|
 |
| | | Author: | tEoS  | | Posted: | Oct 10, 2010 13:59 | | Subject: | Suggest: Forum Policy #3 modification | | Viewed: | 228 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | | Status: | Open | | Vote: | [Yes|No] | |
|
| This suggestion is in reference to Policy #3 as quoted below:
"No personally identifying information - Do not include any e-mail address or
physical mailing address or telephone number in a discussion forum post."
The policy seems a bit too strict on the personally identifying information.
Interpretation of the current policy is open for debate, though the moderators
follow it to the letter.
I propose that it be modified to be "No Personally Identifying Information of
any BL Member." Outside corporation addresses, phone numbers, etc can be be
informative and very useful. The moderators would still have final say on anything
that is borderline on the updated policy.
Thank you for considering the change.
http://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=126
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | JediRob | | Posted: | Oct 10, 2010 14:12 | | Subject: | Re: Suggest: Forum Policy #3 modification | | Viewed: | 68 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, tEoS writes:
| | This suggestion is in reference to Policy #3 as quoted below:
"No personally identifying information - Do not include any e-mail address or
physical mailing address or telephone number in a discussion forum post."
The policy seems a bit too strict on the personally identifying information.
Interpretation of the current policy is open for debate, though the moderators
follow it to the letter.
I propose that it be modified to be "No Personally Identifying Information of
any BL Member." Outside corporation addresses, phone numbers, etc can be be
informative and very useful. The moderators would still have final say on anything
that is borderline on the updated policy.
Thank you for considering the change.
http://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=126
|
Perhaps this re-wording, or something similar may be appropriate:
"Do not include any personally identifying information of private individuals,
do not post private email addresses, physical addresses, names, or phone numbers.
Posting of public intitution email, phone numbers, or addresses is acceptable
if relavent and neccesary where this information is not obtainable through normal
means"
So, posting the phone number of the Seattle police department is unnecesary,
as you can just say "contact the Seattle police" and that's quite easy to look
up. When a specific individual has a case pending, and it's relavent to post
their direct line and extension, then it would be appropriate to say "contact
Detective Columbo of the Seattle police at xxx-xxx-xxxx ext xxx regarding case
#nnnn"
-R
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | FigBits | | Posted: | Oct 10, 2010 15:27 | | Subject: | Re: Suggest: Forum Policy #3 modification | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Master_Jedi_Rob writes:
| | In Suggestions, tEoS writes:
| | This suggestion is in reference to Policy #3 as quoted below:
"No personally identifying information - Do not include any e-mail address or
physical mailing address or telephone number in a discussion forum post."
The policy seems a bit too strict on the personally identifying information.
Interpretation of the current policy is open for debate, though the moderators
follow it to the letter.
I propose that it be modified to be "No Personally Identifying Information of
any BL Member." Outside corporation addresses, phone numbers, etc can be be
informative and very useful. The moderators would still have final say on anything
that is borderline on the updated policy.
Thank you for considering the change.
http://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=126
|
Perhaps this re-wording, or something similar may be appropriate:
"Do not include any personally identifying information of private individuals,
do not post private email addresses, physical addresses, names, or phone numbers.
Posting of public intitution email, phone numbers, or addresses is acceptable
if relavent and neccesary where this information is not obtainable through normal
means"
So, posting the phone number of the Seattle police department is unnecesary,
as you can just say "contact the Seattle police" and that's quite easy to look
up. When a specific individual has a case pending, and it's relavent to post
their direct line and extension, then it would be appropriate to say "contact
Detective Columbo of the Seattle police at xxx-xxx-xxxx ext xxx regarding case
#nnnn"
|
I like it, though I wonder a bit about the general "Seattle police" example you
mention. While I would agree it would be unnecessary, would you then see such
a post as needing to be cancelled?
--
Marc.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | JediRob | | Posted: | Oct 10, 2010 15:36 | | Subject: | Re: Suggest: Forum Policy #3 modification | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, fleury writes:
| | In Suggestions, Master_Jedi_Rob writes:
| | In Suggestions, tEoS writes:
| | This suggestion is in reference to Policy #3 as quoted below:
"No personally identifying information - Do not include any e-mail address or
physical mailing address or telephone number in a discussion forum post."
The policy seems a bit too strict on the personally identifying information.
Interpretation of the current policy is open for debate, though the moderators
follow it to the letter.
I propose that it be modified to be "No Personally Identifying Information of
any BL Member." Outside corporation addresses, phone numbers, etc can be be
informative and very useful. The moderators would still have final say on anything
that is borderline on the updated policy.
Thank you for considering the change.
http://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=126
|
Perhaps this re-wording, or something similar may be appropriate:
"Do not include any personally identifying information of private individuals,
do not post private email addresses, physical addresses, names, or phone numbers.
Posting of public intitution email, phone numbers, or addresses is acceptable
if relavent and neccesary where this information is not obtainable through normal
means"
So, posting the phone number of the Seattle police department is unnecesary,
as you can just say "contact the Seattle police" and that's quite easy to look
up. When a specific individual has a case pending, and it's relavent to post
their direct line and extension, then it would be appropriate to say "contact
Detective Columbo of the Seattle police at xxx-xxx-xxxx ext xxx regarding case
#nnnn"
|
I like it, though I wonder a bit about the general "Seattle police" example you
mention. While I would agree it would be unnecessary, would you then see such
a post as needing to be cancelled?
--
Marc.
|
There is the problem, as soon as we start allowing some phone numbers
etc.. to be published in forum, then, due to (some) members not being aware of,
or wishing to test the limits of the rules, the work of moderators goes up tenfold.
As it is, nearly every post cancelled gets followed up with a string of "Why
did you cancel" which would be almost entirely unnecessary if people would just
first read, then follow the existing rules.
As imperfect as they are, the rules do exist for a reason, reasons which can
be debated (in the appropriate thread) and possibly changed.
-R
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Oct 11, 2010 03:37 | | Subject: | Re: Suggest: Forum Policy #3 modification | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Master_Jedi_Rob writes:
| | There is the problem, as soon as we start allowing some phone numbers
etc.. to be published in forum, then, due to (some) members not being aware of,
or wishing to test the limits of the rules, the work of moderators goes up tenfold.
|
I don't believe it is a valid argument to say the mods' workload will increase
if they allow some phone numbers or addresses, but not others. If this were a
valid argument, then no poster could ever offer anything for sale or include
any link in a post.
Forum rule 1 states: "No offering of items for sale which are not listed in a
BrickLink store." Allowing members to offer some items for sale which *ARE* listed
in a BL store does not significantly increase the workload of the mods. Or, if
it does, it is not a valid enough reason to prohibit posts that offer anything
for sale.
Forum rule 2 states: "No links to web pages outside of BrickLink that offer items
for sale that can be sold on BrickLink. Links to items that cannot be sold on
BrickLink, or information only pages, at such sites are permitted." Allowing
some links but not others does NOT significantly increase the workload of the
mods. Or, if it does, it is not a valid reason to prohibit posts that include
any link.
Forum rules 4 and 5 state: "No foul language." and "No religious or political
discussions." Allowing some language/discussions but not others does NOT significantly
increase the workload of the mods. Or, if it does, it is not a valid reason to
prohibit posts that include any language or discussion.
Similarly, allowing some phone numbers and addresses but not others will not
significantly increase the workload of the mods.
To determine if there is a violation of rules 1, 2, 4 or 5, a mod needs to actually
read the post in question. Such posts are not cancelled merely because there
is something offered for sale, a link, some language or a discussion. EVERY one
of these five Forum rules has a qualifier. For rule 3, it is the word "personally".
Thor
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | leggodtshop | | Posted: | Oct 10, 2010 15:43 | | Subject: | Re: Suggest: Forum Policy #3 modification | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| No. Such information can be communicated through message system if necessary.
There is no need to put it on the forum.
Arnoud
In Suggestions, tEoS writes:
| | This suggestion is in reference to Policy #3 as quoted below:
"No personally identifying information - Do not include any e-mail address or
physical mailing address or telephone number in a discussion forum post."
The policy seems a bit too strict on the personally identifying information.
Interpretation of the current policy is open for debate, though the moderators
follow it to the letter.
I propose that it be modified to be "No Personally Identifying Information of
any BL Member." Outside corporation addresses, phone numbers, etc can be be
informative and very useful. The moderators would still have final say on anything
that is borderline on the updated policy.
Thank you for considering the change.
http://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=126
|
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | renhoffman | | Posted: | Oct 10, 2010 15:49 | | Subject: | Re: Suggest: Forum Policy #3 modification | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, tEoS writes:
| | This suggestion is in reference to Policy #3 as quoted below:
"No personally identifying information - Do not include any e-mail address or
physical mailing address or telephone number in a discussion forum post."
The policy seems a bit too strict on the personally identifying information.
Interpretation of the current policy is open for debate, though the moderators
follow it to the letter.
I propose that it be modified to be "No Personally Identifying Information of
any BL Member." Outside corporation addresses, phone numbers, etc can be be
informative and very useful. The moderators would still have final say on anything
that is borderline on the updated policy.
Thank you for considering the change.
http://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=126
|
I personally think it is better left as-is, but then again I am biased, I like
simple rules.I really don't see what all the fuss is about, I replied to his
message and left everything there for all to see, except the phone number. Well,
good luck, if the rule is changed, I will follow it.
Darren
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | Rolf | | Posted: | Oct 10, 2010 19:43 | | Subject: | Re: Suggest: Forum Policy #3 modification | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, tEoS writes:
| | This suggestion is in reference to Policy #3 as quoted below:
"No personally identifying information - Do not include any e-mail address or
physical mailing address or telephone number in a discussion forum post."
The policy seems a bit too strict on the personally identifying information.
Interpretation of the current policy is open for debate, though the moderators
follow it to the letter.
I propose that it be modified to be "No Personally Identifying Information of
any BL Member." Outside corporation addresses, phone numbers, etc can be be
informative and very useful. The moderators would still have final say on anything
that is borderline on the updated policy.
Thank you for considering the change.
http://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=126
|
Nope, partial allowed enforcement is much more difficult for moderators.
Not only that, but those data could become outdated before it rolls off the 6
month lifetime.
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | LEGOMASTER | | Posted: | Oct 10, 2010 20:11 | | Subject: | Re: Suggest: Forum Policy #3 modification | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, tEoS writes:
| | This suggestion is in reference to Policy #3 as quoted below:
"No personally identifying information - Do not include any e-mail address or
physical mailing address or telephone number in a discussion forum post."
The policy seems a bit too strict on the personally identifying information.
Interpretation of the current policy is open for debate, though the moderators
follow it to the letter.
I propose that it be modified to be "No Personally Identifying Information of
any BL Member." Outside corporation addresses, phone numbers, etc can be be
informative and very useful. The moderators would still have final say on anything
that is borderline on the updated policy.
Thank you for considering the change.
http://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=126
|
I vote no.
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | BLUSER_213599 | | Posted: | Oct 10, 2010 21:20 | | Subject: | Re: Suggest: Forum Policy #3 modification | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, tEoS writes:
| | This suggestion is in reference to Policy #3 as quoted below:
"No personally identifying information - Do not include any e-mail address or
physical mailing address or telephone number in a discussion forum post."
The policy seems a bit too strict on the personally identifying information.
Interpretation of the current policy is open for debate, though the moderators
follow it to the letter.
I propose that it be modified to be "No Personally Identifying Information of
any BL Member." Outside corporation addresses, phone numbers, etc can be be
informative and very useful. The moderators would still have final say on anything
that is borderline on the updated policy.
Thank you for considering the change.
http://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=126
|
Like much in life, it's great in theory but nearly impossible to implement. If
a hard to find number/email is needed, as to have people PM you to get it.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | BLUSER_213599 | | Posted: | Oct 10, 2010 21:21 | | Subject: | Re: Suggest: Forum Policy #3 modification | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Magawr2002 writes:
| | In Suggestions, tEoS writes:
| | This suggestion is in reference to Policy #3 as quoted below:
"No personally identifying information - Do not include any e-mail address or
physical mailing address or telephone number in a discussion forum post."
The policy seems a bit too strict on the personally identifying information.
Interpretation of the current policy is open for debate, though the moderators
follow it to the letter.
I propose that it be modified to be "No Personally Identifying Information of
any BL Member." Outside corporation addresses, phone numbers, etc can be be
informative and very useful. The moderators would still have final say on anything
that is borderline on the updated policy.
Thank you for considering the change.
http://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=126
|
Like much in life, it's great in theory but nearly impossible to implement. If
a hard to find number/email is needed, as to have people PM you to get it.
|
I mean ASK to have people to PM you.
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Oct 11, 2010 02:56 | | Subject: | Re: Suggest: Forum Policy #3 modification | | Viewed: | 77 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| I voted no. The current rule is fine. What is not fine is the inconsistent and
occasionally erroneous enforcement of this rule to situations where it does not
apply.
The rule specifically refers to "personally" identifying information. And what
follows should not be read without regard to the key clarifying word "personally".
The rule by its express terms does not apply to government or public offices,
or even non-member corporations or businesses.
The forum has contained numerous posts providing the telephone numbers, email
and/or street addresses for Lego and PayPal customer service, shipping companies,
shipping supply companies, packaging supply companies, shipping insurance companies,
online payment service providers, post offices, customs offices, etc., etc. And
some of those posts appeared in threads which included posts by one or more mods
where no objection was made to including such information. IN FACT, IN ONE OF
THESE POSTS, TROY - THE MOTHER OF ALL MODS - POSTED AN EMAIL ADDRESS. For some
examples, see:
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=450223
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=450228
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=450230
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=451743
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=455855
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=460362
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=464592
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=464590
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=466505
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=472662
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=479637
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=479796
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=480788
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=480806
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=481314
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=481350
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=460242
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=448506
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=444857
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=475615
This is just some such posts from only the past six months. Should all those
posts and the even greater number of replies to them be cancelled en masse? And
if the rule is "so clear" that any and all phone numbers are verbotten, why were
so many of these posts not cancelled?
In the most recent situation where this arose, the moderator stated that he did
not know the phone number was to a police station. Which means he did not read
the post before cancelling it. The post specifically stated the number was to
a police station. But, apparently, the mod just saw a phone number and immediately
cancelled the post without reading further. While this mod and the other mods
do a superb job overall, he simply dropped the ball on this one.
Yes, "moderators have the final say on what is appropriate". But read the next
part of that same sentence: "to maintain a positive, family friendly atmosphere
in the forums". How does a post which includes the telephone number to, for example,
Lego or PayPal customer service jeopardize the "positive, family friendly atmosphere
in the forums"?
Thor
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | renhoffman | | Posted: | Oct 11, 2010 16:57 | | Subject: | Re: Suggest: Forum Policy #3 modification | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| | | In the most recent situation where this arose, the moderator stated that he did
not know the phone number was to a police station. Which means he did not read
the post before cancelling it. The post specifically stated the number was to
a police station. But, apparently, the mod just saw a phone number and immediately
cancelled the post without reading further. While this mod and the other mods
do a superb job overall, he simply dropped the ball on this one.
|
Actually, here is the paragraph...
| | I will no longer reply here. Say what you want. I have filed a police report
(recol.ca filing # 110615 in case you're wondering), and I have been in contact
with Tim at the Montreal RCMP (Phone(514) 939-8304 ). Don't believe me, I guess
you don't believe they went to the moon, either.
|
I read that he posted a phone number of a guy named Tim. I have never been to
Montreal, exept when I drove through once, and I did not know that RCMP meant
a police station. I am human, thank you. Have a good day sir.
Darren
|
|
|
|
|
|
USA, Michigan
Canada, Ontario
Netherlands, Overijssel
