|
so when a person asks another person to kill someone, that's not against
the law? even though no crime has been committed?
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 23, 2015 12:38 | | Subject: | Re: Add 'Customs Fraud' to option to cancel order | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, blackballoon writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, blackballoon writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, LordSkylark writes:
| | Please add
"Buyer wanted seller to lie on custom's form"
as an option for the seller to cancel the order.
Andy
|
I take it you meant
"Buyer demanded"
I think that's an important difference. Just asking for it shouldn't
be cause for a seller to freak out and cancel the order. If a buyer demands it
(like demanding a lower price. which is already in there as one of the reasons)
then that is a legitimate deal breaker.
|
Has that ever stopped the thought police from trying to regulate our speech ?
Pretty soon they will be calling for a checkbox to cancel an order if the buyer
asks about the weather in the seller's country.
Customs fraud is law made and enforced by government(s). Bricklink is not a
government. Even if a buyer breaks a legal contract here on bricklink, it would
be a matter for the courts to handle, not bricklink.
Since when is asking a question a crime ? Last i checked, you usually have to
act in order to face consequences. Besides, the seller already has the ability
to cancel an order for almost any reason they desire, so long as it is part of
their store terms.
|
http://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=1919
part 13:
General Compliance with Laws:
You shall comply with all applicable laws, statutes, ordinances and regulations
regarding your use of our service and your listing, purchase and sale of items.
part 9:
Breach:
We reserve the right to terminate your membership, delete all of your data and
deny you access to any or all of your data stored at BrickLink.com if you breach
this Agreement or if we are unable to verify or authenticate any information
you provide to us. We also reserve the right to terminate your membership, delete
all of your data and deny you access to any or all of the site's features
at any time for any reason without prior notice.
So by BL's ToS by asking someone to break the law BL could find you in breach
of the contract and delete your account.
|
Do you know by chance where I can get one of those tinfoil hats you are wearing?
|
are you advocating that we break the law and break BL's ToS ? and how long
you want to be a member here?
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 23, 2015 12:37 | | Subject: | Re: Add 'Customs Fraud' to option to cancel order | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, blackballoon writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
Oh God, not an inspection of your mother's package! That is the truly harsh
punishment for a most heinous crime.
Thanks for providing those links to multi-million dollar customs fraud cases.
You have just proved that all of this hoopla about customs fraud is so far overblown
it is almost ridiculous.
Let me know when you locate the news story about the "Lego seller arrested for
illegally declaring $100 parcel to Singapore as only $10"
|
oh there won't be news stories about that, but they do happen, and my mothers
package was checked for customs declaration.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 23, 2015 12:28 | | Subject: | Re: Add 'Customs Fraud' to option to cancel order | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, blackballoon writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, LordSkylark writes:
| | Please add
"Buyer wanted seller to lie on custom's form"
as an option for the seller to cancel the order.
Andy
|
I take it you meant
"Buyer demanded"
I think that's an important difference. Just asking for it shouldn't
be cause for a seller to freak out and cancel the order. If a buyer demands it
(like demanding a lower price. which is already in there as one of the reasons)
then that is a legitimate deal breaker.
|
Has that ever stopped the thought police from trying to regulate our speech ?
Pretty soon they will be calling for a checkbox to cancel an order if the buyer
asks about the weather in the seller's country.
Customs fraud is law made and enforced by government(s). Bricklink is not a
government. Even if a buyer breaks a legal contract here on bricklink, it would
be a matter for the courts to handle, not bricklink.
Since when is asking a question a crime ? Last i checked, you usually have to
act in order to face consequences. Besides, the seller already has the ability
to cancel an order for almost any reason they desire, so long as it is part of
their store terms.
|
http://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=1919
part 13:
General Compliance with Laws:
You shall comply with all applicable laws, statutes, ordinances and regulations
regarding your use of our service and your listing, purchase and sale of items.
part 9:
Breach:
We reserve the right to terminate your membership, delete all of your data and
deny you access to any or all of your data stored at BrickLink.com if you breach
this Agreement or if we are unable to verify or authenticate any information
you provide to us. We also reserve the right to terminate your membership, delete
all of your data and deny you access to any or all of the site's features
at any time for any reason without prior notice.
So by BL's ToS by asking someone to break the law BL could find you in breach
of the contract and delete your account.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 23, 2015 12:17 | | Subject: | Re: Add 'Customs Fraud' to option to cancel order | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, blackballoon writes:
| | In Suggestions, Legopeter writes:
| | Has anyone ever heard of anyone ever getting into the slightest difficulty after
committing this horrible crime, worse than murder, rape or genocide altogether?
Peter
|
My cousin's friend's sister's uncle's hairstylist's mother's
automechanic SWEARS that a package he sent in the 1990's was held by the
local post office and marked "ADDITIONAL POSTAGE DUE" upon delivery of a $200
package declared as $50
Customs Fraud typicallly applies to commercial shipments of very large value
(for example, shipment of $100 million of new microprocessors declared as $1
million by corporate tax cheaters, or a $50 million Picasso painting smuggled
across borders declared as $50 value). There is an option on the USPS website
to select if the package contents are below or above $2,500 which is the current
"commercial shipment" threshhold value which will likely require a customs broker.
|
that's for shipments into the US.
|
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 23, 2015 11:58 | | Subject: | Re: Add 'Customs Fraud' to option to cancel order | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | it does not mean he has to break the law, its like you asking him to go rob a
liquor store, would you ask someone to go commit a robbery? that's what your
doing.
|
If someone would ask me to rob a liquor store, I'd simply say no. If I'd
catch them doing it themselves, I'd call the authorities.
Again, these comparisons are (regardless of their validity) highly subjective.
I, for example, would not consider an inaccurate value declaration more offending
than asking for a lower price. Asking for a lower price for no logical reason
is much more offending to me as it implies the buyer wants to get ahead of other
buyers which to my moral compass is much more selfish. But these things are personal
so I will send a friendly reply in either case. To you it feels like being asked
to rob a liquor store. To a guy from another country it feels like asking whether
a seller would help them increase the likelihood of an order arriving without
being stolen.
I think people who get angry over this question just need to snap out of it and
understand that the buyer did not intend any offense. It seems some people blow
this hugely out of proportion in their minds, thinking "oh my god, this buyer
is implying that I'm the sort of person that'd commit crimes, they're
saying that I'm a horrible person, I'm so offended"
So let's just...
"Hi seller, could you please write a lower value on the package?"
"Thank you for your inquiry. I'm afraid I can't do that for you. What
you are asking is actually illegal, and I have chosen for my business to be 100%
in accordance with the law. My apologies for the inconvenience."
Repeat after me...
|
but it is very accurate, to ask someone to lie on the customs form is asking
them to break the law, a crime that can have prison time and a fine, pretty much
what happens if you rob a liquor store.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 23, 2015 10:54 | | Subject: | Re: Add 'Customs Fraud' to option to cancel order | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | What I mean is, your experience seems to illustrate my point: You have to find
a way to work with other people in a way that agrees with your own terms. So
rather than boycotting everything and everyone, we promote what we stand for
and either do the job that way, or not at all.
Following the logic of "buyer asked for inaccurate customs declaration" as a
reason to break off the deal, I would have to boycot all of the post offices
here as well, as they all sympathise with inaccurate customs declarations. Yes,
I am aware it is illegal, but what I mean is; I have no problem with simply pointing
out which way I will have it. Otherwise, I would be out of business because
there'd be no place left where I could ship out my orders (Besides, the
bare fact of something being illegal doesn't impress me very much in and
of itself, running a red light is illegal too but I and alot of other people
do it frequently when there's no harm in it. Laws serve people, people don't
serve laws.)
I understand it is annoying to get messages asking do to this when you won't,
and you have to tell that over and over again. However, I don't think that's
a significant workload compared to other types of inquiries we're getting.
To me it's proper customer service to simply point out what can and what
cannot be done in a friendly way.
|
it does not mean he has to break the law, its like you asking him to go rob a
liquor store, would you ask someone to go commit a robbery? that's what your
doing.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 23, 2015 10:51 | | Subject: | Re: Add 'Customs Fraud' to option to cancel order | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, kzinti writes:
| | Is a law any less a law because you don't agree with it? I concur that a
witch hunt is not called for, however, could we simply agree that it is illegal
and that Buyers should stop asking?
US Code Title 13 Chapter 9 Section 305: Penalties for unlawful export information
activities:
(a) CRIMINAL PENALTIES.—
(1) FAILURE TO FILE; SUBMISSION OF FALSE OR
MISLEADING INFORMATION.—Any person who
knowingly fails to file or knowingly submits
false or misleading export information
through the Shippers Export Declaration
(SED) (or any successor document) or the
Automated Export System (AES) shall be subject
to a fine not to exceed $10,000 per violation
or imprisonment for not more than 5
years, or both
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2010-title13/pdf/USCODE-2010-title13-chap9.pdf
|
True alright. But still, someone simply.. disagree Law itself doesn't
impress me (e.g. during WW2 hiding people was
We can initate heated debates over following law vs. acting on personal persuasion,
but at the end of the day, there'll always be those two kinds of people.
The one who says 'I'll have to ship this in two batches to keep it below
the critical value', and the other who says 'nobody would benefit from
that' might as well ship it at once and write down half the value on it.
It shouldn't really matter what someone's position on law is. I've
noticed that to some people here that's hard to swallow an law is almost
holy, but.. really. I'm not saying you have to condone the other, but a simple
refusal should suffice. Nobody should of course do anything against their principles.
I always get a bit uneasy when these kinds of topics arise, because I feel people
get judged overly harsh. Many people just got out of their dark age, are young,
and are not aware that what they're asking is considered by some people to
be very malicious. Or people live in a country where parcels get stolen if they're
valuable, and they really want to have Lego as a hobby. It's easy for us
to judge people in that situation. And there could be other reasons.
From my point of view, for example, fishing is barbarous and immoral, but I'm
still able to be on perfectly fine civil terms with Americans who like to go
fishing with their son and I appreciate that's considered a nice and bonding
family activity. I wouldn't want "buyer participates in fishing" as a reason
to cancel an order either Let's just disagree with each other whenever
we feel like it and focus on getting the Lego from the one end to the other.
Once a point is reached where a mutual deal cannot be reached and someone is
getting forced to break their own principles, it's time to resort to cancellation.
|
sure, lie on the customs form its no risk to the buyer, all the risk is on the
seller, how would you feel if you receiving the package took on all the risk?
but until then I'm not breaking the law and taking such a huge risk because
a buyer wants to save a few bucks.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 22, 2015 16:30 | | Subject: | Re: Checkboxes to describe sellers (part II) | | Viewed: | 21 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, eileenkeeney writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| |
and yet people lie even in their own terms and splash pages, so why wouldn't
they lie on a button? now excuse me had an order from another site get paid and
must be off to the post office so they get it soon.
|
We can not expect perfection here.
I can not think of any perfect answer.
Those who will try to deceive will try no matter what the system is.
As for terms that reflect how much a person will be charged, auto-checkout seems
to be a superior solution for preventing issues.
But it also potentially leads to higher costs, since a perfect algorithm for
determining the cheapest possible shipping is probably not available (it would
need to know the exact shape of each piece, and apply some very complicated geometry).
As for shipping time, The few times I want a piece quickly, I do look for a mention
of shipping times either in the store terms, the splash page, or within the seller's
feedback.
More often I am just patient. Sometimes I am even patient enough to order from
a store that I know will take a long time to ship, since I also know they won't
rip me off.
If you are likely to take 7 days to ship, do you really want business from a
customer who will be unhappy with this?
Or is the issue more that you normally will provide a certain level of service,
but do not want to promise that level of service, but also do not want to be
excluded from searches of buyers wanting that level of service?
Then we have to ask if it is ok to check a box, indicating you will ship within
3 days, if you expect to meet this goal for most (but not all) orders.
|
well i'm currently in an issue with one store which said they are having
delays in shipping but orders will go out in 5-10 days maybe sooner, after 10
days no order shipped emailed them, they told me its 10 business days and supposedly
my order will ship today, supposedly.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 22, 2015 15:46 | | Subject: | Re: Add 'Customs Fraud' to option to cancel order | | Viewed: | 73 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, LordSkylark writes:
| | Please add
"Buyer wanted seller to lie on custom's form"
as an option for the seller to cancel the order.
Andy
|
ok this I can sign up for.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 22, 2015 14:23 | | Subject: | Re: include/exclude superlots from pricelist | | Viewed: | 23 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Remko100 writes:
| | Hi,
I would like to see an option (like complete/incomplete) for excluding supelots
from the pricelist. It completeley messes up average pricings, because some people
make one lot of their superlot outrageous high in price and the others just 1
cent. It would be nice if people would use more realistic pricing, but I don't
think that's gonna happen, so that's why I propose this.
How do I get a vote button???
Kind regards,
Remko van Rosmalen
|
got my seal of approval, i'd like to also make it an option where all superlots
can be excluded from searches if not already so.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 22, 2015 13:59 | | Subject: | Re: Checkboxes to describe sellers (part II) | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, renhoffman writes:
| | I vote no. If implimented, I would not allow cancelations, which would certainly
hurt my business, by excluding my store in some searches, even though this is
a BL policy. I have allowed cancelations in the past, and will most likely do
so again in the future.
Darren
|
but see you would have the choice, the option, while not having your store penalized
by being excluded from searches.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 22, 2015 12:59 | | Subject: | Re: Checkboxes to describe sellers (part II) | | Viewed: | 20 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, FigBits writes:
| | In Suggestions, mabccc writes:
| | | | And it's a suggestion. Nobody is forcing anything on anyone.
|
The choice of filters available will force sellers into certain behaviour.
|
It will "force" them to either check or not check the box. Their behaviour is
not forced at all.
| | If choice is offered, then some buyers will tick it. That excludes sellers if
they do not offer that service. So who gets to choose the range of services offered?
If BL offers one day handling, some buyers will select it. That will give sellers
that say they do one day handling a better chance of getting an order.
|
It will give sellers a better chance of getting orders from people who really
want their orders shipped quickly. Absolutely. Which is precisely as it should
be.
--
Marc.
|
and yet people lie even in their own terms and splash pages, so why wouldn't
they lie on a button? now excuse me had an order from another site get paid and
must be off to the post office so they get it soon.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 22, 2015 12:56 | | Subject: | Re: Checkboxes to describe sellers (part II) | | Viewed: | 23 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, fosterbengoshi writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | because it, goes against certain laws in the US, stores can say whatever they
want advertising, but they can not be excluded because of what they do or do
not offer.
|
Please post said laws. I would love to see them.
Randy
|
it would be discrimination in its base form.
|
Rick, please cut out the legal arguments. They are absurd and you really don't
know what you are talking about here. Stick to the issue. You are not helping
with this legal nonsense.
Thor
|
yes oh legal master, as it goes though I consider it discrimination.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 22, 2015 12:55 | | Subject: | Re: Checkboxes to describe sellers (part II) | | Viewed: | 22 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, renhoffman writes:
| | | | if you advertise in your store, that's fine, but if you penalize other stores
because they do not do that, its called discrimination.
|
Is it illegal to tag the box on this page to exclude US stores?
http://www.bricklink.com/searchAdvanced.asp
This is what has been suggested, add a check-box for more options. Not illegal,
as far as I can tell.
Darren
|
no, since that is search parameters, are you also going to have a check list
for stores that will lie on customs forms? or stores that will not follow the
BL ToS? or stores that will . . . . . the list goes on and on, and yet those
are things buyers also want to know.
is it illegal to look for a seller in your own country? no, is it illegal to
exclude a class of sellers because they have a certain set of rules? yes.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 22, 2015 12:51 | | Subject: | Re: Checkboxes to describe sellers (part II) | | Viewed: | 21 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, FigBits writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, FigBits writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, mabccc writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, mabccc writes:
| | | | | | now that's something I'd like to see a banner waving over the price guide
of stores that ship within 24 hours of payment (1 business day), I'd like
that a lot more then this suggestion, and if a store clicks that banner then
they have to comply or the buyers order is free
|
I agree tht would be awesome. That is exactly the kind of thing I am suggesting.
Different stores are good at different things. Let them tell us in a systematic
way.
|
I still don't see how this helps buyers.
Sellers select it. They get the order from the buyer based on one day shipping.
They then take three days to pack it, they send it, and later apologize to the
buyer for something out of their control. The buyer gets their stuff two days
late. What do they do, leave negative feedback? Make a complaint to admin, and
admin bars the seller from using the 1-day shipping tag?
It makes a buyer feel they are getting something, when in reality a seller doesn't
have to do it.
|
no my comment was not about 1 day shipping, but one day service, the item will
be shipped out within one business day of payment being received, how long it
takes the post office to deliver is up to them.
|
By one day shipping, I meant one day turnaround to post.
|
well in my store that's what my customers got, was a fast turn around and
low shipping, and now I get an insult from this suggestion telling me I have
to have this button clicked or be removed from a bunch of searches, if I want
to be in searches I have to give up my freedom to say no.
and in a country founded in freedom I refuse to give up my right to freedom or
be penalized for using it.
|
You would absolutely still have the freedom to set your terms. You would only
lose the ability to hide them. I trust that you would not want to hide them.
I believe that you are an honest seller and would be fine with people knowing
your terms. My suggestion would make it easier to compare your terms with other
sellers.
--
Marc.
|
and whos hiding anything? my terms are the BL ToS, I comply with that, I will
not mutually cancel an order, and if a buyer comes across with a shipping to
high request I will NPB them for the mere fact I lose money on my shipping prices.
my terms are not hidden. but you would rather penalize me because I stand by
the BL ToS.
|
I don't want to penalize you at all. I want to make it easier for buyers
to find your store when you meet their needs.
You can ship orders within one dah. That is awesome. If ever I need parts in
a hurry, I want to be able to find your store and others like it, who are able
to do that. Right now, there is no easy way. I want there to be a way.
--
Marc.
|
because it would discriminate against stores or force them to lie, if stores
want to do that then they can advertise it in the store splash page or such.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 22, 2015 12:38 | | Subject: | Re: Checkboxes to describe sellers (part II) | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, FigBits writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, eileenkeeney writes:
| | If a buyer makes a choice to exclude you from their searches, based on your choice
to not offer a particular service, is that penalizing you?
|
when it is not service, yes. just because you will cancel an order no questions
asked, that's grandstanding not a service, especially why would a seller
cancel an order in my store? the options allowed by BL are few and far between,
their only option would really be shipping to high, which tells me the buyer
was just out to waste my time
|
Of course it is a service. It's just a service that some people want to provide,
and others don't. Which is fine!
I totally understand that some sellers want to take a hard line when it comes
to orders in their store. BrickLink allows them to. I also want them to have
that freedom. It's just not how I run my store. If a buyer placs an order
and then asks to cancel it because it's a full moon, I cancel it.
| | Also furthermore this suggestion could not be implemented since it would violate
some laws i'm sure, like not penalizing a store for not offering a service.
|
That's simply not true.
--
Marc.
|
if you advertise in your store, that's fine, but if you penalize other stores
because they do not do that, its called discrimination.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 22, 2015 12:29 | | Subject: | Re: Checkboxes to describe sellers (part II) | | Viewed: | 20 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, mabccc writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, mabccc writes:
| | | | You have the freedom to say No, and the buyers have the freedom to not include
you in their searches. The buyers also have the freedom to include you in their
searches.
So both sides have plenty of freedom.
If a buyer makes a choice to exclude you from their searches, based on your choice
to not offer a particular service, is that penalizing you?
|
Does it guarantee the service though?
Having a filter option raises buyer expectation. If I read a store's terms
and they say they aim for two day service and it turns out to be four, I don't
really care. However, if I search for stores that offer two day service and it
turns out to be four, I'm going to be more annoyed since I used that filter
in my search. So what can the buyer do? Not much. And that is the problem, everyone
could just tick the fast service checkbox and the filter becomes useless since
it doesn't filter out the ones that do vs the ones that don't since they
all say they do. The sellers that will be damaged are the honest ones. The ones
that know they can only get 95% of their orders out in two days, so don't
tick the fast service option so as not to disappoint the 5%.
|
well technically I was always able to get out my orders paid for with 1 business
day of being paid, but I took pride in my sales
|
So do I. Yet if I am suddenly ill, it might take an extra day. As an honest seller
should I say I can guarantee one day service on my orders or should I accept
that there is a small risk of not being able to do so for every order, and so
not tick the box?
|
illness never stopped me, for some reason my orders came in and went out with
speed, but then again I am weird.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 22, 2015 12:27 | | Subject: | Re: Checkboxes to describe sellers (part II) | | Viewed: | 20 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, FigBits writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, mabccc writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, mabccc writes:
| | | | | | now that's something I'd like to see a banner waving over the price guide
of stores that ship within 24 hours of payment (1 business day), I'd like
that a lot more then this suggestion, and if a store clicks that banner then
they have to comply or the buyers order is free
|
I agree tht would be awesome. That is exactly the kind of thing I am suggesting.
Different stores are good at different things. Let them tell us in a systematic
way.
|
I still don't see how this helps buyers.
Sellers select it. They get the order from the buyer based on one day shipping.
They then take three days to pack it, they send it, and later apologize to the
buyer for something out of their control. The buyer gets their stuff two days
late. What do they do, leave negative feedback? Make a complaint to admin, and
admin bars the seller from using the 1-day shipping tag?
It makes a buyer feel they are getting something, when in reality a seller doesn't
have to do it.
|
no my comment was not about 1 day shipping, but one day service, the item will
be shipped out within one business day of payment being received, how long it
takes the post office to deliver is up to them.
|
By one day shipping, I meant one day turnaround to post.
|
well in my store that's what my customers got, was a fast turn around and
low shipping, and now I get an insult from this suggestion telling me I have
to have this button clicked or be removed from a bunch of searches, if I want
to be in searches I have to give up my freedom to say no.
and in a country founded in freedom I refuse to give up my right to freedom or
be penalized for using it.
|
You would absolutely still have the freedom to set your terms. You would only
lose the ability to hide them. I trust that you would not want to hide them.
I believe that you are an honest seller and would be fine with people knowing
your terms. My suggestion would make it easier to compare your terms with other
sellers.
--
Marc.
|
and whos hiding anything? my terms are the BL ToS, I comply with that, I will
not mutually cancel an order, and if a buyer comes across with a shipping to
high request I will NPB them for the mere fact I lose money on my shipping prices.
my terms are not hidden. but you would rather penalize me because I stand by
the BL ToS.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 22, 2015 12:20 | | Subject: | Re: Checkboxes to describe sellers (part II) | | Viewed: | 17 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, mabccc writes:
| | | | You have the freedom to say No, and the buyers have the freedom to not include
you in their searches. The buyers also have the freedom to include you in their
searches.
So both sides have plenty of freedom.
If a buyer makes a choice to exclude you from their searches, based on your choice
to not offer a particular service, is that penalizing you?
|
Does it guarantee the service though?
Having a filter option raises buyer expectation. If I read a store's terms
and they say they aim for two day service and it turns out to be four, I don't
really care. However, if I search for stores that offer two day service and it
turns out to be four, I'm going to be more annoyed since I used that filter
in my search. So what can the buyer do? Not much. And that is the problem, everyone
could just tick the fast service checkbox and the filter becomes useless since
it doesn't filter out the ones that do vs the ones that don't since they
all say they do. The sellers that will be damaged are the honest ones. The ones
that know they can only get 95% of their orders out in two days, so don't
tick the fast service option so as not to disappoint the 5%.
|
well technically I was always able to get out my orders paid for with 1 business
day of being paid, but I took pride in my sales
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 22, 2015 12:16 | | Subject: | Re: Checkboxes to describe sellers (part II) | | Viewed: | 23 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | because it, goes against certain laws in the US, stores can say whatever they
want advertising, but they can not be excluded because of what they do or do
not offer.
|
Please post said laws. I would love to see them.
Randy
|
it would be discrimination in its base form.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 22, 2015 12:12 | | Subject: | Re: Checkboxes to describe sellers (part II) | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, FigBits writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, FigBits writes:
| | In Suggestions, mabccc writes:
| | | | *shrug* You are free to interpret it however you like. As I showed, though, there
is nothing in the suggestion that prevents sellers from being flexible. Exactly
how they can now be flexible with countries they ship to. The suggestion would
work in exactly the same way.
|
So how would it work, if a seller ticked the allow OCR without penalty then a
buyer is incredibly rude in their cancellation email or the buyer empties the
store then emails a day later with CANCEL THE LOT LOLZ? Where is the flexibility
for the seller to deny the request or file a NPB? They are breaking their terms
if they file a NPB.
|
The parallel is identical. If a seller says that they accept cancelation requests
with no penalty, then that's what it is. With shipping, if they say they
accept orders from Canada, then that's what it is. If a buyer wants to cancel,
done. If a buyer wants to ship to Canada, done.
The flexibility is on the other side. A seller can set up their store to NOT
ship to Canada, but still be flexible on the issue on a case-by-case basis. And
a seller could state that the DON'T automatically accept all cancelation
requests, but still be flexible on a case by case basis.
This is precisely how things are right now. The only difference is that one category
is easy for buyers to filter, and the other is not.
--
Marc.
|
thing their saying is, if a seller does not ship to Canada a Canadian will not
see their store, if a store does not accept OCR's then nobody who may file
an OCR will see their store, their stores will be excluded from searches.
|
That isn't true. I can see every single store that doesn't ship to Canada.
--
Marc.
|
unless you exclude stores that do not ship to you from the listings.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 22, 2015 12:06 | | Subject: | Re: Checkboxes to describe sellers (part II) | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, FigBits writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, FigBits writes:
| | Once again... if you want to discuss the ideas, please do. These personal attacks
are uncalled for.
I am at work. Do you want me to bring 53000 parts to work with me every morning?
I can post because I am between tasks and I have the internet.
--
Marc.
|
wish I had a job I could post all day on the forums and get paid for it.
my point is, don't go pointing out what problems others have if you have
problems of your own, clean up your yard first before telling your neighbor his
yard is filthy, and so on but I'm sure you get the gist of it.
|
Please dial it back.
I am not pointing out anyone's problems. The shipping delays in my store
are exactly what my suggestions would address. I want to be able to tell potential
buyers that they will not get their order shipped in a day or two. Buyers would
benefit from being able to filter OUT my store if they are in a hurry.
Why is that not a good thing?
--
Marc.
|
because it, goes against certain laws in the US, stores can say whatever they
want advertising, but they can not be excluded because of what they do or do
not offer.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 22, 2015 12:03 | | Subject: | Re: Checkboxes to describe sellers (part II) | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, eileenkeeney writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| |
well in my store that's what my customers got, was a fast turn around and
low shipping, and now I get an insult from this suggestion telling me I have
to have this button clicked or be removed from a bunch of searches, if I want
to be in searches I have to give up my freedom to say no.
and in a country founded in freedom I refuse to give up my right to freedom or
be penalized for using it.
|
You have the freedom to say No, and the buyers have the freedom to not include
you in their searches. The buyers also have the freedom to include you in their
searches.
So both sides have plenty of freedom.
If a buyer makes a choice to exclude you from their searches, based on your choice
to not offer a particular service, is that penalizing you?
|
when it is not service, yes. just because you will cancel an order no questions
asked, that's grandstanding not a service, especially why would a seller
cancel an order in my store? the options allowed by BL are few and far between,
their only option would really be shipping to high, which tells me the buyer
was just out to waste my time since my shipping fees are pretty much downright
low. only other option is a mutual agreement and my thought is, if the buyer
didn't want to shop in my store then why did they?
Also furthermore this suggestion could not be implemented since it would violate
some laws i'm sure, like not penalizing a store for not offering a service.
that would be like removing a store from the yellow pages because they do not
offer a bathroom to the non-paying public.
|
|
| Author: | Rick_S. | | Posted: | May 22, 2015 11:57 | | Subject: | Re: Checkboxes to describe sellers (part II) | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, eileenkeeney writes:
| | In Suggestions, mabccc writes:
| | | | The parallel is identical. If a seller says that they accept cancelation requests
with no penalty, then that's what it is. With shipping, if they say they
accept orders from Canada, then that's what it is. If a buyer wants to cancel,
done. If a buyer wants to ship to Canada, done.
|
So they have no flexibility once selected.
Lets say seller A and seller B both buy in a load of the same new parts, new
to market and they are the only sellers. A allows cancellations without penalty.
B doesn't.
B lists his parts and then A undercuts him. So B orders all A's parts. He
now has one week to hold those parts in his order before he has to pay. After
7 days he cancels, penalty free. A cannot do anything about it, he has chosen
to do penalty free cancellations. B then gets his friend C to do the same, removing
A's parts from sale again for another week. In the meantime the market has
become flooded, the price has dropped and A is still waiting for the payment
from C. B and C have done nothing wrong. It is in the contract between A and
B and A and C that the buyer can cancel penalty free.
|
I think the seller should set the time limit, and I think that 24 hours is reasonable.
I also think that a seller should be able to limit the max value of a single
order.
Your scenario is not even limited to allowing vs not allowing a cancel.
If I want to hurt a seller, I can just create a new user to engage in the very
behavior you are describing.
Each user can get 3 NPBs before loosing buying privileges.
It takes time for these to go through.
So if someone wants to engage in the behavior you are describing, they can easily
do so already.
|
yes but with NPB's there are penalties, and if the accounts get linked, the
NPB's follow, while with the button suggested here, there is no penalty I
could go to every store that says they cancel, make a big order, then cancel
and nothing they could do since they have to comply with their choice since their
freedom of choice was removed from them so that they could stay in the searches.
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
USA, California
