Discussion Forum: Thread 265308

 Author: bje View Messages Posted By bje
 Posted: Mar 22, 2020 05:01
 Subject: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 840 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

bje (1368)

Location:  South Africa, Western Cape
Member Since Contact Type Status
May 24, 2010 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: JE Bricks
Why do you want to alienate members who voluntarily contribute their time, money
and effort to make this site better in a manner not even your paid catalogue
assistants or whatever they are called can do? Simple – you let ego get in the
way of sound reasoning.

In a word, members who link anything to BO should not wait to be banned. Call
it BL Forum Distancing Where do you draw the line? I'll tell you – if
you link anything in your life to BO, whether it be images, your e-mail address
or for that matter your entire inventory, do the responsible thing and ban yourself.
Think of the benefits:

You do not have to be confused when a ban is given to you (you know, like: who
me??? WTH have I done??, kind of thing);

You do not waste your time doing things that might improve BL such as catalogue
images, catalogue change requests, catalogue contributions, but go unappreciated
because you are somehow offending some senseless rule made up to suit the moment;

You do not have ask why you are banned or have to post comments about it offsite,
or in other forums;

Best of all, that way you let others live in their state of complete and utter
blissful ignorance.

Members should know that the catalogue is not a volunteer project at this time.
So as far as I am concerned if there are still members willing to work for others'
remuneration, they should be commended for their efforts.

Seriously BL management and by extension, TLG Board members – is this really
what you should be wasting your time with, when you have an atlas guiding you
to all of the stuff still not dealt with in the catalogue and still have a large
volume of problems with the rest of the site as well?

Just so you know, I have never seen Mark post a link to that page when someone
in the forum has asked about parts in that list of his. If there are any links
to them in any part of the forum I might have missed, I'm sure the admins
spent a very very very productive morning finding them all and deleting them
all, and if not, the admins should be banned for allowing those links to stand.
Actually, since that member is now banned, all of his posts must also be scrubbed
and replaced with a moniker like "BLBANNER" to differentiate from the all of
the BLUSERS out there. Pfft
 Author: StarBrick View Messages Posted By StarBrick
 Posted: Mar 22, 2020 05:30
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 112 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

StarBrick (5395)

Location:  Netherlands, Gelderland
Member Since Contact Type Status
Oct 18, 2008 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: StarBrick's BrickShop
+1
 Author: Dino1 View Messages Posted By Dino1
 Posted: Mar 22, 2020 05:32
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 106 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

Dino1 (377)

Location:  Luxembourg
Member Since Contact Type Status
Oct 22, 2003 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: dino's world
+1
 Author: robar View Messages Posted By robar
 Posted: Mar 22, 2020 05:32
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 111 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

robar (2625)

Location:  Australia, Victoria
Member Since Contact Type Status
Oct 7, 2006 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: Bitsnpieces.....25% off
In General, bje writes:
  Why do you want to alienate members who voluntarily contribute their time, money
and effort to make this site better in a manner not even your paid catalogue
assistants or whatever they are called can do? Simple – you let ego get in the
way of sound reasoning.

In a word, members who link anything to BO should not wait to be banned. Call
it BL Forum Distancing Where do you draw the line? I'll tell you – if
you link anything in your life to BO, whether it be images, your e-mail address
or for that matter your entire inventory, do the responsible thing and ban yourself.
Think of the benefits:

You do not have to be confused when a ban is given to you (you know, like: who
me??? WTH have I done??, kind of thing);

You do not waste your time doing things that might improve BL such as catalogue
images, catalogue change requests, catalogue contributions, but go unappreciated
because you are somehow offending some senseless rule made up to suit the moment;

You do not have ask why you are banned or have to post comments about it offsite,
or in other forums;

Best of all, that way you let others live in their state of complete and utter
blissful ignorance.

Members should know that the catalogue is not a volunteer project at this time.
So as far as I am concerned if there are still members willing to work for others'
remuneration, they should be commended for their efforts.

Seriously BL management and by extension, TLG Board members – is this really
what you should be wasting your time with, when you have an atlas guiding you
to all of the stuff still not dealt with in the catalogue and still have a large
volume of problems with the rest of the site as well?

Just so you know, I have never seen Mark post a link to that page when someone
in the forum has asked about parts in that list of his. If there are any links
to them in any part of the forum I might have missed, I'm sure the admins
spent a very very very productive morning finding them all and deleting them
all, and if not, the admins should be banned for allowing those links to stand.
Actually, since that member is now banned, all of his posts must also be scrubbed
and replaced with a moniker like "BLBANNER" to differentiate from the all of
the BLUSERS out there. Pfft

+1
 Author: manganschlamm View Messages Posted By manganschlamm
 Posted: Mar 22, 2020 09:06
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 168 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

manganschlamm (1406)

Location:  Germany, Rheinland-Pfalz
Member Since Contact Type Status
Mar 8, 2016 Contact Member Buyer
Buying Privileges - OK
In General, bje writes:
  Why do you want to alienate members who voluntarily contribute their time, money
and effort to make this site better in a manner not even your paid catalogue
assistants or whatever they are called can do? Simple – you let ego get in the
way of sound reasoning.

In a word, members who link anything to BO should not wait to be banned. Call
it BL Forum Distancing Where do you draw the line? I'll tell you – if
you link anything in your life to BO, whether it be images, your e-mail address
or for that matter your entire inventory, do the responsible thing and ban yourself.
Think of the benefits:

You do not have to be confused when a ban is given to you (you know, like: who
me??? WTH have I done??, kind of thing);

You do not waste your time doing things that might improve BL such as catalogue
images, catalogue change requests, catalogue contributions, but go unappreciated
because you are somehow offending some senseless rule made up to suit the moment;

You do not have ask why you are banned or have to post comments about it offsite,
or in other forums;

Best of all, that way you let others live in their state of complete and utter
blissful ignorance.

Members should know that the catalogue is not a volunteer project at this time.
So as far as I am concerned if there are still members willing to work for others'
remuneration, they should be commended for their efforts.

Seriously BL management and by extension, TLG Board members – is this really
what you should be wasting your time with, when you have an atlas guiding you
to all of the stuff still not dealt with in the catalogue and still have a large
volume of problems with the rest of the site as well?

Just so you know, I have never seen Mark post a link to that page when someone
in the forum has asked about parts in that list of his. If there are any links
to them in any part of the forum I might have missed, I'm sure the admins
spent a very very very productive morning finding them all and deleting them
all, and if not, the admins should be banned for allowing those links to stand.
Actually, since that member is now banned, all of his posts must also be scrubbed
and replaced with a moniker like "BLBANNER" to differentiate from the all of
the BLUSERS out there. Pfft


+1
 Author: BrainOfTheBrick View Messages Posted By BrainOfTheBrick
 Posted: Mar 22, 2020 15:30
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 114 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

BrainOfTheBrick (51)

Location:  USA, Michigan
Member Since Contact Type Status
Jun 23, 2018 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store Closed Store: BrainyBricks
In General, bje writes:
  Why do you want to alienate members who voluntarily contribute their time, money
and effort to make this site better in a manner not even your paid catalogue
assistants or whatever they are called can do? Simple – you let ego get in the
way of sound reasoning.

In a word, members who link anything to BO should not wait to be banned. Call
it BL Forum Distancing Where do you draw the line? I'll tell you – if
you link anything in your life to BO, whether it be images, your e-mail address
or for that matter your entire inventory, do the responsible thing and ban yourself.
Think of the benefits:

You do not have to be confused when a ban is given to you (you know, like: who
me??? WTH have I done??, kind of thing);

You do not waste your time doing things that might improve BL such as catalogue
images, catalogue change requests, catalogue contributions, but go unappreciated
because you are somehow offending some senseless rule made up to suit the moment;

You do not have ask why you are banned or have to post comments about it offsite,
or in other forums;

Best of all, that way you let others live in their state of complete and utter
blissful ignorance.

Members should know that the catalogue is not a volunteer project at this time.
So as far as I am concerned if there are still members willing to work for others'
remuneration, they should be commended for their efforts.

Seriously BL management and by extension, TLG Board members – is this really
what you should be wasting your time with, when you have an atlas guiding you
to all of the stuff still not dealt with in the catalogue and still have a large
volume of problems with the rest of the site as well?

Just so you know, I have never seen Mark post a link to that page when someone
in the forum has asked about parts in that list of his. If there are any links
to them in any part of the forum I might have missed, I'm sure the admins
spent a very very very productive morning finding them all and deleting them
all, and if not, the admins should be banned for allowing those links to stand.
Actually, since that member is now banned, all of his posts must also be scrubbed
and replaced with a moniker like "BLBANNER" to differentiate from the all of
the BLUSERS out there. Pfft

+1
 Author: Yo_Yo_Flamingo View Messages Posted By Yo_Yo_Flamingo
 Posted: Mar 22, 2020 15:59
 Subject: (Cancelled)
 Viewed: 88 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

Yo_Yo_Flamingo (1487)

Location:  USA, New York
Member Since Contact Type Status
Jan 9, 2016 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: Set You Up
(Cancelled)
 Author: Yo_Yo_Flamingo View Messages Posted By Yo_Yo_Flamingo
 Posted: Mar 22, 2020 16:27
 Subject: (Cancelled)
 Viewed: 77 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

Yo_Yo_Flamingo (1487)

Location:  USA, New York
Member Since Contact Type Status
Jan 9, 2016 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: Set You Up
In General, Yo_Yo_Flamingo writes:
  (Cancelled)

(Just to clarify so no one is wondering what I said, (as I hate that myself),
I was asking what happened, then I found what I think was this post in question,
so I don't need to ask anymore).
 Author: Adjour View Messages Posted By Adjour
 Posted: Mar 22, 2020 16:48
 Subject: Re: (Cancelled)
 Viewed: 76 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

Adjour (685)

Location:  USA, California
Member Since Contact Type Status
Aug 1, 2016 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: The Chili is a Bit Spicy
In General, Yo_Yo_Flamingo writes:
  In General, Yo_Yo_Flamingo writes:
  (Cancelled)

(Just to clarify so no one is wondering what I said, (as I hate that myself),
I was asking what happened, then I found what I think was this post in question,
so I don't need to ask anymore).

haha, thank you,


I almost did the same thing.
 Author: pitz8008 View Messages Posted By pitz8008
 Posted: Mar 22, 2020 16:29
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 124 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

pitz8008 (7956)

Location:  USA, Illinois
Member Since Contact Type Status
Dec 30, 2009 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: The Pitz Playhouse
In General, bje writes:
  Why do you want to alienate members who voluntarily contribute their time, money
and effort to make this site better in a manner not even your paid catalogue
assistants or whatever they are called can do? Simple – you let ego get in the
way of sound reasoning.

In a word, members who link anything to BO should not wait to be banned. Call
it BL Forum Distancing Where do you draw the line? I'll tell you – if
you link anything in your life to BO, whether it be images, your e-mail address
or for that matter your entire inventory, do the responsible thing and ban yourself.
Think of the benefits:

You do not have to be confused when a ban is given to you (you know, like: who
me??? WTH have I done??, kind of thing);

You do not waste your time doing things that might improve BL such as catalogue
images, catalogue change requests, catalogue contributions, but go unappreciated
because you are somehow offending some senseless rule made up to suit the moment;

You do not have ask why you are banned or have to post comments about it offsite,
or in other forums;

Best of all, that way you let others live in their state of complete and utter
blissful ignorance.

Members should know that the catalogue is not a volunteer project at this time.
So as far as I am concerned if there are still members willing to work for others'
remuneration, they should be commended for their efforts.

Seriously BL management and by extension, TLG Board members – is this really
what you should be wasting your time with, when you have an atlas guiding you
to all of the stuff still not dealt with in the catalogue and still have a large
volume of problems with the rest of the site as well?

Just so you know, I have never seen Mark post a link to that page when someone
in the forum has asked about parts in that list of his. If there are any links
to them in any part of the forum I might have missed, I'm sure the admins
spent a very very very productive morning finding them all and deleting them
all, and if not, the admins should be banned for allowing those links to stand.
Actually, since that member is now banned, all of his posts must also be scrubbed
and replaced with a moniker like "BLBANNER" to differentiate from the all of
the BLUSERS out there. Pfft


Maybe I'm missing something, but if it's wrong to have links to BO in
the forum. And I would like to think that we can all understand the reasoning
for that. Then why would anyone think it's ok to have links to a website
that has links to BO. And in times like these when you need the people who make
these decisions to give you the benefit of the doubt, things like "Yo, Admin"
aren't going to do you any favors.
 Author: SylvainLS View Messages Posted By SylvainLS
 Posted: Mar 22, 2020 16:59
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 159 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

SylvainLS (32)

Location:  France, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
Member Since Contact Type Status
Apr 25, 2014 Contact Member Buyer
Buying Privileges - OK
In General, pitz8008 writes:
  […]
Maybe I'm missing something, but if it's wrong to have links to BO in
the forum. And I would like to think that we can all understand the reasoning
for that. Then why would anyone think it's ok to have links to a website
that has links to BO.

Then explain why no one ever got banned for linking to Rebrickable, Brickset,
or any other AFOL news website which directly links to LEGO sets and parts on
BrickOwl, eBay or Amazon?

And why not one of the messages with such links were ever cancelled?


  And in times like these when you need the people who make
these decisions to give you the benefit of the doubt, things like "Yo, Admin"
aren't going to do you any favors.

Then why say the reason for the ban is the links without mentionniong “irrespect”
or whatever you want to call it?

And why, again, the messages weren’t cancelled?


What’s next?
Banning members because they linked to a website with ads for Amazon or eBay?
Or banning members for linking to www.google.com?
This is ridiculous.
 Author: manganschlamm View Messages Posted By manganschlamm
 Posted: Mar 22, 2020 17:03
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 88 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

manganschlamm (1406)

Location:  Germany, Rheinland-Pfalz
Member Since Contact Type Status
Mar 8, 2016 Contact Member Buyer
Buying Privileges - OK
In General, SylvainLS writes:
  In General, pitz8008 writes:
  […]
Maybe I'm missing something, but if it's wrong to have links to BO in
the forum. And I would like to think that we can all understand the reasoning
for that. Then why would anyone think it's ok to have links to a website
that has links to BO.

Then explain why no one ever got banned for linking to Rebrickable, Brickset,
or any other AFOL news website which directly links to LEGO sets and parts on
BrickOwl, eBay or Amazon?

And why not one of the messages with such links were ever cancelled?


  And in times like these when you need the people who make
these decisions to give you the benefit of the doubt, things like "Yo, Admin"
aren't going to do you any favors.

Then why say the reason for the ban is the links without mentionniong “irrespect”
or whatever you want to call it?

And why, again, the messages weren’t cancelled?


What’s next?
Banning members because they linked to a website with ads for Amazon or eBay?
Or banning members for linking to www.google.com?
This is ridiculous.


A politically justifiable reason had to be found and was finally found. It is
of course not the true reason as everybody who follows the discussions here understands.
 Author: Captain_Q View Messages Posted By Captain_Q
 Posted: Mar 22, 2020 20:44
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 94 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

Captain_Q (4971)

Location:  USA, Oregon
Member Since Contact Type Status
Aug 6, 2005 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: The Captain Q Bazaar
  Then explain why no one ever got banned for linking to Rebrickable, Brickset,
or any other AFOL news website which directly links to LEGO sets and parts on
BrickOwl, eBay or Amazon?

And why not one of the messages with such links were ever cancelled?



Rebrickable shares from both BL and BO and thus brings in revenue that would
otherwise not be brought in, so is a neutral website, I suppose? As how else
do you explain it being allowed as affiliate site for Bricklink?

I guess Brickset also includes a Bricklink, link, so that makes it acceptable
to the admin?



  Then why say the reason for the ban is the links without mentionniong “irrespect”
or whatever you want to call it?

And why, again, the messages weren’t cancelled?


This is the thing that does not make sense in all this. If the offending link
is reason for the banishment for the poster then why does it still linger?
Why not just cancel the message and slap Mark on the wrist? This ban seems
excessive to me. smh
 Author: Leftoverbricks View Messages Posted By Leftoverbricks
 Posted: Mar 23, 2020 11:54
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 74 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

Leftoverbricks (1462)

Location:  Netherlands, Overijssel
Member Since Contact Type Status
Mar 11, 2012 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: Leftoverbricks
Great response Silvain!
 Author: bje View Messages Posted By bje
 Posted: Mar 22, 2020 17:11
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 77 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

bje (1368)

Location:  South Africa, Western Cape
Member Since Contact Type Status
May 24, 2010 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: JE Bricks
In General, pitz8008 writes:
  In General, bje writes:


Maybe I'm missing something, but if it's wrong to have links to BO in
the forum. And I would like to think that we can all understand the reasoning
for that. Then why would anyone think it's ok to have links to a website
that has links to BO. And in times like these when you need the people who make
these decisions to give you the benefit of the doubt, things like "Yo, Admin"
aren't going to do you any favors.

It is a privately owned website. Nobody forced anybody to click on any link.
I think you will be hard pressed to find a direct link to that site from anywhere
in BL. Also, I might be wrong, but those looked like it was BO's images anyway.
Its no use actually, since the member concerned cannot give his thoughts on the
matter any longer. In the words of the Joe Strummer: "You have the right to free
speech unless you are dumb enough to actually try it".

If you have a question about a part ID, are you going to worry out which catalogue
the picture of the part in your answer comes? I do not think those links were
to any specific store in BO either. And besides, most part queries get answered
with a link to BL catalogue. BL has NEVER cared where images are harvested from.
It was an informational post on a private website with maybe better images than
the renders in BL (which you cannot see any longer so you'll have to probably
take my word for it)

I might also be wrong in my own reasoning, but if you list all of your inventory
on BO and link it with some inventory management software to your inventory in
BL, there is not much difference in giving a direct link of your entire store
inventory. Besides - where is your primary listing and are ALL of your inventory
available at any time for BL's exclusive use if you are dual listed? This
is allowed, so why have a hissy fit about an offsite image?

Besides anything, if banning is your answer to life's vexing questions, it
does leave you in some very illustrious company
https://www.britannica.com/topic/banning-South-African-law

There are better means to manage something like this. If any Admin was offended
by "Yo, Admin", they could have opened their mouths and said so and addressed
the matter like the adults they supposedly are, or in fact, the better persons
they are supposed to be.

You might also notice that all of that work is now lost to members of this site.
Well done BL...
 Author: Teup View Messages Posted By Teup
 Posted: Mar 22, 2020 17:11
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 87 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

Teup (4442)

Location:  Netherlands, Utrecht
Member Since Contact Type Status
May 6, 2004 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: The T-workshop
In General, bje writes:
  Why do you want to alienate members who voluntarily contribute their time, money
and effort to make this site better in a manner not even your paid catalogue
assistants or whatever they are called can do? Simple – you let ego get in the
way of sound reasoning.

In a word, members who link anything to BO should not wait to be banned. Call
it BL Forum Distancing Where do you draw the line? I'll tell you – if
you link anything in your life to BO, whether it be images, your e-mail address
or for that matter your entire inventory, do the responsible thing and ban yourself.
Think of the benefits:

You do not have to be confused when a ban is given to you (you know, like: who
me??? WTH have I done??, kind of thing);

You do not waste your time doing things that might improve BL such as catalogue
images, catalogue change requests, catalogue contributions, but go unappreciated
because you are somehow offending some senseless rule made up to suit the moment;

You do not have ask why you are banned or have to post comments about it offsite,
or in other forums;

Best of all, that way you let others live in their state of complete and utter
blissful ignorance.

Members should know that the catalogue is not a volunteer project at this time.
So as far as I am concerned if there are still members willing to work for others'
remuneration, they should be commended for their efforts.

Seriously BL management and by extension, TLG Board members – is this really
what you should be wasting your time with, when you have an atlas guiding you
to all of the stuff still not dealt with in the catalogue and still have a large
volume of problems with the rest of the site as well?

Just so you know, I have never seen Mark post a link to that page when someone
in the forum has asked about parts in that list of his. If there are any links
to them in any part of the forum I might have missed, I'm sure the admins
spent a very very very productive morning finding them all and deleting them
all, and if not, the admins should be banned for allowing those links to stand.
Actually, since that member is now banned, all of his posts must also be scrubbed
and replaced with a moniker like "BLBANNER" to differentiate from the all of
the BLUSERS out there. Pfft

+1

There's a difference between a policy that forbids sales outside the platform,
and a policy that we should all be role playing in an alternative universe bubble
where BrickOwl does not exist (disclaimer: BrickOwl? What on earth is that?)
 Author: Admin_Russell View Messages Posted By Admin_Russell
 Posted: Mar 22, 2020 17:12
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 239 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

Admin_Russell

Location:  USA, California
Member Since Contact Type Status
May 9, 2017 Contact Member Admin
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
BrickLink Administrator
In General, bje writes:
  Why do you want to alienate members who voluntarily contribute their time, money
and effort to make this site better in a manner not even your paid catalogue
assistants or whatever they are called can do? Simple – you let ego get in the
way of sound reasoning.

I have no desire to alienate such members. I have expressed my desire a number
of times that mfav would return to producing part photos of exceptional quality
for the site. But he is frustrated with the current leadership (which I am a
part of) so unless that changes, or there is a noticeable change in focus,
he is not likely to start helping out.
 Author: bje View Messages Posted By bje
 Posted: Mar 22, 2020 17:35
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 150 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

bje (1368)

Location:  South Africa, Western Cape
Member Since Contact Type Status
May 24, 2010 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: JE Bricks
In General, Admin_Russell writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  Why do you want to alienate members who voluntarily contribute their time, money
and effort to make this site better in a manner not even your paid catalogue
assistants or whatever they are called can do? Simple – you let ego get in the
way of sound reasoning.

I have no desire to alienate such members. I have expressed my desire a number
of times that mfav would return to producing part photos of exceptional quality
for the site. But he is frustrated with the current leadership (which I am a
part of) so unless that changes, or there is a noticeable change in focus,
he is not likely to start helping out.

So the only value you attach to him is how much you can use him? Besides - what
is the quality of that leadership if you cannot take criticism? You do not have
to like his opinions, but you can respect the man's knowledge and allow for
that. So what if he is critical and abrasive - who cares? This site has always
needed volunteers, but if this is the way to go, stretch the purse strings and
offer him money. If he then sells his soul, you can control his mouth like you
would any other employee. Until then, a volunteer is exactly that and entitled
to his opinions and his own website. Cancel his posts if such offend your sensibilities.

This thing you did was churlish and you might be able to justify it in the mirror,
but that will be the only place it is going to make sense.
 Author: popsicle View Messages Posted By popsicle
 Posted: Mar 22, 2020 18:21
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 151 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

popsicle (5767)

Location:  USA, Washington
Member Since Contact Type Status
Feb 21, 2006 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: ConstrucToys
In General, bje writes:
  In General, Admin_Russell writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  Why do you want to alienate members who voluntarily contribute their time, money
and effort to make this site better in a manner not even your paid catalogue
assistants or whatever they are called can do? Simple – you let ego get in the
way of sound reasoning.

I have no desire to alienate such members. I have expressed my desire a number
of times that mfav would return to producing part photos of exceptional quality
for the site. But he is frustrated with the current leadership (which I am a
part of) so unless that changes, or there is a noticeable change in focus,
he is not likely to start helping out.

So the only value you attach to him is how much you can use him? Besides - what
is the quality of that leadership if you cannot take criticism? You do not have
to like his opinions, but you can respect the man's knowledge and allow for
that. So what if he is critical and abrasive - who cares? This site has always
needed volunteers, but if this is the way to go, stretch the purse strings and
offer him money. If he then sells his soul, you can control his mouth like you
would any other employee. Until then, a volunteer is exactly that and entitled
to his opinions and his own website. Cancel his posts if such offend your sensibilities.

This thing you did was churlish and you might be able to justify it in the mirror,
but that will be the only place it is going to make sense.

A little harsh and frankly over-the-top, IMO.

Russell and the other admins “take criticism” on a regular basis, as evidenced
by yours and other posts. There’s always much more to it than is spelt-out, especially
for us here in the forum, i.e. we don’t have all the info or backstory, nor will
we.

We have no idea beyond the forum, what Russell and the others put-up with in
their efforts. I am pleasantly surprised though, that Russell takes the time
to share at the level that he does.

But these are just the opinions and thoughts of one, in the minority, member,
as unpopular as they may be.

And by the way, I'm not in favor of banning unless it's truly egregious
behavior, or continued breaching of the TOS agreement.
 Author: Captain_Q View Messages Posted By Captain_Q
 Posted: Mar 22, 2020 20:34
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 96 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

Captain_Q (4971)

Location:  USA, Oregon
Member Since Contact Type Status
Aug 6, 2005 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: The Captain Q Bazaar
  A little harsh and frankly over-the-top, IMO.

And by the way, I'm not in favor of banning unless it's truly egregious
behavior, or continued breaching of the TOS agreement.


I don't understand this suspension / ban , it seems excessive to me. Especially
when the main post is still around and not canceled.
 Author: manganschlamm View Messages Posted By manganschlamm
 Posted: Mar 23, 2020 04:05
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 109 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

manganschlamm (1406)

Location:  Germany, Rheinland-Pfalz
Member Since Contact Type Status
Mar 8, 2016 Contact Member Buyer
Buying Privileges - OK
In General, popsicle writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  In General, Admin_Russell writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  Why do you want to alienate members who voluntarily contribute their time, money
and effort to make this site better in a manner not even your paid catalogue
assistants or whatever they are called can do? Simple – you let ego get in the
way of sound reasoning.

I have no desire to alienate such members. I have expressed my desire a number
of times that mfav would return to producing part photos of exceptional quality
for the site. But he is frustrated with the current leadership (which I am a
part of) so unless that changes, or there is a noticeable change in focus,
he is not likely to start helping out.

So the only value you attach to him is how much you can use him? Besides - what
is the quality of that leadership if you cannot take criticism? You do not have
to like his opinions, but you can respect the man's knowledge and allow for
that. So what if he is critical and abrasive - who cares? This site has always
needed volunteers, but if this is the way to go, stretch the purse strings and
offer him money. If he then sells his soul, you can control his mouth like you
would any other employee. Until then, a volunteer is exactly that and entitled
to his opinions and his own website. Cancel his posts if such offend your sensibilities.

This thing you did was churlish and you might be able to justify it in the mirror,
but that will be the only place it is going to make sense.

A little harsh and frankly over-the-top, IMO.

Russell and the other admins “take criticism” on a regular basis, as evidenced
by yours and other posts. There’s always much more to it than is spelt-out, especially
for us here in the forum, i.e. we don’t have all the info or backstory, nor will
we.

We have no idea beyond the forum, what Russell and the others put-up with in
their efforts. I am pleasantly surprised though, that Russell takes the time
to share at the level that he does.

But these are just the opinions and thoughts of one, in the minority, member,
as unpopular as they may be.

And by the way, I'm not in favor of banning unless it's truly egregious
behavior, or continued breaching of the TOS agreement.


When Mark posted this link to the very nice pictures with details of part variants,
was it really necessary that you exposed the links to pictures of the competing
site and bringing this to the attention of admins?. Just have a look at the outcome:
We have now lost a valuable member of the community. For future posts, consider
the "The three sieves of Socrates" first.
 Author: popsicle View Messages Posted By popsicle
 Posted: Mar 23, 2020 09:38
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 113 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

popsicle (5767)

Location:  USA, Washington
Member Since Contact Type Status
Feb 21, 2006 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: ConstrucToys
In General, manganschlamm writes:
  In General, popsicle writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  In General, Admin_Russell writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  Why do you want to alienate members who voluntarily contribute their time, money
and effort to make this site better in a manner not even your paid catalogue
assistants or whatever they are called can do? Simple – you let ego get in the
way of sound reasoning.

I have no desire to alienate such members. I have expressed my desire a number
of times that mfav would return to producing part photos of exceptional quality
for the site. But he is frustrated with the current leadership (which I am a
part of) so unless that changes, or there is a noticeable change in focus,
he is not likely to start helping out.

So the only value you attach to him is how much you can use him? Besides - what
is the quality of that leadership if you cannot take criticism? You do not have
to like his opinions, but you can respect the man's knowledge and allow for
that. So what if he is critical and abrasive - who cares? This site has always
needed volunteers, but if this is the way to go, stretch the purse strings and
offer him money. If he then sells his soul, you can control his mouth like you
would any other employee. Until then, a volunteer is exactly that and entitled
to his opinions and his own website. Cancel his posts if such offend your sensibilities.

This thing you did was churlish and you might be able to justify it in the mirror,
but that will be the only place it is going to make sense.

A little harsh and frankly over-the-top, IMO.

Russell and the other admins “take criticism” on a regular basis, as evidenced
by yours and other posts. There’s always much more to it than is spelt-out, especially
for us here in the forum, i.e. we don’t have all the info or backstory, nor will
we.

We have no idea beyond the forum, what Russell and the others put-up with in
their efforts. I am pleasantly surprised though, that Russell takes the time
to share at the level that he does.

But these are just the opinions and thoughts of one, in the minority, member,
as unpopular as they may be.

And by the way, I'm not in favor of banning unless it's truly egregious
behavior, or continued breaching of the TOS agreement.


When Mark posted this link to the very nice pictures with details of part variants,
was it really necessary that you exposed the links to pictures of the competing
site and bringing this to the attention of admins?. Just have a look at the outcome:
We have now lost a valuable member of the community. For future posts, consider
the "The three sieves of Socrates" first.

Contemporary drama is not enough in these sequestered times, we're invoking
the classics now?: https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1186894

I wasn't "exposing" but was having what I thought would be a conversation.
Honestly didn't know there was anything to hide. Ironically, you and a few
others did feel there was, though? If you take time to read my past posts, you'll
know I don't exhibit such behavior as exposing supposed rule breaking.

Look at the empirical not innuendo.

What is being "exposed" and what I am learning here through a few of the
responses, is the corrupt thinking of some. It's okay to offend against our
site, as long as the offender is part of the clan or pack. I've seen time
and time again here in the forum, just how many are quick to pounce on those
who are not on the list, often newbies that just happen to breach the
TOS, even in the slightest manner.

If you enjoy quoting the classics, have a look at the term hypocrite.

-Cory
 Author: WoutR View Messages Posted By WoutR
 Posted: Mar 23, 2020 09:46
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 92 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

WoutR (700)

Location:  Netherlands, Zuid-Holland
Member Since Contact Type Status
Mar 8, 2011 Contact Member Buyer
Buying Privileges - OK
In General, popsicle writes:
  In General, manganschlamm writes:
  In General, popsicle writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  In General, Admin_Russell writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  Why do you want to alienate members who voluntarily contribute their time, money
and effort to make this site better in a manner not even your paid catalogue
assistants or whatever they are called can do? Simple – you let ego get in the
way of sound reasoning.

I have no desire to alienate such members. I have expressed my desire a number
of times that mfav would return to producing part photos of exceptional quality
for the site. But he is frustrated with the current leadership (which I am a
part of) so unless that changes, or there is a noticeable change in focus,
he is not likely to start helping out.

So the only value you attach to him is how much you can use him? Besides - what
is the quality of that leadership if you cannot take criticism? You do not have
to like his opinions, but you can respect the man's knowledge and allow for
that. So what if he is critical and abrasive - who cares? This site has always
needed volunteers, but if this is the way to go, stretch the purse strings and
offer him money. If he then sells his soul, you can control his mouth like you
would any other employee. Until then, a volunteer is exactly that and entitled
to his opinions and his own website. Cancel his posts if such offend your sensibilities.

This thing you did was churlish and you might be able to justify it in the mirror,
but that will be the only place it is going to make sense.

A little harsh and frankly over-the-top, IMO.

Russell and the other admins “take criticism” on a regular basis, as evidenced
by yours and other posts. There’s always much more to it than is spelt-out, especially
for us here in the forum, i.e. we don’t have all the info or backstory, nor will
we.

We have no idea beyond the forum, what Russell and the others put-up with in
their efforts. I am pleasantly surprised though, that Russell takes the time
to share at the level that he does.

But these are just the opinions and thoughts of one, in the minority, member,
as unpopular as they may be.

And by the way, I'm not in favor of banning unless it's truly egregious
behavior, or continued breaching of the TOS agreement.


When Mark posted this link to the very nice pictures with details of part variants,
was it really necessary that you exposed the links to pictures of the competing
site and bringing this to the attention of admins?. Just have a look at the outcome:
We have now lost a valuable member of the community. For future posts, consider
the "The three sieves of Socrates" first.

Contemporary drama is not enough in these sequestered times, we're invoking
the classics now?: https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1186894

I wasn't "exposing" but was having what I thought would be a conversation.
Honestly didn't know there was anything to hide. Ironically, you and a few
others did feel there was, though? If you take time to read my past posts, you'll
know I don't exhibit such behavior as exposing supposed rule breaking.

Look at the empirical not innuendo.

What is being "exposed" and what I am learning here through a few of the
responses, is the corrupt thinking of some. It's okay to offend against our
site, as long as the offender is part of the clan or pack. I've seen time
and time again here in the forum, just how many are quick to pounce on those
who are not on the list, often newbies that just happen to breach the
TOS, even in the slightest manner.

If you enjoy quoting the classics, have a look at the term hypocrite.

-Cory

It doesn't matter who was banned. My problem is that I do not understand
which rule was broken.

He linked to his own site without intending to take sales away from Bricklink.
That site does not sell LEGO. As far as I can see, that is allowed.

There happen to be links there to another site that sells LEGO. So what? LEGO
fan sites are full of similar links going everywhere.

Why is this a problem, but not mentioning the LEGO website or posting an Ebay
item number?
 Author: tEoS View Messages Posted By tEoS
 Posted: Mar 24, 2020 14:04
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 77 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

tEoS (4985)

Location:  USA, Michigan
Member Since Contact Type Status
Dec 24, 2002 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store Closed Store: The Elements Of Surprise
Well, he was constantly shaming BL operations and staff through the comic strips
posted on the forum, which should be enough for a forum ban.

Generally, active members don't receive a perma-ban on the first offense.
Instead, they are given a time-out period. I think I once was given a few days
to a week off the forum.

Some members have been given multiples of these time-outs. Someone really has
to cross the line to receive a perma-ban and likely knows what they did to receive
it.

  It doesn't matter who was banned. My problem is that I do not understand
which rule was broken.

He linked to his own site without intending to take sales away from Bricklink.
That site does not sell LEGO. As far as I can see, that is allowed.

There happen to be links there to another site that sells LEGO. So what? LEGO
fan sites are full of similar links going everywhere.

Why is this a problem, but not mentioning the LEGO website or posting an Ebay
item number?
 Author: manganschlamm View Messages Posted By manganschlamm
 Posted: Mar 23, 2020 10:39
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 79 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

manganschlamm (1406)

Location:  Germany, Rheinland-Pfalz
Member Since Contact Type Status
Mar 8, 2016 Contact Member Buyer
Buying Privileges - OK
In General, popsicle writes:
  In General, manganschlamm writes:
  In General, popsicle writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  In General, Admin_Russell writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  Why do you want to alienate members who voluntarily contribute their time, money
and effort to make this site better in a manner not even your paid catalogue
assistants or whatever they are called can do? Simple – you let ego get in the
way of sound reasoning.

I have no desire to alienate such members. I have expressed my desire a number
of times that mfav would return to producing part photos of exceptional quality
for the site. But he is frustrated with the current leadership (which I am a
part of) so unless that changes, or there is a noticeable change in focus,
he is not likely to start helping out.

So the only value you attach to him is how much you can use him? Besides - what
is the quality of that leadership if you cannot take criticism? You do not have
to like his opinions, but you can respect the man's knowledge and allow for
that. So what if he is critical and abrasive - who cares? This site has always
needed volunteers, but if this is the way to go, stretch the purse strings and
offer him money. If he then sells his soul, you can control his mouth like you
would any other employee. Until then, a volunteer is exactly that and entitled
to his opinions and his own website. Cancel his posts if such offend your sensibilities.

This thing you did was churlish and you might be able to justify it in the mirror,
but that will be the only place it is going to make sense.

A little harsh and frankly over-the-top, IMO.

Russell and the other admins “take criticism” on a regular basis, as evidenced
by yours and other posts. There’s always much more to it than is spelt-out, especially
for us here in the forum, i.e. we don’t have all the info or backstory, nor will
we.

We have no idea beyond the forum, what Russell and the others put-up with in
their efforts. I am pleasantly surprised though, that Russell takes the time
to share at the level that he does.

But these are just the opinions and thoughts of one, in the minority, member,
as unpopular as they may be.

And by the way, I'm not in favor of banning unless it's truly egregious
behavior, or continued breaching of the TOS agreement.


When Mark posted this link to the very nice pictures with details of part variants,
was it really necessary that you exposed the links to pictures of the competing
site and bringing this to the attention of admins?. Just have a look at the outcome:
We have now lost a valuable member of the community. For future posts, consider
the "The three sieves of Socrates" first.

Contemporary drama is not enough in these sequestered times, we're invoking
the classics now?: https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1186894

I wasn't "exposing" but was having what I thought would be a conversation.
Honestly didn't know there was anything to hide. Ironically, you and a few
others did feel there was, though? If you take time to read my past posts, you'll
know I don't exhibit such behavior as exposing supposed rule breaking.

Look at the empirical not innuendo.

What is being "exposed" and what I am learning here through a few of the
responses, is the corrupt thinking of some. It's okay to offend against our
site, as long as the offender is part of the clan or pack. I've seen time
and time again here in the forum, just how many are quick to pounce on those
who are not on the list, often newbies that just happen to breach the
TOS, even in the slightest manner.

If you enjoy quoting the classics, have a look at the term hypocrite.

-Cory


When I referred to exposing, I meant bringing to the attention of admins, who
were obviously looking for a reason to ban Mark. Simply because they felt annoyed
by his constant fact based criticisms and possibly also by his cartoons. This
is what I meant, nothing else. The reasons given for the banning are in my opinion
constructed and do not stand critical review, but who cares about facts if there
are political reasons to justify something.
 Author: popsicle View Messages Posted By popsicle
 Posted: Mar 24, 2020 10:39
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 110 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

popsicle (5767)

Location:  USA, Washington
Member Since Contact Type Status
Feb 21, 2006 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: ConstrucToys
In General, manganschlamm writes:
  In General, popsicle writes:
  In General, manganschlamm writes:
  In General, popsicle writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  In General, Admin_Russell writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  Why do you want to alienate members who voluntarily contribute their time, money
and effort to make this site better in a manner not even your paid catalogue
assistants or whatever they are called can do? Simple – you let ego get in the
way of sound reasoning.

I have no desire to alienate such members. I have expressed my desire a number
of times that mfav would return to producing part photos of exceptional quality
for the site. But he is frustrated with the current leadership (which I am a
part of) so unless that changes, or there is a noticeable change in focus,
he is not likely to start helping out.

So the only value you attach to him is how much you can use him? Besides - what
is the quality of that leadership if you cannot take criticism? You do not have
to like his opinions, but you can respect the man's knowledge and allow for
that. So what if he is critical and abrasive - who cares? This site has always
needed volunteers, but if this is the way to go, stretch the purse strings and
offer him money. If he then sells his soul, you can control his mouth like you
would any other employee. Until then, a volunteer is exactly that and entitled
to his opinions and his own website. Cancel his posts if such offend your sensibilities.

This thing you did was churlish and you might be able to justify it in the mirror,
but that will be the only place it is going to make sense.

A little harsh and frankly over-the-top, IMO.

Russell and the other admins “take criticism” on a regular basis, as evidenced
by yours and other posts. There’s always much more to it than is spelt-out, especially
for us here in the forum, i.e. we don’t have all the info or backstory, nor will
we.

We have no idea beyond the forum, what Russell and the others put-up with in
their efforts. I am pleasantly surprised though, that Russell takes the time
to share at the level that he does.

But these are just the opinions and thoughts of one, in the minority, member,
as unpopular as they may be.

And by the way, I'm not in favor of banning unless it's truly egregious
behavior, or continued breaching of the TOS agreement.


When Mark posted this link to the very nice pictures with details of part variants,
was it really necessary that you exposed the links to pictures of the competing
site and bringing this to the attention of admins?. Just have a look at the outcome:
We have now lost a valuable member of the community. For future posts, consider
the "The three sieves of Socrates" first.

Contemporary drama is not enough in these sequestered times, we're invoking
the classics now?: https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1186894

I wasn't "exposing" but was having what I thought would be a conversation.
Honestly didn't know there was anything to hide. Ironically, you and a few
others did feel there was, though? If you take time to read my past posts, you'll
know I don't exhibit such behavior as exposing supposed rule breaking.

Look at the empirical not innuendo.

What is being "exposed" and what I am learning here through a few of the
responses, is the corrupt thinking of some. It's okay to offend against our
site, as long as the offender is part of the clan or pack. I've seen time
and time again here in the forum, just how many are quick to pounce on those
who are not on the list, often newbies that just happen to breach the
TOS, even in the slightest manner.

If you enjoy quoting the classics, have a look at the term hypocrite.

-Cory


When I referred to exposing, I meant bringing to the attention of admins,

And how did I do this exactly, by asking a question in the forum?

  who were obviously looking for a reason to ban Mark. Simply because they felt annoyed
by his constant fact based criticisms and possibly also by his cartoons.

How is it you know this? What insight do you have that I don't, into how
admins "feel" about any particular member?

  This is what I meant, nothing else. The reasons given for the banning are in my opinion
constructed and do not stand critical review, but who cares about facts if there
are political reasons to justify something.
 Author: TheBrickGuys View Messages Posted By TheBrickGuys
 Posted: Mar 23, 2020 10:51
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 85 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

TheBrickGuys (9288)

Location:  USA, California
Member Since Contact Type Status
Dec 18, 2010 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: TheBrickGuys
In General, popsicle writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  In General, Admin_Russell writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  Why do you want to alienate members who voluntarily contribute their time, money
and effort to make this site better in a manner not even your paid catalogue
assistants or whatever they are called can do? Simple – you let ego get in the
way of sound reasoning.

I have no desire to alienate such members. I have expressed my desire a number
of times that mfav would return to producing part photos of exceptional quality
for the site. But he is frustrated with the current leadership (which I am a
part of) so unless that changes, or there is a noticeable change in focus,
he is not likely to start helping out.

So the only value you attach to him is how much you can use him? Besides - what
is the quality of that leadership if you cannot take criticism? You do not have
to like his opinions, but you can respect the man's knowledge and allow for
that. So what if he is critical and abrasive - who cares? This site has always
needed volunteers, but if this is the way to go, stretch the purse strings and
offer him money. If he then sells his soul, you can control his mouth like you
would any other employee. Until then, a volunteer is exactly that and entitled
to his opinions and his own website. Cancel his posts if such offend your sensibilities.

This thing you did was churlish and you might be able to justify it in the mirror,
but that will be the only place it is going to make sense.

A little harsh and frankly over-the-top, IMO.

Russell and the other admins “take criticism” on a regular basis, as evidenced
by yours and other posts. There’s always much more to it than is spelt-out, especially
for us here in the forum, i.e. we don’t have all the info or backstory, nor will
we.

We have no idea beyond the forum, what Russell and the others put-up with in
their efforts. I am pleasantly surprised though, that Russell takes the time
to share at the level that he does.

But these are just the opinions and thoughts of one, in the minority, member,
as unpopular as they may be.

And by the way, I'm not in favor of banning unless it's truly egregious
behavior, or continued breaching of the TOS agreement.

+2
 Author: Teup View Messages Posted By Teup
 Posted: Mar 22, 2020 19:08
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 123 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

Teup (4442)

Location:  Netherlands, Utrecht
Member Since Contact Type Status
May 6, 2004 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: The T-workshop
In General, Admin_Russell writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  Why do you want to alienate members who voluntarily contribute their time, money
and effort to make this site better in a manner not even your paid catalogue
assistants or whatever they are called can do? Simple – you let ego get in the
way of sound reasoning.

I have no desire to alienate such members. I have expressed my desire a number
of times that mfav would return to producing part photos of exceptional quality
for the site. But he is frustrated with the current leadership (which I am a
part of) so unless that changes, or there is a noticeable change in focus,
he is not likely to start helping out.

It was linking to BO because he was frustrated with BL? I think it was linking
to BO because that was the most convenient tool to use for that particular purpose.
This is also what Mark seems to be saying and I don't see a reason to doubt
it. I don't really see how him being frustrated with the leadership factors
into this thing at all. I only see you bringing that up. The only result from
that sentiment that I've seen are some great comics.
 Author: Proprietor View Messages Posted By Proprietor
 Posted: Mar 23, 2020 00:00
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 113 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

Proprietor (1680)

Location:  USA, New York
Member Since Contact Type Status Collage
Oct 18, 2011 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
View Collage Pic
Store Closed Store: Lost & Found
Just got caught up on this and the original thread.

I don’t see how Mark violated any BL terms by setting links on his own website.

This seemingly unilateral Admin decision is alarming and sets a bad precedent
and tone.

I think a response from someone in management other than Russell is necessary
to address the growing membership concern. Requiring Mark contribute to the site
to get the ban lifted is not OK, nor is banning members wantonly. I’ve never
seem a commerce site push members away more than BL does.

Guessing that listing about my sincere concerns will put me at risk of being
banned. I’d rather die for speaking out...

In General, Teup writes:
  In General, Admin_Russell writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  Why do you want to alienate members who voluntarily contribute their time, money
and effort to make this site better in a manner not even your paid catalogue
assistants or whatever they are called can do? Simple – you let ego get in the
way of sound reasoning.

I have no desire to alienate such members. I have expressed my desire a number
of times that mfav would return to producing part photos of exceptional quality
for the site. But he is frustrated with the current leadership (which I am a
part of) so unless that changes, or there is a noticeable change in focus,
he is not likely to start helping out.

It was linking to BO because he was frustrated with BL? I think it was linking
to BO because that was the most convenient tool to use for that particular purpose.
This is also what Mark seems to be saying and I don't see a reason to doubt
it. I don't really see how him being frustrated with the leadership factors
into this thing at all. I only see you bringing that up. The only result from
that sentiment that I've seen are some great comics.
 Author: Admin_Russell View Messages Posted By Admin_Russell
 Posted: Mar 23, 2020 03:09
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 230 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

Admin_Russell

Location:  USA, California
Member Since Contact Type Status
May 9, 2017 Contact Member Admin
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
BrickLink Administrator
In General, Proprietor writes:
  Just got caught up on this and the original thread.

I don’t see how Mark violated any BL terms by setting links on his own website.

This seemingly unilateral Admin decision is alarming and sets a bad precedent
and tone.

I think a response from someone in management other than Russell is necessary
to address the growing membership concern. Requiring Mark contribute to the site
to get the ban lifted is not OK, nor is banning members wantonly. I’ve never
seem a commerce site push members away more than BL does.

Guessing that listing about my sincere concerns will put me at risk of being
banned. I’d rather die for speaking out...

Since you are unlikely to get a response from someone in management other than
myself, I will address your concerns.

What you see developing in this thread is a one-sided story. Forum discipline
is a private matter between the site and the individual member. In this case
mfav chose to publicly display the communication I sent to him regarding the
ban.

I strongly recommend against publicly sharing such conversations. It was against
Forum rules for a while, but I recently removed it because it would have the
affect of heaping penalty upon penalty for those that found themselves in trouble.
The real penalty, of course, is that you burn your bridges and it makes it really
hard for the other party to ever trust you again with private communication.

So as a matter of principle, I am not going to publicly get into the exact rules
that were broken or whether or not the rules we have should be the rules. I realize
that leaves me open to criticism without a defense, but this is nothing new in
the Forum. I'll take the bad with the good.

A couple more points:

1) As someone who makes every effort to foster a vibrant community here on BrickLink,
and equally as someone who has campaigned for years to increase the level of
community contribution to the catalog (in addition to contributing a lot myself),
I am acutely aware of what we lose when a member like mfav gets banned. It's
unfortunate, but it was the best alternative.

2) We will accept a certain amount of negative responses to this situation over
the next few days. One of the roles of the Forum is that of a pressure valve,
so that members can let off some steam.

But for those who continue to bring this issue up in the future and question
the need for this Forum ban, you may given a ban yourself, based on Forum rule
no. 1:

Be respectful of others. We don't want to discourage banter or healthy
debate. However, hostile or insulting messages aimed at other users, BrickLink,
or its employees are not acceptable.
 Author: SylvainLS View Messages Posted By SylvainLS
 Posted: Mar 23, 2020 13:22
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 80 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

SylvainLS (32)

Location:  France, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
Member Since Contact Type Status
Apr 25, 2014 Contact Member Buyer
Buying Privileges - OK
In General, Admin_Russell writes:
  […]
So as a matter of principle, I am not going to publicly get into the exact rules
that were broken or whether or not the rules we have should be the rules. I realize
that leaves me open to criticism without a defense, but this is nothing new in
the Forum. I'll take the bad with the good.

Two problems with that:

1. How are we not to break the rules if we don’t know them or if they change
on a whim, “à la tête du client” (depending on whom they are applied to)?

2. Mfav published your message. So, are you saying the reasons given in said
message aren’t the ones for which he was banned?
Curious. At least Sheryl used trumped up charges that were listed in the rules.
 Author: Proprietor View Messages Posted By Proprietor
 Posted: Mar 23, 2020 20:29
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 90 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

Proprietor (1680)

Location:  USA, New York
Member Since Contact Type Status Collage
Oct 18, 2011 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
View Collage Pic
Store Closed Store: Lost & Found
Questioning the motives, decision or actions of BL isn’t by definition “hostile
or insulting” of course.

In General, Admin_Russell writes:
  In General, Proprietor writes:
  Just got caught up on this and the original thread.

I don’t see how Mark violated any BL terms by setting links on his own website.

This seemingly unilateral Admin decision is alarming and sets a bad precedent
and tone.

I think a response from someone in management other than Russell is necessary
to address the growing membership concern. Requiring Mark contribute to the site
to get the ban lifted is not OK, nor is banning members wantonly. I’ve never
seem a commerce site push members away more than BL does.

Guessing that listing about my sincere concerns will put me at risk of being
banned. I’d rather die for speaking out...

Since you are unlikely to get a response from someone in management other than
myself, I will address your concerns.

What you see developing in this thread is a one-sided story. Forum discipline
is a private matter between the site and the individual member. In this case
mfav chose to publicly display the communication I sent to him regarding the
ban.

I strongly recommend against publicly sharing such conversations. It was against
Forum rules for a while, but I recently removed it because it would have the
affect of heaping penalty upon penalty for those that found themselves in trouble.
The real penalty, of course, is that you burn your bridges and it makes it really
hard for the other party to ever trust you again with private communication.

So as a matter of principle, I am not going to publicly get into the exact rules
that were broken or whether or not the rules we have should be the rules. I realize
that leaves me open to criticism without a defense, but this is nothing new in
the Forum. I'll take the bad with the good.

A couple more points:

1) As someone who makes every effort to foster a vibrant community here on BrickLink,
and equally as someone who has campaigned for years to increase the level of
community contribution to the catalog (in addition to contributing a lot myself),
I am acutely aware of what we lose when a member like mfav gets banned. It's
unfortunate, but it was the best alternative.

2) We will accept a certain amount of negative responses to this situation over
the next few days. One of the roles of the Forum is that of a pressure valve,
so that members can let off some steam.

But for those who continue to bring this issue up in the future and question
the need for this Forum ban, you may given a ban yourself, based on Forum rule
no. 1:

Be respectful of others. We don't want to discourage banter or healthy
debate. However, hostile or insulting messages aimed at other users, BrickLink,
or its employees are not acceptable.
 Author: StarBrick View Messages Posted By StarBrick
 Posted: Mar 23, 2020 12:55
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 69 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

StarBrick (5395)

Location:  Netherlands, Gelderland
Member Since Contact Type Status
Oct 18, 2008 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: StarBrick's BrickShop
In General, Teup writes:
  

It was linking to BO because he was frustrated with BL? I think it was linking
to BO because that was the most convenient tool to use for that particular purpose.
This is also what Mark seems to be saying and I don't see a reason to doubt
it. I don't really see how him being frustrated with the leadership factors
into this thing at all. I only see you bringing that up. The only result from
that sentiment that I've seen are some great comics.

+1
 Author: Leftoverbricks View Messages Posted By Leftoverbricks
 Posted: Mar 23, 2020 12:20
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 117 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

Leftoverbricks (1462)

Location:  Netherlands, Overijssel
Member Since Contact Type Status
Mar 11, 2012 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: Leftoverbricks
In General, Admin_Russell writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  Why do you want to alienate members who voluntarily contribute their time, money
and effort to make this site better in a manner not even your paid catalogue
assistants or whatever they are called can do? Simple – you let ego get in the
way of sound reasoning.

I have no desire to alienate such members. I have expressed my desire a number
of times that mfav would return to producing part photos of exceptional quality
for the site. But he is frustrated with the current leadership (which I am a
part of)
so unless that changes, or there is a noticeable change in focus,
he is not likely to start helping out.

I'm commenting on the bold highlighted words above.
It looks like you're speaking in behalf of The LEGO Group. Is that really
true? Earlier you mentioned that you now are on the payroll of TLG. But can you
decide solely to ban/approve/cancel forum posts or make other decisions to the
forum or catalogue?

I feel there's a growing sense of disapproval amongst members for Admin_Russell's
decisions.

I acknowledge that you are very committed to BL and you have contributed a lot
to the site in the past, paid and unpaid.
But now that you are paid by TLG I have a few questions for you.

Are your actions on this site blessed and approved by TLG or do you have a
'carte blanche'? Are you accountable to the TLG?
 Author: manganschlamm View Messages Posted By manganschlamm
 Posted: Mar 23, 2020 15:03
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 82 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

manganschlamm (1406)

Location:  Germany, Rheinland-Pfalz
Member Since Contact Type Status
Mar 8, 2016 Contact Member Buyer
Buying Privileges - OK
In General, Leftoverbricks writes:
  In General, Admin_Russell writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  Why do you want to alienate members who voluntarily contribute their time, money
and effort to make this site better in a manner not even your paid catalogue
assistants or whatever they are called can do? Simple – you let ego get in the
way of sound reasoning.

I have no desire to alienate such members. I have expressed my desire a number
of times that mfav would return to producing part photos of exceptional quality
for the site. But he is frustrated with the current leadership (which I am a
part of)
so unless that changes, or there is a noticeable change in focus,
he is not likely to start helping out.

I'm commenting on the bold highlighted words above.
It looks like you're speaking in behalf of The LEGO Group. Is that really
true? Earlier you mentioned that you now are on the payroll of TLG. But can you
decide solely to ban/approve/cancel forum posts or make other decisions to the
forum or catalogue?

I feel there's a growing sense of disapproval amongst members for Admin_Russell's
decisions.

I acknowledge that you are very committed to BL and you have contributed a lot
to the site in the past, paid and unpaid.
But now that you are paid by TLG I have a few questions for you.

Are your actions on this site blessed and approved by TLG or do you have a
'carte blanche'? Are you accountable to the TLG?



This question would need to be directed to Julia Golding I believe.
 Author: Admin_Russell View Messages Posted By Admin_Russell
 Posted: Mar 23, 2020 16:12
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 158 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

Admin_Russell

Location:  USA, California
Member Since Contact Type Status
May 9, 2017 Contact Member Admin
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
BrickLink Administrator
In General, Leftoverbricks writes:
  In General, Admin_Russell writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  Why do you want to alienate members who voluntarily contribute their time, money
and effort to make this site better in a manner not even your paid catalogue
assistants or whatever they are called can do? Simple – you let ego get in the
way of sound reasoning.

I have no desire to alienate such members. I have expressed my desire a number
of times that mfav would return to producing part photos of exceptional quality
for the site. But he is frustrated with the current leadership (which I am a
part of)
so unless that changes, or there is a noticeable change in focus,
he is not likely to start helping out.

I'm commenting on the bold highlighted words above.
It looks like you're speaking in behalf of The LEGO Group. Is that really
true? Earlier you mentioned that you now are on the payroll of TLG. But can you
decide solely to ban/approve/cancel forum posts or make other decisions to the
forum or catalogue?

Our Discussions Moderators, who are currently in the process of onboarding to
the new Community Expert Program, have the authority to cancel posts, lock threads,
and ban members. Their privileges are codified in a written agreement with the
site and in the Terms of Service.

I also have these privileges, in addition to the ability to revoke buying and
selling privileges, deleting feedback, deleting items for sale, banning people
from the Help Desk, and terminating accounts. I can also add and remove administrators
from their positions.

At the BrickLink staff level, I can (and do) also appoint others to do these
tasks.

  I feel there's a growing sense of disapproval amongst members for Admin_Russell's
decisions.

In the context of this thread, I would agree. But in terms of the general membership
or the general Forum readership, I don't think that is accurate.

  I acknowledge that you are very committed to BL and you have contributed a lot
to the site in the past, paid and unpaid.
But now that you are paid by TLG I have a few questions for you.

Are your actions on this site blessed and approved by TLG or do you have a
'carte blanche'? Are you accountable to the TLG?


As any other BrickLink employee, I am completely accountable to my superiors.
They in turn are accountable to people further on up the authority ladder in
the LEGO Group.
 Author: popsicle View Messages Posted By popsicle
 Posted: Mar 23, 2020 17:35
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 103 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

popsicle (5767)

Location:  USA, Washington
Member Since Contact Type Status
Feb 21, 2006 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: ConstrucToys
In General, Admin_Russell writes:
  In General, Leftoverbricks writes:
  In General, Admin_Russell writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  Why do you want to alienate members who voluntarily contribute their time, money
and effort to make this site better in a manner not even your paid catalogue
assistants or whatever they are called can do? Simple – you let ego get in the
way of sound reasoning.

I have no desire to alienate such members. I have expressed my desire a number
of times that mfav would return to producing part photos of exceptional quality
for the site. But he is frustrated with the current leadership (which I am a
part of)
so unless that changes, or there is a noticeable change in focus,
he is not likely to start helping out.

I'm commenting on the bold highlighted words above.
It looks like you're speaking in behalf of The LEGO Group. Is that really
true? Earlier you mentioned that you now are on the payroll of TLG. But can you
decide solely to ban/approve/cancel forum posts or make other decisions to the
forum or catalogue?

Our Discussions Moderators, who are currently in the process of onboarding to
the new Community Expert Program, have the authority to cancel posts, lock threads,
and ban members. Their privileges are codified in a written agreement with the
site and in the Terms of Service.

I also have these privileges, in addition to the ability to revoke buying and
selling privileges, deleting feedback, deleting items for sale, banning people
from the Help Desk, and terminating accounts. I can also add and remove administrators
from their positions.

At the BrickLink staff level, I can (and do) also appoint others to do these
tasks.

  I feel there's a growing sense of disapproval amongst members for Admin_Russell's
decisions.

In the context of this thread, I would agree. But in terms of the general membership
or the general Forum readership,

I don't think that is accurate.

It's not accurate. It's all too common that we few dozen forum regulars
back'n forthing with each other, assume our input is the consensus view of
the overall site. It's erroneous thinking, at best.

  
  I acknowledge that you are very committed to BL and you have contributed a lot
to the site in the past, paid and unpaid.
But now that you are paid by TLG I have a few questions for you.

Are your actions on this site blessed and approved by TLG or do you have a
'carte blanche'? Are you accountable to the TLG?


As any other BrickLink employee, I am completely accountable to my superiors.
They in turn are accountable to people further on up the authority ladder in
the LEGO Group.
 Author: 62Bricks View Messages Posted By 62Bricks
 Posted: Mar 23, 2020 17:49
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 82 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

62Bricks (874)

Location:  USA, Missouri
Member Since Contact Type Status
Jan 27, 2002 Member Does Not Allow Contact Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: 62 Bricks
In General, popsicle writes:
  In General, Admin_Russell writes:


  
  
In the context of this thread, I would agree. But in terms of the general membership
or the general Forum readership,

I don't think that is accurate.

It's not accurate. It's all too common that we few dozen forum regulars
back'n forthing with each other, assume our input is the consensus view of
the overall site. It's erroneous thinking, at best.

I don't disagree, but in this case the subject at hand is access to the forum,
so the opinions of a few dozen forum regulars seem relevant.

The vast number of members who never participate in the forum probably also do
not care who has posting privileges. The vast number of members who never submit
parts, photos or inventories probably do not care who is or is not contributing
and why.

The people who care most about these things are the few dozen forum regulars
who are here talking about them daily. And those are the people who are being
driven away.
 Author: popsicle View Messages Posted By popsicle
 Posted: Mar 23, 2020 18:51
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 106 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

popsicle (5767)

Location:  USA, Washington
Member Since Contact Type Status
Feb 21, 2006 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: ConstrucToys
In General, 62Bricks writes:
  In General, popsicle writes:
  In General, Admin_Russell writes:


  
  
In the context of this thread, I would agree. But in terms of the general membership
or the general Forum readership,

I don't think that is accurate.

It's not accurate. It's all too common that we few dozen forum regulars
back'n forthing with each other, assume our input is the consensus view of
the overall site. It's erroneous thinking, at best.

I don't disagree, but in this case the subject at hand is access to the forum,
so the opinions of a few dozen forum regulars seem relevant.

What you say makes less sense if you place back in, what you omitted of Leftoverbricks's
post, and what Russell, and I by extension, were replying to:

"I feel there's a growing sense of disapproval amongst members for Admin_Russell's
decisions."

Which is entirely unfounded.

-Cory
  
The vast number of members who never participate in the forum probably also do
not care who has posting privileges. The vast number of members who never submit
parts, photos or inventories probably do not care who is or is not contributing
and why.

The people who care most about these things are the few dozen forum regulars
who are here talking about them daily. And those are the people who are being
driven away.

Look, I get it. I'd like to see him back in the forum too. I was certain
he would be back, if he still wanted to come back. But Mark seems to be "burning
bridges" as Russell puts it. So I'm a little less certain than I initially
was.

I spoke to him just after it happened. Who doesn't like a talented personality
type such as Mark? But there seems to be a lot going regarding this, behind
the scenes. Much we don't know.

I read what you shared of your experiences, too, and know your feelings on the
subject.

-Cory
 Author: 62Bricks View Messages Posted By 62Bricks
 Posted: Mar 23, 2020 19:19
 Subject: (Cancelled)
 Viewed: 63 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

62Bricks (874)

Location:  USA, Missouri
Member Since Contact Type Status
Jan 27, 2002 Member Does Not Allow Contact Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: 62 Bricks
(Cancelled)
 Author: popsicle View Messages Posted By popsicle
 Posted: Mar 24, 2020 01:03
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 98 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

popsicle (5767)

Location:  USA, Washington
Member Since Contact Type Status
Feb 21, 2006 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: ConstrucToys
In General, popsicle writes:
  In General, 62Bricks writes:
  In General, popsicle writes:
  In General, Admin_Russell writes:


  
  
In the context of this thread, I would agree. But in terms of the general membership
or the general Forum readership,

I don't think that is accurate.

It's not accurate. It's all too common that we few dozen forum regulars
back'n forthing with each other, assume our input is the consensus view of
the overall site. It's erroneous thinking, at best.

I don't disagree, but in this case the subject at hand is access to the forum,
so the opinions of a few dozen forum regulars seem relevant.

What you say makes less sense if you place back in, what you omitted of Leftoverbricks's
post, and what Russell, and I by extension, were replying to:

"I feel there's a growing sense of disapproval amongst members for Admin_Russell's
decisions."

Which is entirely unfounded.

-Cory
  
The vast number of members who never participate in the forum probably also do
not care who has posting privileges. The vast number of members who never submit
parts, photos or inventories probably do not care who is or is not contributing
and why.

The people who care most about these things are the few dozen forum regulars
who are here talking about them daily. And those are the people who are being
driven away.

Look, I get it. I'd like to see him back in the forum too. I was certain
he would be back, if he still wanted to come back. But Mark seems to be "burning
bridges" as Russell puts it. So I'm a little less certain than I initially
was.

I spoke to him just after it happened.

And by spoke, I meant correspondence via email.
 Author: BigBBricks View Messages Posted By BigBBricks
 Posted: Mar 23, 2020 18:05
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 78 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

BigBBricks (9246)

Location:  USA, Pennsylvania
Member Since Contact Type Status
Dec 2, 2013 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: Big B Bricks
In General, Admin_Russell writes:
  In General, Leftoverbricks writes:
  In General, Admin_Russell writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  Why do you want to alienate members who voluntarily contribute their time, money
and effort to make this site better in a manner not even your paid catalogue
assistants or whatever they are called can do? Simple – you let ego get in the
way of sound reasoning.

I have no desire to alienate such members. I have expressed my desire a number
of times that mfav would return to producing part photos of exceptional quality
for the site. But he is frustrated with the current leadership (which I am a
part of)
so unless that changes, or there is a noticeable change in focus,
he is not likely to start helping out.

I'm commenting on the bold highlighted words above.
It looks like you're speaking in behalf of The LEGO Group. Is that really
true? Earlier you mentioned that you now are on the payroll of TLG. But can you
decide solely to ban/approve/cancel forum posts or make other decisions to the
forum or catalogue?

Our Discussions Moderators, who are currently in the process of onboarding to
the new Community Expert Program, have the authority to cancel posts, lock threads,
and ban members. Their privileges are codified in a written agreement with the
site and in the Terms of Service.

I also have these privileges, in addition to the ability to revoke buying and
selling privileges, deleting feedback, deleting items for sale, banning people
from the Help Desk, and terminating accounts. I can also add and remove administrators
from their positions.

At the BrickLink staff level, I can (and do) also appoint others to do these
tasks.

  I feel there's a growing sense of disapproval amongst members for Admin_Russell's
decisions.

In the context of this thread, I would agree. But in terms of the general membership
or the general Forum readership, I don't think that is accurate.

  I acknowledge that you are very committed to BL and you have contributed a lot
to the site in the past, paid and unpaid.
But now that you are paid by TLG I have a few questions for you.

Are your actions on this site blessed and approved by TLG or do you have a
'carte blanche'? Are you accountable to the TLG?


As any other BrickLink employee, I am completely accountable to my superiors.
They in turn are accountable to people further on up the authority ladder in
the LEGO Group.

Russell, so in your eyes, the only eyes of TLG that are present, the user overstepped.
In the eyes of the majority of the commenters, you, the only visible management
BL has, overstepped. Additionally it appears that you happened to have overstepped,
in their eyes, with a member that was producing what many may have previously
thought was a starical comic about the day-to-day goings on of an alternative
universe BrickLink. Previously.

Now, from the outside looking in, without having a horse in either race, the
optics on this look like the comic hits closer to home and reality for the employees.
No idea on the truth but the optics on this are terrible for BL, especially with
your counter argument being that the member was okay when they were working for
the company for free.

Just sayin', look at the optics man.

- Not a forum regular
 Author: Leftoverbricks View Messages Posted By Leftoverbricks
 Posted: Mar 24, 2020 11:56
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 80 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

Leftoverbricks (1462)

Location:  Netherlands, Overijssel
Member Since Contact Type Status
Mar 11, 2012 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: Leftoverbricks
In General, Admin_Russell writes:
  In General, Leftoverbricks writes:
  In General, Admin_Russell writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  Why do you want to alienate members who voluntarily contribute their time, money
and effort to make this site better in a manner not even your paid catalogue
assistants or whatever they are called can do? Simple – you let ego get in the
way of sound reasoning.

I have no desire to alienate such members. I have expressed my desire a number
of times that mfav would return to producing part photos of exceptional quality
for the site. But he is frustrated with the current leadership (which I am a
part of)
so unless that changes, or there is a noticeable change in focus,
he is not likely to start helping out.

I'm commenting on the bold highlighted words above.
It looks like you're speaking in behalf of The LEGO Group. Is that really
true? Earlier you mentioned that you now are on the payroll of TLG. But can you
decide solely to ban/approve/cancel forum posts or make other decisions to the
forum or catalogue?

Our Discussions Moderators, who are currently in the process of onboarding to
the new Community Expert Program, have the authority to cancel posts, lock threads,
and ban members. Their privileges are codified in a written agreement with the
site and in the Terms of Service.

I also have these privileges, in addition to the ability to revoke buying and
selling privileges, deleting feedback, deleting items for sale, banning people
from the Help Desk, and terminating accounts. I can also add and remove administrators
from their positions.

At the BrickLink staff level, I can (and do) also appoint others to do these
tasks.

  I feel there's a growing sense of disapproval amongst members for Admin_Russell's
decisions.

In the context of this thread, I would agree. But in terms of the general membership
or the general Forum readership, I don't think that is accurate.

  I acknowledge that you are very committed to BL and you have contributed a lot
to the site in the past, paid and unpaid.
But now that you are paid by TLG I have a few questions for you.

Are your actions on this site blessed and approved by TLG or do you have a
'carte blanche'? Are you accountable to the TLG?


As any other BrickLink employee, I am completely accountable to my superiors.
They in turn are accountable to people further on up the authority ladder in
the LEGO Group.

Thanks for your answer.
 Author: infinibrix View Messages Posted By infinibrix
 Posted: Mar 24, 2020 03:33
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 110 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

infinibrix (2604)

Location:  United Kingdom, England
Member Since Contact Type Status
Jul 1, 2013 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: infinibrix
In General, Leftoverbricks writes:
  In General, Admin_Russell writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  Why do you want to alienate members who voluntarily contribute their time, money
and effort to make this site better in a manner not even your paid catalogue
assistants or whatever they are called can do? Simple – you let ego get in the
way of sound reasoning.

I have no desire to alienate such members. I have expressed my desire a number
of times that mfav would return to producing part photos of exceptional quality
for the site. But he is frustrated with the current leadership (which I am a
part of)
so unless that changes, or there is a noticeable change in focus,
he is not likely to start helping out.

I'm commenting on the bold highlighted words above.
It looks like you're speaking in behalf of The LEGO Group. Is that really
true? Earlier you mentioned that you now are on the payroll of TLG. But can you
decide solely to ban/approve/cancel forum posts or make other decisions to the
forum or catalogue?

I feel there's a growing sense of disapproval amongst members for Admin_Russell's
decisions.

I acknowledge that you are very committed to BL and you have contributed a lot
to the site in the past, paid and unpaid.
But now that you are paid by TLG I have a few questions for you.

Are your actions on this site blessed and approved by TLG or do you have a
'carte blanche'? Are you accountable to the TLG?


To be fair it’s this type of inappropriate questioning of TLG and its admins
(not just by you) that will see the community no longer even have a forum and
then people really will have something to complain about and yet nowhere to actually
complain??

The forum should NOT be seen as an ‘Entitlement’ to be able to publicly undermine,
question or insult the admins but a ‘Privilege’ where you can make suggestions,
voice your concerns, perhaps agree/disagree, ask questions and hopefully get
helpful answers? We might not always agree with TLG or its admins but there’s
a right and wrong way to go about things or at least a more respectful way!

Comments like the below are clearly aimed at trying to stir up and rally further
hostility/negativity towards the admin Russell:-

"I feel there's a growing sense of disapproval amongst members for Admin_Russell's
decisions."

However please don’t speak for us all or at least not me! and for those that
don’t understand why a certain person or certain people may have been banned?
Well whilst I can’t fully comment on that I do understand enough to know that
it’s in absolutely no organisation or companies’ best interest to allow their
own public forum to be riddled with comments that negatively mock, insult or
show a general lack of respect for that organisation or its associated admins
and I’m sure it’s certainly not in the spirit of the way the Lego group would
want its Bricklink members to come across to the wider community so with that
said does it really come as any surprise that the admins should choose to remove
certain posts and ban certain members?

The Lego Group own the forum now and so who are we to question how they choose
to moderate it after all its often our comments that can leave a negative reflection
on TLG and yet despite all this they still give us more freedom of speech than
most other organisations would even begin to put up with so be grateful we even
have a forum because perhaps one day TLG might feel its easier to just pull the
plug on it!
 Author: nectara View Messages Posted By nectara
 Posted: Mar 24, 2020 04:37
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 86 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

nectara (3934)

Location:  United Kingdom, England
Member Since Contact Type Status
Dec 14, 2015 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: LondonBricks
In General, infinibrix writes:

  The forum should NOT be seen as an ‘Entitlement’ to be able to publicly undermine,
question or insult the admins but a ‘Privilege’ where you can make suggestions,
voice your concerns, perhaps agree/disagree, ask questions and hopefully get
helpful answers? We might not always agree with TLG or its admins but there’s
a right and wrong way to go about things or at least a more respectful way!

Comments like the below are clearly aimed at trying to stir up and rally further
hostility/negativity towards the admin Russell:-



+1
 Author: 62Bricks View Messages Posted By 62Bricks
 Posted: Mar 24, 2020 10:49
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 118 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

62Bricks (874)

Location:  USA, Missouri
Member Since Contact Type Status
Jan 27, 2002 Member Does Not Allow Contact Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: 62 Bricks
In General, infinibrix writes:
  In General, Leftoverbricks writes:
  In General, Admin_Russell writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  Why do you want to alienate members who voluntarily contribute their time, money
and effort to make this site better in a manner not even your paid catalogue
assistants or whatever they are called can do? Simple – you let ego get in the
way of sound reasoning.

I have no desire to alienate such members. I have expressed my desire a number
of times that mfav would return to producing part photos of exceptional quality
for the site. But he is frustrated with the current leadership (which I am a
part of)
so unless that changes, or there is a noticeable change in focus,
he is not likely to start helping out.

I'm commenting on the bold highlighted words above.
It looks like you're speaking in behalf of The LEGO Group. Is that really
true? Earlier you mentioned that you now are on the payroll of TLG. But can you
decide solely to ban/approve/cancel forum posts or make other decisions to the
forum or catalogue?

I feel there's a growing sense of disapproval amongst members for Admin_Russell's
decisions.

I acknowledge that you are very committed to BL and you have contributed a lot
to the site in the past, paid and unpaid.
But now that you are paid by TLG I have a few questions for you.

Are your actions on this site blessed and approved by TLG or do you have a
'carte blanche'? Are you accountable to the TLG?


To be fair it’s this type of inappropriate questioning of TLG and its admins
(not just by you) that will see the community no longer even have a forum and
then people really will have something to complain about and yet nowhere to actually
complain??

The forum should NOT be seen as an ‘Entitlement’ to be able to publicly undermine,
question or insult the admins but a ‘Privilege’ where you can make suggestions,
voice your concerns, perhaps agree/disagree, ask questions and hopefully get
helpful answers? We might not always agree with TLG or its admins but there’s
a right and wrong way to go about things or at least a more respectful way!

Comments like the below are clearly aimed at trying to stir up and rally further
hostility/negativity towards the admin Russell:-

"I feel there's a growing sense of disapproval amongst members for Admin_Russell's
decisions."

However please don’t speak for us all or at least not me! and for those that
don’t understand why a certain person or certain people may have been banned?
Well whilst I can’t fully comment on that I do understand enough to know that
it’s in absolutely no organisation or companies’ best interest to allow their
own public forum to be riddled with comments that negatively mock, insult or
show a general lack of respect for that organisation or its associated admins
and I’m sure it’s certainly not in the spirit of the way the Lego group would
want its Bricklink members to come across to the wider community so with that
said does it really come as any surprise that the admins should choose to remove
certain posts and ban certain members?

The Lego Group own the forum now and so who are we to question how they choose
to moderate it after all its often our comments that can leave a negative reflection
on TLG and yet despite all this they still give us more freedom of speech than
most other organisations would even begin to put up with so be grateful we even
have a forum because perhaps one day TLG might feel its easier to just pull the
plug on it!

Your sentiments are probably shared by many users. The question here is what
actions result in the loss of the privilege of forum access.

Because as we can all see, our actions outside of Bricklink are now grounds for
removing our access here. Today, linking to a page that links to a competitor
from your own webpage is grounds for being removed from the forum. But that rule
is not in the terms of use.

Then there is the question of actions aligning with words. At the bottom of every
catalog page, Bricklink links to outside pages that, in turn, link to sites where
Lego is sold in competition with Bricklink. This is grounds to ban a member from
the forum, but Bricklink itself has about 135,000 links (and counting) that do
the same thing.

And at least once in the past couple weeks an admin has linked to an outside
informational page on a site where competing items are sold on the same site.

You are correct that forum posting is a privilege, and strictly speaking Bricklink
needs no reason at all to ban you because of the "sole discretion" language in
the terms. But when those actions are taken in clear conflict with practice elsewhere
on the site, and when some are allowed to do the same things others are being
banned for, I think it is proper to question what is going on.
 Author: infinibrix View Messages Posted By infinibrix
 Posted: Mar 24, 2020 13:47
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 76 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

infinibrix (2604)

Location:  United Kingdom, England
Member Since Contact Type Status
Jul 1, 2013 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: infinibrix
In General, 62Bricks writes:
  In General, infinibrix writes:
  In General, Leftoverbricks writes:
  In General, Admin_Russell writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  Why do you want to alienate members who voluntarily contribute their time, money
and effort to make this site better in a manner not even your paid catalogue
assistants or whatever they are called can do? Simple – you let ego get in the
way of sound reasoning.

I have no desire to alienate such members. I have expressed my desire a number
of times that mfav would return to producing part photos of exceptional quality
for the site. But he is frustrated with the current leadership (which I am a
part of)
so unless that changes, or there is a noticeable change in focus,
he is not likely to start helping out.

I'm commenting on the bold highlighted words above.
It looks like you're speaking in behalf of The LEGO Group. Is that really
true? Earlier you mentioned that you now are on the payroll of TLG. But can you
decide solely to ban/approve/cancel forum posts or make other decisions to the
forum or catalogue?

I feel there's a growing sense of disapproval amongst members for Admin_Russell's
decisions.

I acknowledge that you are very committed to BL and you have contributed a lot
to the site in the past, paid and unpaid.
But now that you are paid by TLG I have a few questions for you.

Are your actions on this site blessed and approved by TLG or do you have a
'carte blanche'? Are you accountable to the TLG?


To be fair it’s this type of inappropriate questioning of TLG and its admins
(not just by you) that will see the community no longer even have a forum and
then people really will have something to complain about and yet nowhere to actually
complain??

The forum should NOT be seen as an ‘Entitlement’ to be able to publicly undermine,
question or insult the admins but a ‘Privilege’ where you can make suggestions,
voice your concerns, perhaps agree/disagree, ask questions and hopefully get
helpful answers? We might not always agree with TLG or its admins but there’s
a right and wrong way to go about things or at least a more respectful way!

Comments like the below are clearly aimed at trying to stir up and rally further
hostility/negativity towards the admin Russell:-

"I feel there's a growing sense of disapproval amongst members for Admin_Russell's
decisions."

However please don’t speak for us all or at least not me! and for those that
don’t understand why a certain person or certain people may have been banned?
Well whilst I can’t fully comment on that I do understand enough to know that
it’s in absolutely no organisation or companies’ best interest to allow their
own public forum to be riddled with comments that negatively mock, insult or
show a general lack of respect for that organisation or its associated admins
and I’m sure it’s certainly not in the spirit of the way the Lego group would
want its Bricklink members to come across to the wider community so with that
said does it really come as any surprise that the admins should choose to remove
certain posts and ban certain members?

The Lego Group own the forum now and so who are we to question how they choose
to moderate it after all its often our comments that can leave a negative reflection
on TLG and yet despite all this they still give us more freedom of speech than
most other organisations would even begin to put up with so be grateful we even
have a forum because perhaps one day TLG might feel its easier to just pull the
plug on it!

Your sentiments are probably shared by many users. The question here is what
actions result in the loss of the privilege of forum access.

Because as we can all see, our actions outside of Bricklink are now grounds for
removing our access here. Today, linking to a page that links to a competitor
from your own webpage is grounds for being removed from the forum. But that rule
is not in the terms of use.

Then there is the question of actions aligning with words. At the bottom of every
catalog page, Bricklink links to outside pages that, in turn, link to sites where
Lego is sold in competition with Bricklink. This is grounds to ban a member from
the forum, but Bricklink itself has about 135,000 links (and counting) that do
the same thing.

And at least once in the past couple weeks an admin has linked to an outside
informational page on a site where competing items are sold on the same site.

You are correct that forum posting is a privilege, and strictly speaking Bricklink
needs no reason at all to ban you because of the "sole discretion" language in
the terms. But when those actions are taken in clear conflict with practice elsewhere
on the site, and when some are allowed to do the same things others are being
banned for, I think it is proper to question what is going on.


The question is was all this avoidable by the member in the first place?

I wasn’t going to comment on mfav’s case because I do not know all the facts
and I cannot speak on behalf of the admins but I will just ‘Speculate’ based
on my own observations and say that it probably comes down to a number of contributing
factors rather than one single thing being the underlining factor but for starters
his comic strips would often seem to depict the admins and TLG as trash can wearing
half-wits that don’t have a clue what’s going on or what they are doing and whilst
this will no doubt be meant as a harmless joke and will be seen as this on the
first few occasions as it goes on and on constantly showing them in this light
it starts to become disrespectful and it starts to set a precedent for others
to think its okay to continuously and publicly prevoke, mock and criticise the
admin and TLG’s efforts when we should be trying to support them during this
vital time of change!
I’m sure we are all very good at being the brunt of a joke and able to laugh
at ourselves but when its only ever directed at you I think you will agree that
it then starts to get a little too personal!

Then referring to Russell as ‘Sloppy’ in the forum and appearing to go against
the grain by choosing to purposely link to Brickowl for no obvious reason other
than it would seem to make some kind of point and yet rather than just give a
reasonable explanation or attempt to adhere to the required change of links another
member and Russell are met with a spikey response of “With all due respect, it's
none of your business.” And when all said and done if you keep prodding at the
beehive, expect to get stung!

That said and from what I’ve seen of Russells private response/reply its seemed
quite a reasonable request to me and yet mfav has chosen not to comply in order
to have his forum privileges re-instated and so who’s fault is that?
 Author: SylvainLS View Messages Posted By SylvainLS
 Posted: Mar 24, 2020 14:02
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 68 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

SylvainLS (32)

Location:  France, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
Member Since Contact Type Status
Apr 25, 2014 Contact Member Buyer
Buying Privileges - OK
In General, infinibrix writes:
  […]
The question is was all this avoidable by the member in the first place?

I wasn’t going to comment on mfav’s case because I do not know all the facts
and I cannot speak on behalf of the admins but I will just ‘Speculate’ based
on my own observations and say that it probably comes down to a number of contributing
factors rather than one single thing being the underlining factor but for starters
his comic strips would often seem to depict the admins and TLG as trash can wearing
half-wits that don’t have a clue what’s going on or what they are doing and whilst
this will no doubt be meant as a harmless joke and will be seen as this on the
first few occasions as it goes on and on constantly showing them in this light
it starts to become disrespectful and it starts to set a precedent for others
to think its okay to continuously and publicly prevoke, mock and criticise the
admin and TLG’s efforts when we should be trying to support them during this
vital time of change!
I’m sure we are all very good at being the brunt of a joke and able to laugh
at ourselves but when its only ever directed at you I think you will agree that
it then starts to get a little too personal!

Then referring to Russell as ‘Sloppy’ in the forum and appearing to go against
the grain by choosing to purposely link to Brickowl for no obvious reason other
than it would seem to make some kind of point and yet rather than just give a
reasonable explanation or attempt to adhere to the required change of links another
member and Russell are met with a spikey response of “With all due respect, it's
none of your business.” And when all said and done if you keep prodding at the
beehive, expect to get stung!

That said and from what I’ve seen of Russells private response/reply its seemed
quite a reasonable request to me and yet mfav has chosen not to comply in order
to have his forum privileges re-instated and so who’s fault is that?

“Guv’, she asked for it: she wore a skirt!”

Disgusting.
 Author: popsicle View Messages Posted By popsicle
 Posted: Mar 24, 2020 14:31
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 80 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

popsicle (5767)

Location:  USA, Washington
Member Since Contact Type Status
Feb 21, 2006 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: ConstrucToys
In General, infinibrix writes:
  In General, 62Bricks writes:
  In General, infinibrix writes:
  In General, Leftoverbricks writes:
  In General, Admin_Russell writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  Why do you want to alienate members who voluntarily contribute their time, money
and effort to make this site better in a manner not even your paid catalogue
assistants or whatever they are called can do? Simple – you let ego get in the
way of sound reasoning.

I have no desire to alienate such members. I have expressed my desire a number
of times that mfav would return to producing part photos of exceptional quality
for the site. But he is frustrated with the current leadership (which I am a
part of)
so unless that changes, or there is a noticeable change in focus,
he is not likely to start helping out.

I'm commenting on the bold highlighted words above.
It looks like you're speaking in behalf of The LEGO Group. Is that really
true? Earlier you mentioned that you now are on the payroll of TLG. But can you
decide solely to ban/approve/cancel forum posts or make other decisions to the
forum or catalogue?

I feel there's a growing sense of disapproval amongst members for Admin_Russell's
decisions.

I acknowledge that you are very committed to BL and you have contributed a lot
to the site in the past, paid and unpaid.
But now that you are paid by TLG I have a few questions for you.

Are your actions on this site blessed and approved by TLG or do you have a
'carte blanche'? Are you accountable to the TLG?


To be fair it’s this type of inappropriate questioning of TLG and its admins
(not just by you) that will see the community no longer even have a forum and
then people really will have something to complain about and yet nowhere to actually
complain??

The forum should NOT be seen as an ‘Entitlement’ to be able to publicly undermine,
question or insult the admins but a ‘Privilege’ where you can make suggestions,
voice your concerns, perhaps agree/disagree, ask questions and hopefully get
helpful answers? We might not always agree with TLG or its admins but there’s
a right and wrong way to go about things or at least a more respectful way!

Comments like the below are clearly aimed at trying to stir up and rally further
hostility/negativity towards the admin Russell:-

"I feel there's a growing sense of disapproval amongst members for Admin_Russell's
decisions."

However please don’t speak for us all or at least not me! and for those that
don’t understand why a certain person or certain people may have been banned?
Well whilst I can’t fully comment on that I do understand enough to know that
it’s in absolutely no organisation or companies’ best interest to allow their
own public forum to be riddled with comments that negatively mock, insult or
show a general lack of respect for that organisation or its associated admins
and I’m sure it’s certainly not in the spirit of the way the Lego group would
want its Bricklink members to come across to the wider community so with that
said does it really come as any surprise that the admins should choose to remove
certain posts and ban certain members?

The Lego Group own the forum now and so who are we to question how they choose
to moderate it after all its often our comments that can leave a negative reflection
on TLG and yet despite all this they still give us more freedom of speech than
most other organisations would even begin to put up with so be grateful we even
have a forum because perhaps one day TLG might feel its easier to just pull the
plug on it!

Your sentiments are probably shared by many users. The question here is what
actions result in the loss of the privilege of forum access.

Because as we can all see, our actions outside of Bricklink are now grounds for
removing our access here. Today, linking to a page that links to a competitor
from your own webpage is grounds for being removed from the forum. But that rule
is not in the terms of use.

Then there is the question of actions aligning with words. At the bottom of every
catalog page, Bricklink links to outside pages that, in turn, link to sites where
Lego is sold in competition with Bricklink. This is grounds to ban a member from
the forum, but Bricklink itself has about 135,000 links (and counting) that do
the same thing.

And at least once in the past couple weeks an admin has linked to an outside
informational page on a site where competing items are sold on the same site.

You are correct that forum posting is a privilege, and strictly speaking Bricklink
needs no reason at all to ban you because of the "sole discretion" language in
the terms. But when those actions are taken in clear conflict with practice elsewhere
on the site, and when some are allowed to do the same things others are being
banned for, I think it is proper to question what is going on.


The question is was all this avoidable by the member in the first place?

I wasn’t going to comment on mfav’s case because I do not know all the facts
and I cannot speak on behalf of the admins but I will just ‘Speculate’ based
on my own observations and say that it probably comes down to a number of contributing
factors rather than one single thing being the underlining factor but for starters
his comic strips would often seem to depict the admins and TLG as trash can wearing
half-wits that don’t have a clue what’s going on or what they are doing and whilst
this will no doubt be meant as a harmless joke and will be seen as this on the
first few occasions as it goes on and on constantly showing them in this light
it starts to become disrespectful and it starts to set a precedent for others
to think its okay to continuously and publicly prevoke, mock and criticise the
admin and TLG’s efforts when we should be trying to support them during this
vital time of change!
I’m sure we are all very good at being the brunt of a joke and able to laugh
at ourselves but when its only ever directed at you I think you will agree that
it then starts to get a little too personal!

Then referring to Russell as ‘Sloppy’ in the forum and appearing to go against
the grain by choosing to purposely link to Brickowl for no obvious reason other
than it would seem to make some kind of point and yet rather than just give a
reasonable explanation or attempt to adhere to the required change of links another
member and Russell are met with a spikey response of “With all due respect, it's
none of your business.” And when all said and done if you keep prodding at the
beehive, expect to get stung!

That said and from what I’ve seen of Russells private response/reply its seemed
quite a reasonable request to me and yet mfav has chosen not to comply in order
to have his forum privileges re-instated and so who’s fault is that?

As with many of your posts; well reasoned and well stated. You strike me as an
individual that doesn't mind swimming against the current. I admire that.
Thank you

-Cory
 Author: infinibrix View Messages Posted By infinibrix
 Posted: Mar 24, 2020 16:09
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 68 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

infinibrix (2604)

Location:  United Kingdom, England
Member Since Contact Type Status
Jul 1, 2013 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: infinibrix
In General, popsicle writes:

  As with many of your posts; well reasoned and well stated. You strike me as an
individual that doesn't mind swimming against the current. I admire that.
Thank you

-Cory

Thats okay and in future if you could also agree with me even when I'm in
the wrong I think we will get on just fine! at least I'm learning that
this seems to be the best way to operate on the forum based on watching others!
 Author: popsicle View Messages Posted By popsicle
 Posted: Mar 24, 2020 16:43
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 58 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

popsicle (5767)

Location:  USA, Washington
Member Since Contact Type Status
Feb 21, 2006 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: ConstrucToys
In General, infinibrix writes:
  In General, popsicle writes:

  As with many of your posts; well reasoned and well stated. You strike me as an
individual that doesn't mind swimming against the current. I admire that.
Thank you

-Cory

Thats okay and in future if you could also agree with me even when I'm in
the wrong I think we will get on just fine! at least I'm learning that
this seems to be the best way to operate on the forum based on watching others!


+1

I've already earned myself placement on another stoplist, least favorite
and ignore list (the trifecta of pissed-off) from my posts in this thread. Must
be doing something right!

Enjoy your evening, or as best you can during these days of sequester...
 Author: infinibrix View Messages Posted By infinibrix
 Posted: Mar 24, 2020 17:02
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 52 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

infinibrix (2604)

Location:  United Kingdom, England
Member Since Contact Type Status
Jul 1, 2013 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: infinibrix
In General, popsicle writes:
  +1

I've already earned myself placement on another stoplist, least favorite
and ignore list (the trifecta of pissed-off) from my posts in this thread. Must
be doing something right!

Enjoy your evening, or as best you can during these days of sequester...

Oh in that case I've changed my mind and no longer wish to be associated
with you then as I only hang out with those that seem to be right up there in
the popularity ratings! but have a good evening anyway
 Author: bje View Messages Posted By bje
 Posted: Mar 24, 2020 14:35
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 92 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

bje (1368)

Location:  South Africa, Western Cape
Member Since Contact Type Status
May 24, 2010 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: JE Bricks
In General, infinibrix writes:
snip
  
Then referring to Russell as ‘Sloppy’ in the forum and appearing to go against
the grain by choosing to purposely link to Brickowl for no obvious reason other
than it would seem to make some kind of point and yet rather than just give a
reasonable explanation or attempt to adhere to the required change of links another
member and Russell are met with a spikey response of “With all due respect, it's
none of your business.” And when all said and done if you keep prodding at the
beehive, expect to get stung!

For your information, that page:
Used BrickOwl's images;
Used BrickOwl's item names;
Linked to BrickOwl.

For all you know, the page was designed to help a BrickOwl member. Irrespective,
if BrickOwl's images are used the least you can do honour that with a link
on your very own private website.

Since it was a private website using all of BrickOwl's own material, the
response was exactly spot on: It has stuff all to do with ANY BrickLink member.

(see if you can find this part in the catelogue: bar with top stud, two side
studs

I'll help you:
https://www.bricklink.com/v2/search.page?q=bar%20with%20top%20stud,%20two%20side%20studs

  
That said and from what I’ve seen of Russells private response/reply its seemed
quite a reasonable request to me and yet mfav has chosen not to comply in order
to have his forum privileges re-instated and so who’s fault is that?

Really?
No sir mr policman, he walked into my fist. Its his own fault he is bleeding
No pastor, I sort of fell betweem her legs. Its her own fault she got pregnant
 Author: manganschlamm View Messages Posted By manganschlamm
 Posted: Mar 24, 2020 14:45
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 89 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

manganschlamm (1406)

Location:  Germany, Rheinland-Pfalz
Member Since Contact Type Status
Mar 8, 2016 Contact Member Buyer
Buying Privileges - OK
In General, bje writes:
  In General, infinibrix writes:
snip
  
Then referring to Russell as ‘Sloppy’ in the forum and appearing to go against
the grain by choosing to purposely link to Brickowl for no obvious reason other
than it would seem to make some kind of point and yet rather than just give a
reasonable explanation or attempt to adhere to the required change of links another
member and Russell are met with a spikey response of “With all due respect, it's
none of your business.” And when all said and done if you keep prodding at the
beehive, expect to get stung!

For your information, that page:
Used BrickOwl's images;
Used BrickOwl's item names;
Linked to BrickOwl.

For all you know, the page was designed to help a BrickOwl member. Irrespective,
if BrickOwl's images are used the least you can do honour that with a link
on your very own private website.

Since it was a private website using all of BrickOwl's own material, the
response was exactly spot on: It has stuff all to do with ANY BrickLink member.

(see if you can find this part in the catelogue: bar with top stud, two side
studs

I'll help you:
https://www.bricklink.com/v2/search.page?q=bar%20with%20top%20stud,%20two%20side%20studs

  
That said and from what I’ve seen of Russells private response/reply its seemed
quite a reasonable request to me and yet mfav has chosen not to comply in order
to have his forum privileges re-instated and so who’s fault is that?

Really?
No sir mr policman, he walked into my fist. Its his own fault he is bleeding
No pastor, I sort of fell betweem her legs. Its her own fault she got pregnant


Here comes a preposition: According to the new TOS in case of issues with BL
we are required to use arbitration. How about some sort of arbitration mechanism
when issues between members or between members and admins arise? That would
be fair and transparent. The current systems combines the jurisdiction and the
executive into one. Which has never ever proven to be a good approach.
 Author: infinibrix View Messages Posted By infinibrix
 Posted: Mar 24, 2020 16:11
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 76 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

infinibrix (2604)

Location:  United Kingdom, England
Member Since Contact Type Status
Jul 1, 2013 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: infinibrix
In General, bje writes:
  
For your information, that page:
Used BrickOwl's images;
Used BrickOwl's item names;
Linked to BrickOwl.

For all you know, the page was designed to help a BrickOwl member. Irrespective,
if BrickOwl's images are used the least you can do honour that with a link
on your very own private website.

Since it was a private website using all of BrickOwl's own material, the
response was exactly spot on: It has stuff all to do with ANY BrickLink member.

(see if you can find this part in the catelogue: bar with top stud, two side
studs

I'll help you:
https://www.bricklink.com/v2/search.page?q=bar%20with%20top%20stud,%20two%20side%20studs

  
That said and from what I’ve seen of Russells private response/reply its seemed
quite a reasonable request to me and yet mfav has chosen not to comply in order
to have his forum privileges re-instated and so who’s fault is that?

Really?
No sir mr policman, he walked into my fist. Its his own fault he is bleeding
No pastor, I sort of fell betweem her legs. Its her own fault she got pregnant

With regards to the links it really means little to me and I neither care one
way or the other what links are put on BL even if the admins do though wasn’t
the link posted on the BL forum? and yet if he’s done no wrong then there should
be no reason for him to put his back up when questioned? But perhaps you need
to look beyond the links thing and you may find other factors to take into consideration.
If you feel frustrated that you’ve lost a good member of the community then you
should perhaps be more frustrated at mfav himself for showing an unwilling stubbornness
to conform to what is at the end of the day a reasonable olive branch request
to work with and not against TLG and from reading Russells reply it states his
forum privileges have been suspended for “trying to undermine our efforts”
So I think you have your answer there...
 Author: bje View Messages Posted By bje
 Posted: Mar 24, 2020 17:13
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 61 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

bje (1368)

Location:  South Africa, Western Cape
Member Since Contact Type Status
May 24, 2010 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: JE Bricks
In General, infinibrix writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  

snip

  
With regards to the links it really means little to me and I neither care one
way or the other what links are put on BL even if the admins do though wasn’t
the link posted on the BL forum?

No, and even if it was, it could not have assisted any member as the "frequently
unknown parts" listed on there, will still be just as, well, unknown if searched
for in BL's catalogue.
But to be fair, maybe the admins feel that describing parts in the BL catalogue
as unknown is offensive, since BL knows everything and has the right to stick
their noses in everything. You might have a point there. Sort of like signing
the ToS gives them access to your underwear drawer.

  and yet if he’s done no wrong then there should
be no reason for him to put his back up when questioned?

Maybe I'm a teensy bit of the less than cuddly type, but you certainly cannot
think that it is in within the preserve of any person to question what you or
any member do outside of BL when it does not affect BL and has nothing to do
with BL and is of no consequence to BL? Certainly if that was me, I would have
been far less polite.

  to look beyond the links thing and you may find other factors to take into consideration.

Probably, but that was not the reason cited by the admin concerned. And even
so, the links thing which does not affect BL in any way, should not be the last
log before you heat the heretic up a bit.

  If you feel frustrated that you’ve lost a good member of the community then you
should perhaps be more frustrated at mfav himself for showing an unwilling stubbornness
to conform to what is at the end of the day a reasonable olive branch request
to work with and not against TLG and from reading Russells reply it states his
forum privileges have been suspended for “trying to undermine our efforts”

What efforts were undermined exactly? It is not reasonable to expect members
to work with TLG or BL offsite. If BL admins are policing facebook and other
social media sites as well, they should go get a life. I did not agree in the
ToS to be a BL disciple and tour the land on a donkey to extol the virtues of
BL and only BL and nothing other than BL for ever and ever

  So I think you have your answer there...

Probably so if I was to be brainwashed into thinking that gratitude means servitude
 Author: SylvainLS View Messages Posted By SylvainLS
 Posted: Mar 24, 2020 17:31
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 52 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

SylvainLS (32)

Location:  France, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
Member Since Contact Type Status
Apr 25, 2014 Contact Member Buyer
Buying Privileges - OK
In General, bje writes:
  In General, infinibrix writes:
[…]
  With regards to the links it really means little to me and I neither care one
way or the other what links are put on BL even if the admins do though wasn’t
the link posted on the BL forum?

No, and even if it was, it could not have assisted any member as the "frequently
unknown parts" listed on there, will still be just as, well, unknown if searched
for in BL's catalogue.

And this question remains unanswered by the “I don’t know but he surely deserved
it” BL apologists: if the posts were a problem, why are they still here?


  […]
  So I think you have your answer there...

Probably so if I was to be brainwashed into thinking that gratitude means servitude

+1
 Author: Captain_Q View Messages Posted By Captain_Q
 Posted: Mar 24, 2020 20:30
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 83 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

Captain_Q (4971)

Location:  USA, Oregon
Member Since Contact Type Status
Aug 6, 2005 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: The Captain Q Bazaar
  What efforts were undermined exactly?


mfav did post Russell's private dm onto his website on the exact relevant
page with the BO links with his response, has since been removed, and I believe
Russell cited this as one of the problems in a pattern of non public similar
behavior.
 Author: Turez View Messages Posted By Turez
 Posted: Mar 24, 2020 17:58
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 89 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

Turez (38)

Location:  Germany, Niedersachsen
Member Since Contact Type Status
Sep 18, 2012 Contact Member Buyer
Buying Privileges - OK
In General, bje writes:
  For your information, that page:
Used BrickOwl's images;

Those are mfav's own images, not BrickOwl's images.
 Author: bje View Messages Posted By bje
 Posted: Mar 24, 2020 18:09
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 61 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

bje (1368)

Location:  South Africa, Western Cape
Member Since Contact Type Status
May 24, 2010 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: JE Bricks
In General, Turez writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  For your information, that page:
Used BrickOwl's images;

Those are mfav's own images, not BrickOwl's images.

I'm not going to post links, but I do not see a difference except in size.
If he contributed them to that catalogue, so what? It is still their image now,
same as BL would do for any catalogue image contribution.
 
 Author: WoutR View Messages Posted By WoutR
 Posted: Mar 24, 2020 18:24
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 48 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

WoutR (700)

Location:  Netherlands, Zuid-Holland
Member Since Contact Type Status
Mar 8, 2011 Contact Member Buyer
Buying Privileges - OK
In General, bje writes:
  In General, Turez writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  For your information, that page:
Used BrickOwl's images;

Those are mfav's own images, not BrickOwl's images.

I'm not going to post links, but I do not see a difference except in size.
If he contributed them to that catalogue, so what? It is still their image now,
same as BL would do for any catalogue image contribution.

It still remains his image.

When you upload an image you basicly give an unlimited licence to use the image,
but you do not lose the right to use the same image anywhere else.
 Author: bje View Messages Posted By bje
 Posted: Mar 24, 2020 18:29
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 57 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

bje (1368)

Location:  South Africa, Western Cape
Member Since Contact Type Status
May 24, 2010 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: JE Bricks
In General, WoutR writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  In General, Turez writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  For your information, that page:
Used BrickOwl's images;

Those are mfav's own images, not BrickOwl's images.

I'm not going to post links, but I do not see a difference except in size.
If he contributed them to that catalogue, so what? It is still their image now,
same as BL would do for any catalogue image contribution.

It still remains his image.

When you upload an image you basicly give an unlimited licence to use the image,
but you do not lose the right to use the same image anywhere else.

Thank you, now I understand better. Although, that would probably make the whole
issue seem even more ridiculous.
 Author: Turez View Messages Posted By Turez
 Posted: Mar 24, 2020 18:36
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 66 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

Turez (38)

Location:  Germany, Niedersachsen
Member Since Contact Type Status
Sep 18, 2012 Contact Member Buyer
Buying Privileges - OK
In General, bje writes:
  In General, Turez writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  For your information, that page:
Used BrickOwl's images;

Those are mfav's own images, not BrickOwl's images.

I'm not going to post links, but I do not see a difference except in size.
If he contributed them to that catalogue, so what? It is still their image now,
same as BL would do for any catalogue image contribution.

You're right, I didn't notice that one. But that seems to be an exception
as I checked about 20 other images and couldn't find a second identical image.
(BO has rendered images in most cases.)
 Author: Adjour View Messages Posted By Adjour
 Posted: Mar 26, 2020 17:20
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 121 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

Adjour (685)

Location:  USA, California
Member Since Contact Type Status
Aug 1, 2016 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: The Chili is a Bit Spicy
In General, Turez writes:
  In General, bje writes:
  For your information, that page:
Used BrickOwl's images;

Those are mfav's own images, not BrickOwl's images.

Click on them.
 Author: SylvainLS View Messages Posted By SylvainLS
 Posted: Mar 24, 2020 12:55
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 83 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

SylvainLS (32)

Location:  France, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
Member Since Contact Type Status
Apr 25, 2014 Contact Member Buyer
Buying Privileges - OK
In General, infinibrix writes:
  […]
and I’m sure it’s certainly not in the spirit of the way the Lego group would
want its Bricklink members to come across to the wider community so with that
said does it really come as any surprise that the admins should choose to remove
certain posts and ban certain members?

Except the posts weren’t removed….
 Author: 62Bricks View Messages Posted By 62Bricks
 Posted: Mar 22, 2020 17:18
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 180 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

62Bricks (874)

Location:  USA, Missouri
Member Since Contact Type Status
Jan 27, 2002 Member Does Not Allow Contact Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: 62 Bricks
I was banned recently. The reason given was for being disrespectful to an admin.
I'm not here to dispute my banning as that's a subjective call and as
Russell has pointed out, the fine print says it's his sandbox and he gets
to decide who plays in it.

But with recent events I started to wonder if a pattern is forming.

Like others, I had created an off-site resource that was intended to take up
some slack where BL falls short.

Like others, I frequently offered my opinion on catalog policy and practice,
and it was not always in alignment with the opinions of the admins.

And like others, the message I received on the occasion of my banning made reference
to this perceived antagonism toward BL.

As for my part, my suspicions have been confirmed by recent events. I believe
I, too, have been tagged as a "hater" and so my contributions are no longer welcome.

So, like others, having been kicked out of the sandbox, I decided I would take
my toys and go. No more change requests from me. My modest contributions probably
will not be missed. Others, however, have done much more. And they are no longer
welcome.

No more opinions on catalog policy either. I'm just going to keep my head
down and sell parts. Bricklink, Ltd. can have my fees, but not my help.
 Author: WilliamH View Messages Posted By WilliamH
 Posted: Mar 23, 2020 13:06
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 80 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

WilliamH (993)

Location:  United Kingdom, England
Member Since Contact Type Status
Jan 24, 2002 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store Closed Store: Studs On Top
In General, 62Bricks writes:
  Bricklink, Ltd. can have my fees, but not my help.

+1
 Author: Dino1 View Messages Posted By Dino1
 Posted: Mar 23, 2020 13:41
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 79 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

Dino1 (377)

Location:  Luxembourg
Member Since Contact Type Status
Oct 22, 2003 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: dino's world
In General, 62Bricks writes:
  I was banned recently. The reason given was for being disrespectful to an admin.
I'm not here to dispute my banning as that's a subjective call and as
Russell has pointed out, the fine print says it's his sandbox and he gets
to decide who plays in it.

But with recent events I started to wonder if a pattern is forming.

Like others, I had created an off-site resource that was intended to take up
some slack where BL falls short.

Like others, I frequently offered my opinion on catalog policy and practice,
and it was not always in alignment with the opinions of the admins.

And like others, the message I received on the occasion of my banning made reference
to this perceived antagonism toward BL.

As for my part, my suspicions have been confirmed by recent events. I believe
I, too, have been tagged as a "hater" and so my contributions are no longer welcome.

So, like others, having been kicked out of the sandbox, I decided I would take
my toys and go. No more change requests from me. My modest contributions probably
will not be missed. Others, however, have done much more. And they are no longer
welcome.

No more opinions on catalog policy either. I'm just going to keep my head
down and sell parts. Bricklink, Ltd. can have my fees, but not my help.

+1
 Author: calsbricks View Messages Posted By calsbricks
 Posted: Mar 23, 2020 13:48
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 90 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

calsbricks (6023)

Location:  United Kingdom, England
Member Since Contact Type Status
Aug 12, 2008 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: CalsBricks
In General, 62Bricks writes:
  I was banned recently. The reason given was for being disrespectful to an admin.
I'm not here to dispute my banning as that's a subjective call and as
Russell has pointed out, the fine print says it's his sandbox and he gets
to decide who plays in it.

But with recent events I started to wonder if a pattern is forming.

Like others, I had created an off-site resource that was intended to take up
some slack where BL falls short.

Like others, I frequently offered my opinion on catalog policy and practice,
and it was not always in alignment with the opinions of the admins.

And like others, the message I received on the occasion of my banning made reference
to this perceived antagonism toward BL.

As for my part, my suspicions have been confirmed by recent events. I believe
I, too, have been tagged as a "hater" and so my contributions are no longer welcome.

So, like others, having been kicked out of the sandbox, I decided I would take
my toys and go. No more change requests from me. My modest contributions probably
will not be missed. Others, however, have done much more. And they are no longer
welcome.

No more opinions on catalog policy either. I'm just going to keep my head
down and sell parts. Bricklink, Ltd. can have my fees, but not my help.

Over the years we have been on the site we have had our differences - some got
settled and others did not. Having said that we always respected the work and
effort that you put into the community. It is, at least in our opinion, a great
pity that it has to come to this with not only you but others. When opinions
and ideas differ - move on - simple qas that - enough said.
 Author: calsbricks View Messages Posted By calsbricks
 Posted: Mar 23, 2020 13:49
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 84 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

calsbricks (6023)

Location:  United Kingdom, England
Member Since Contact Type Status
Aug 12, 2008 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: CalsBricks
In General, calsbricks writes:
  In General, 62Bricks writes:
  I was banned recently. The reason given was for being disrespectful to an admin.
I'm not here to dispute my banning as that's a subjective call and as
Russell has pointed out, the fine print says it's his sandbox and he gets
to decide who plays in it.

But with recent events I started to wonder if a pattern is forming.

Like others, I had created an off-site resource that was intended to take up
some slack where BL falls short.

Like others, I frequently offered my opinion on catalog policy and practice,
and it was not always in alignment with the opinions of the admins.

And like others, the message I received on the occasion of my banning made reference
to this perceived antagonism toward BL.

As for my part, my suspicions have been confirmed by recent events. I believe
I, too, have been tagged as a "hater" and so my contributions are no longer welcome.

So, like others, having been kicked out of the sandbox, I decided I would take
my toys and go. No more change requests from me. My modest contributions probably
will not be missed. Others, however, have done much more. And they are no longer
welcome.

No more opinions on catalog policy either. I'm just going to keep my head
down and sell parts. Bricklink, Ltd. can have my fees, but not my help.

Over the years we have been on the site we have had our differences - some got
settled and others did not. Having said that we always respected the work and
effort that you put into the community. It is, at least in our opinion, a great
pity that it has to come to this with not only you but others. When opinions
and ideas differ - move on - simple as that - enough said.
 Author: yorbrick View Messages Posted By yorbrick
 Posted: Mar 23, 2020 14:17
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 81 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

yorbrick (719)

Location:  United Kingdom, England
Member Since Contact Type Status
Apr 11, 2011 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store Closed Store: Yorbricks
I also recently served a forum ban for pointing out something that a LEGO employee
did not want discussed.

No warning, just an instant ban.
 Author: Dino1 View Messages Posted By Dino1
 Posted: Mar 23, 2020 14:46
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 85 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

Dino1 (377)

Location:  Luxembourg
Member Since Contact Type Status
Oct 22, 2003 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: dino's world
In General, yorbrick writes:
  I also recently served a forum ban for pointing out something that a LEGO employee
did not want discussed.

No warning, just an instant ban.

https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1168295
 Author: manganschlamm View Messages Posted By manganschlamm
 Posted: Mar 23, 2020 15:01
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 72 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

manganschlamm (1406)

Location:  Germany, Rheinland-Pfalz
Member Since Contact Type Status
Mar 8, 2016 Contact Member Buyer
Buying Privileges - OK
In General, 62Bricks writes:
  I was banned recently. The reason given was for being disrespectful to an admin.
I'm not here to dispute my banning as that's a subjective call and as
Russell has pointed out, the fine print says it's his sandbox and he gets
to decide who plays in it.

But with recent events I started to wonder if a pattern is forming.

Like others, I had created an off-site resource that was intended to take up
some slack where BL falls short.

Like others, I frequently offered my opinion on catalog policy and practice,
and it was not always in alignment with the opinions of the admins.

And like others, the message I received on the occasion of my banning made reference
to this perceived antagonism toward BL.

As for my part, my suspicions have been confirmed by recent events. I believe
I, too, have been tagged as a "hater" and so my contributions are no longer welcome.

So, like others, having been kicked out of the sandbox, I decided I would take
my toys and go. No more change requests from me. My modest contributions probably
will not be missed. Others, however, have done much more. And they are no longer
welcome.

No more opinions on catalog policy either. I'm just going to keep my head
down and sell parts. Bricklink, Ltd. can have my fees, but not my help.


What needs to be understood is that as long as members engage with the community
and the forum here and give critical comments they still care for the site and
the community. They have not given up yet and they are not haters. A person who
finally gives up and becomes a hater cancels the user account at BL (or stops
any activity there), and moves to the competitor and starts contributing there.
 Author: legoman77 View Messages Posted By legoman77
 Posted: Mar 22, 2020 18:27
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 132 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

legoman77 (3620)

Location:  USA, Texas
Member Since Contact Type Status Collage
Jan 22, 2003 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
View Collage Pic
Store: 77's Bricks & Sets
In General, bje writes:
  Why do you want to alienate members who voluntarily contribute their time, money
and effort to make this site better in a manner not even your paid catalogue
assistants or whatever they are called can do? Simple – you let ego get in the
way of sound reasoning.

In a word, members who link anything to BO should not wait to be banned. Call
it BL Forum Distancing Where do you draw the line? I'll tell you – if
you link anything in your life to BO, whether it be images, your e-mail address
or for that matter your entire inventory, do the responsible thing and ban yourself.
Think of the benefits:

You do not have to be confused when a ban is given to you (you know, like: who
me??? WTH have I done??, kind of thing);

You do not waste your time doing things that might improve BL such as catalogue
images, catalogue change requests, catalogue contributions, but go unappreciated
because you are somehow offending some senseless rule made up to suit the moment;

You do not have ask why you are banned or have to post comments about it offsite,
or in other forums;

Best of all, that way you let others live in their state of complete and utter
blissful ignorance.

Members should know that the catalogue is not a volunteer project at this time.
So as far as I am concerned if there are still members willing to work for others'
remuneration, they should be commended for their efforts.

Seriously BL management and by extension, TLG Board members – is this really
what you should be wasting your time with, when you have an atlas guiding you
to all of the stuff still not dealt with in the catalogue and still have a large
volume of problems with the rest of the site as well?

Just so you know, I have never seen Mark post a link to that page when someone
in the forum has asked about parts in that list of his. If there are any links
to them in any part of the forum I might have missed, I'm sure the admins
spent a very very very productive morning finding them all and deleting them
all, and if not, the admins should be banned for allowing those links to stand.
Actually, since that member is now banned, all of his posts must also be scrubbed
and replaced with a moniker like "BLBANNER" to differentiate from the all of
the BLUSERS out there. Pfft

Would it not be simpler to send them to the Antarctic? Give them a book of matches
for a heat source.
John P
 Author: yorbrick View Messages Posted By yorbrick
 Posted: Mar 23, 2020 04:14
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 148 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

yorbrick (719)

Location:  United Kingdom, England
Member Since Contact Type Status
Apr 11, 2011 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store Closed Store: Yorbricks
It is probably time to ban all links or mention of other websites on the forum.
If someone links to br1ck53t for example, they have links to A***** where Lego
can be purchased. If links to links selling Lego are no go, that probably rules
out links to any fan sites.
 Author: jennnifer View Messages Posted By jennnifer
 Posted: Mar 26, 2020 11:32
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 127 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

jennnifer (2326)

Location:  USA, Illinois
Member Since Contact Type Status
Sep 8, 2009 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: Old Grey Bricks
I finally got around to reading this long thread and finding out what happened
to mfav. I am shocked and dismayed at the results of this incident.

It looks to me like mfav posted brilliant and useful images for the community
to share. He was then banned for linking to BO from a completely different section
of his website. However, the explanation for the ban sounded more like 'you
are not with us so you are against us.'

1) I have posted links to Brickset hundreds of times. There are links there to
other sites that sell LEGO.

2) I am a member of Brick Owl.

3) I have frequently expressed my frustration with the current leadership and
the lack of accountability and customer service.

Please ban me as well.

Jen
 Author: StormChaser View Messages Posted By StormChaser
 Posted: Mar 26, 2020 15:20
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 125 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

StormChaser (378)

Location:  USA, Oklahoma
Member Since Contact Type Status
Sep 10, 2002 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store Closed Store: Store Name
BrickLink Catalog Associate (?)
In General, jennnifer writes:
  linking to BO

The truly bizarre thing about all of this is that BrickLink acts like it has
competitors. It doesn't. There is no site that comes anywhere close to
BrickLink in any terms of comparison, or at least this is my opinion.

And that's not because BrickLink has successfully squashed the competition
with its own staunch defense of its borders, but rather a combination of multiple
other factors.

But in acting like BrickLink is fearful of being overtaken by this hypothetical
competition, BrickLink has been driving members toward such competition ever
since the incident with threatening Brick Owl some years ago when the site was
first sold.

The idea of worthy competitors is a self-fulfilling deception fueled by unalloyed
and unrestrained paranoia. Instead of bettering itself and thus ensuring it
retains its market lead, BrickLink spends a little more time than reasonable,
given the circumstances, in self-imagined skirmishes with non-existent foes.
 Author: Teup View Messages Posted By Teup
 Posted: Mar 26, 2020 15:42
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 75 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

Teup (4442)

Location:  Netherlands, Utrecht
Member Since Contact Type Status
May 6, 2004 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: The T-workshop
In General, StormChaser writes:
  In General, jennnifer writes:
  linking to BO

The truly bizarre thing about all of this is that BrickLink acts like it has
competitors. It doesn't. There is no site that comes anywhere close to
BrickLink in any terms of comparison, or at least this is my opinion.

And that's not because BrickLink has successfully squashed the competition
with its own staunch defense of its borders, but rather a combination of multiple
other factors.

But in acting like BrickLink is fearful of being overtaken by this hypothetical
competition, BrickLink has been driving members toward such competition ever
since the incident with threatening Brick Owl some years ago when the site was
first sold.

The idea of worthy competitors is a self-fulfilling deception fueled by unalloyed
and unrestrained paranoia. Instead of bettering itself and thus ensuring it
retains its market lead, BrickLink spends a little more time than reasonable,
given the circumstances, in self-imagined skirmishes with non-existent foes.

+1 This was exactly my feeling when I saw all this.
 Author: randyf View Messages Posted By randyf
 Posted: Mar 26, 2020 15:53
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 84 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

randyf (381)

Location:  USA, Ohio
Member Since Contact Type Status
Sep 16, 2009 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store Closed Store: The Bricking Spectre
BrickLink Inventories Administrator (?)
In General, StormChaser writes:
  In General, jennnifer writes:
  linking to BO

The truly bizarre thing about all of this is that BrickLink acts like it has
competitors. It doesn't. There is no site that comes anywhere close to
BrickLink in any terms of comparison, or at least this is my opinion.

And that's not because BrickLink has successfully squashed the competition
with its own staunch defense of its borders, but rather a combination of multiple
other factors.

But in acting like BrickLink is fearful of being overtaken by this hypothetical
competition, BrickLink has been driving members toward such competition ever
since the incident with threatening Brick Owl some years ago when the site was
first sold.

The idea of worthy competitors is a self-fulfilling deception fueled by unalloyed
and unrestrained paranoia. Instead of bettering itself and thus ensuring it
retains its market lead, BrickLink spends a little more time than reasonable,
given the circumstances, in self-imagined skirmishes with non-existent foes.

Wonderfully stated.
 Author: SylvainLS View Messages Posted By SylvainLS
 Posted: Mar 26, 2020 15:56
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 77 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

SylvainLS (32)

Location:  France, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
Member Since Contact Type Status
Apr 25, 2014 Contact Member Buyer
Buying Privileges - OK
In General, StormChaser writes:
  […]
BrickLink spends a little more time than reasonable,
given the circumstances, in self-imagined skirmishes with non-existent foes.

You mean, like, “Swoosh… Pew pew pew! Swoosh!”?
 Author: pitz8008 View Messages Posted By pitz8008
 Posted: Mar 26, 2020 16:13
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 88 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

pitz8008 (7956)

Location:  USA, Illinois
Member Since Contact Type Status
Dec 30, 2009 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: The Pitz Playhouse
In General, StormChaser writes:
  In General, jennnifer writes:
  linking to BO

The truly bizarre thing about all of this is that BrickLink acts like it has
competitors. It doesn't. There is no site that comes anywhere close to
BrickLink in any terms of comparison, or at least this is my opinion.

And that's not because BrickLink has successfully squashed the competition
with its own staunch defense of its borders, but rather a combination of multiple
other factors.

But in acting like BrickLink is fearful of being overtaken by this hypothetical
competition, BrickLink has been driving members toward such competition ever
since the incident with threatening Brick Owl some years ago when the site was
first sold.

The idea of worthy competitors is a self-fulfilling deception fueled by unalloyed
and unrestrained paranoia. Instead of bettering itself and thus ensuring it
retains its market lead, BrickLink spends a little more time than reasonable,
given the circumstances, in self-imagined skirmishes with non-existent foes.


Brick Owl is a competitor to Bricklink. Bricklink is clearly the big dog on the
block. But that doesn't mean they aren't competing to sell legos to the
exact same people who want to buy legos. If there was no Brick Owl, Bricklink's
sales would be even much higher than they are. That makes them competitors. And
as such, I can't fathom why people don't understand why Bricklink wouldn't
want someone having links to a website that has links to Brick Owl.
 Author: Teup View Messages Posted By Teup
 Posted: Mar 26, 2020 16:19
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 84 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

Teup (4442)

Location:  Netherlands, Utrecht
Member Since Contact Type Status
May 6, 2004 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: The T-workshop
In General, pitz8008 writes:
  In General, StormChaser writes:
  In General, jennnifer writes:
  linking to BO

The truly bizarre thing about all of this is that BrickLink acts like it has
competitors. It doesn't. There is no site that comes anywhere close to
BrickLink in any terms of comparison, or at least this is my opinion.

And that's not because BrickLink has successfully squashed the competition
with its own staunch defense of its borders, but rather a combination of multiple
other factors.

But in acting like BrickLink is fearful of being overtaken by this hypothetical
competition, BrickLink has been driving members toward such competition ever
since the incident with threatening Brick Owl some years ago when the site was
first sold.

The idea of worthy competitors is a self-fulfilling deception fueled by unalloyed
and unrestrained paranoia. Instead of bettering itself and thus ensuring it
retains its market lead, BrickLink spends a little more time than reasonable,
given the circumstances, in self-imagined skirmishes with non-existent foes.


Brick Owl is a competitor to Bricklink. Bricklink is clearly the big dog on the
block. But that doesn't mean they aren't competing to sell legos to the
exact same people who want to buy legos. If there was no Brick Owl, Bricklink's
sales would be even much higher than they are. That makes them competitors. And
as such, I can't fathom why people don't understand why Bricklink wouldn't
want someone having links to a website that has links to Brick Owl.

Surely you must understand the difference between leading people off the platform
to a sale elsewhere for which Briclink misses out on fees, versus having to live
in a role playing bubble where we need to pretend that Br*ckOwl does not exist
and any evidence of it must be erased? To me that's like not allowing people
on national television to say they "googled" something because they're mentioning
a brand. Sure, you don't want to advertise, I get that. But at some point
you need to accept that some things become part of society, or part of a community
like the AFOl community...

If that really is the way it's going to work on Bricklink, we better stick
to the Facebook group and abandon the forum entirely. That's another way
to solve the issue.
 Author: randyf View Messages Posted By randyf
 Posted: Mar 26, 2020 16:24
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 95 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

randyf (381)

Location:  USA, Ohio
Member Since Contact Type Status
Sep 16, 2009 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store Closed Store: The Bricking Spectre
BrickLink Inventories Administrator (?)
In General, pitz8008 writes:

  And as such, I can't fathom why people don't understand why Bricklink wouldn't
want someone having links to a website that has links to Brick Owl.

And BrickLink has links on every single catalog page that link to Rebrickable
which links to BrickOwl. SMH
 Author: 62Bricks View Messages Posted By 62Bricks
 Posted: Mar 26, 2020 19:14
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 104 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

62Bricks (874)

Location:  USA, Missouri
Member Since Contact Type Status
Jan 27, 2002 Member Does Not Allow Contact Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: 62 Bricks
In General, pitz8008 writes:
  In General, StormChaser writes:
  In General, jennnifer writes:
  linking to BO

The truly bizarre thing about all of this is that BrickLink acts like it has
competitors. It doesn't. There is no site that comes anywhere close to
BrickLink in any terms of comparison, or at least this is my opinion.

And that's not because BrickLink has successfully squashed the competition
with its own staunch defense of its borders, but rather a combination of multiple
other factors.

But in acting like BrickLink is fearful of being overtaken by this hypothetical
competition, BrickLink has been driving members toward such competition ever
since the incident with threatening Brick Owl some years ago when the site was
first sold.

The idea of worthy competitors is a self-fulfilling deception fueled by unalloyed
and unrestrained paranoia. Instead of bettering itself and thus ensuring it
retains its market lead, BrickLink spends a little more time than reasonable,
given the circumstances, in self-imagined skirmishes with non-existent foes.


Brick Owl is a competitor to Bricklink. Bricklink is clearly the big dog on the
block. But that doesn't mean they aren't competing to sell legos to the
exact same people who want to buy legos. If there was no Brick Owl, Bricklink's
sales would be even much higher than they are. That makes them competitors. And
as such, I can't fathom why people don't understand why Bricklink wouldn't
want someone having links to a website that has links to Brick Owl.

Why does Bricklink have 135,000 links to pages that link to Lego.com and amazon.com,
do you suppose, then?

I would think those would have been gone years ago if this were actually a priority.

But there they are. You can all draw your own conclusions. The conclusion I have
drawn based on my own personal experience, and based on the differences between
what Bricklink is saying and what Bricklink is doing, is that the fear of losing
business is not a motivating factor here.
 Author: pitz8008 View Messages Posted By pitz8008
 Posted: Mar 27, 2020 00:37
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 91 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

pitz8008 (7956)

Location:  USA, Illinois
Member Since Contact Type Status
Dec 30, 2009 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: The Pitz Playhouse
In General, 62Bricks writes:
  In General, pitz8008 writes:
  In General, StormChaser writes:
  In General, jennnifer writes:
  linking to BO

The truly bizarre thing about all of this is that BrickLink acts like it has
competitors. It doesn't. There is no site that comes anywhere close to
BrickLink in any terms of comparison, or at least this is my opinion.

And that's not because BrickLink has successfully squashed the competition
with its own staunch defense of its borders, but rather a combination of multiple
other factors.

But in acting like BrickLink is fearful of being overtaken by this hypothetical
competition, BrickLink has been driving members toward such competition ever
since the incident with threatening Brick Owl some years ago when the site was
first sold.

The idea of worthy competitors is a self-fulfilling deception fueled by unalloyed
and unrestrained paranoia. Instead of bettering itself and thus ensuring it
retains its market lead, BrickLink spends a little more time than reasonable,
given the circumstances, in self-imagined skirmishes with non-existent foes.


Brick Owl is a competitor to Bricklink. Bricklink is clearly the big dog on the
block. But that doesn't mean they aren't competing to sell legos to the
exact same people who want to buy legos. If there was no Brick Owl, Bricklink's
sales would be even much higher than they are. That makes them competitors. And
as such, I can't fathom why people don't understand why Bricklink wouldn't
want someone having links to a website that has links to Brick Owl.

Why does Bricklink have 135,000 links to pages that link to Lego.com and amazon.com,
do you suppose, then?

I would think those would have been gone years ago if this were actually a priority.

But there they are. You can all draw your own conclusions. The conclusion I have
drawn based on my own personal experience, and based on the differences between
what Bricklink is saying and what Bricklink is doing, is that the fear of losing
business is not a motivating factor here.


The main point I was making was saying that Brick Owl is a competitor. Which
they absolutely are. Anyone who says differently doesn't know what the words
competitor, competing, or competition means. However as I have also said previously,
when you need the benefit of the doubt, things like "Yo Admin" aren't going
to help your cause.
 Author: 62Bricks View Messages Posted By 62Bricks
 Posted: Mar 27, 2020 07:21
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 92 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

62Bricks (874)

Location:  USA, Missouri
Member Since Contact Type Status
Jan 27, 2002 Member Does Not Allow Contact Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: 62 Bricks
In General, pitz8008 writes:
  In General, 62Bricks writes:
  In General, pitz8008 writes:
  In General, StormChaser writes:
  In General, jennnifer writes:
  linking to BO

The truly bizarre thing about all of this is that BrickLink acts like it has
competitors. It doesn't. There is no site that comes anywhere close to
BrickLink in any terms of comparison, or at least this is my opinion.

And that's not because BrickLink has successfully squashed the competition
with its own staunch defense of its borders, but rather a combination of multiple
other factors.

But in acting like BrickLink is fearful of being overtaken by this hypothetical
competition, BrickLink has been driving members toward such competition ever
since the incident with threatening Brick Owl some years ago when the site was
first sold.

The idea of worthy competitors is a self-fulfilling deception fueled by unalloyed
and unrestrained paranoia. Instead of bettering itself and thus ensuring it
retains its market lead, BrickLink spends a little more time than reasonable,
given the circumstances, in self-imagined skirmishes with non-existent foes.


Brick Owl is a competitor to Bricklink. Bricklink is clearly the big dog on the
block. But that doesn't mean they aren't competing to sell legos to the
exact same people who want to buy legos. If there was no Brick Owl, Bricklink's
sales would be even much higher than they are. That makes them competitors. And
as such, I can't fathom why people don't understand why Bricklink wouldn't
want someone having links to a website that has links to Brick Owl.

Why does Bricklink have 135,000 links to pages that link to Lego.com and amazon.com,
do you suppose, then?

I would think those would have been gone years ago if this were actually a priority.

But there they are. You can all draw your own conclusions. The conclusion I have
drawn based on my own personal experience, and based on the differences between
what Bricklink is saying and what Bricklink is doing, is that the fear of losing
business is not a motivating factor here.


The main point I was making was saying that Brick Owl is a competitor. Which
they absolutely are. Anyone who says differently doesn't know what the words
competitor, competing, or competition means. However as I have also said previously,
when you need the benefit of the doubt, things like "Yo Admin" aren't going
to help your cause.

Brickowl is a competitor. But would you agree that Lego and Walmart are even
bigger competitors?

To get from here to Brickowl via Mark's link to his clip type page takes
me four clicks - the initial link, a menu click, click the FUP link, then click
a part name.

But why would I go through all that trouble when in just two clicks from
this page - and every page on Bricklink - I can find the items in the first picture
below for sale at Lego.com. No typing or searching required. Just two mouse clicks.

Or if I were feeling energetic, I could make three clicks from this page
and buy a set on Walmart. It took me exactly three clicks, no typing or searching,
to get to that page from here.

This is how the web works. Everything is linked. It is obviously not a concern
to Bricklink that there are links to links to competitors, since it is much easier
to get to much larger competitors from every single Bricklink page than it is
to get to smaller Brickowl from a single post buried in the forums.

So I don't think it's paranoia about Brickowl at all. I think it's
paranoia about vocal disagreement in the forums. You've got it backward.
It's "Yo, Admin" that gets you branded as a hater and banned, and linking
to links to links to Lego is just the nominal reason given.
 


 Author: pitz8008 View Messages Posted By pitz8008
 Posted: Mar 27, 2020 07:47
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 71 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

pitz8008 (7956)

Location:  USA, Illinois
Member Since Contact Type Status
Dec 30, 2009 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: The Pitz Playhouse
In General, 62Bricks writes:
  In General, pitz8008 writes:
  In General, 62Bricks writes:
  In General, pitz8008 writes:
  In General, StormChaser writes:
  In General, jennnifer writes:
  linking to BO

The truly bizarre thing about all of this is that BrickLink acts like it has
competitors. It doesn't. There is no site that comes anywhere close to
BrickLink in any terms of comparison, or at least this is my opinion.

And that's not because BrickLink has successfully squashed the competition
with its own staunch defense of its borders, but rather a combination of multiple
other factors.

But in acting like BrickLink is fearful of being overtaken by this hypothetical
competition, BrickLink has been driving members toward such competition ever
since the incident with threatening Brick Owl some years ago when the site was
first sold.

The idea of worthy competitors is a self-fulfilling deception fueled by unalloyed
and unrestrained paranoia. Instead of bettering itself and thus ensuring it
retains its market lead, BrickLink spends a little more time than reasonable,
given the circumstances, in self-imagined skirmishes with non-existent foes.


Brick Owl is a competitor to Bricklink. Bricklink is clearly the big dog on the
block. But that doesn't mean they aren't competing to sell legos to the
exact same people who want to buy legos. If there was no Brick Owl, Bricklink's
sales would be even much higher than they are. That makes them competitors. And
as such, I can't fathom why people don't understand why Bricklink wouldn't
want someone having links to a website that has links to Brick Owl.

Why does Bricklink have 135,000 links to pages that link to Lego.com and amazon.com,
do you suppose, then?

I would think those would have been gone years ago if this were actually a priority.

But there they are. You can all draw your own conclusions. The conclusion I have
drawn based on my own personal experience, and based on the differences between
what Bricklink is saying and what Bricklink is doing, is that the fear of losing
business is not a motivating factor here.


The main point I was making was saying that Brick Owl is a competitor. Which
they absolutely are. Anyone who says differently doesn't know what the words
competitor, competing, or competition means. However as I have also said previously,
when you need the benefit of the doubt, things like "Yo Admin" aren't going
to help your cause.

Brickowl is a competitor. But would you agree that Lego and Walmart are even
bigger competitors?

To get from here to Brickowl via Mark's link to his clip type page takes
me four clicks - the initial link, a menu click, click the FUP link, then click
a part name.

But why would I go through all that trouble when in just two clicks from
this page - and every page on Bricklink - I can find the items in the first picture
below for sale at Lego.com. No typing or searching required. Just two mouse clicks.

Or if I were feeling energetic, I could make three clicks from this page
and buy a set on Walmart. It took me exactly three clicks, no typing or searching,
to get to that page from here.

This is how the web works. Everything is linked. It is obviously not a concern
to Bricklink that there are links to links to competitors, since it is much easier
to get to much larger competitors from every single Bricklink page than it is
to get to smaller Brickowl from a single post buried in the forums.

So I don't think it's paranoia about Brickowl at all. I think it's
paranoia about vocal disagreement in the forums. You've got it backward.
It's "Yo, Admin" that gets you branded as a hater and banned, and linking
to links to links to Lego is just the nominal reason given.

Considering Lego owns Bricklink, they are definitely not a competitor. We can
play the "But they did it too game", but that doesn't take away the fact
that he did it. When you come off as a jerk to people, you aren't going to
get the benefit of the doubt from those same people.
 Author: WoutR View Messages Posted By WoutR
 Posted: Mar 27, 2020 07:52
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 70 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

WoutR (700)

Location:  Netherlands, Zuid-Holland
Member Since Contact Type Status
Mar 8, 2011 Contact Member Buyer
Buying Privileges - OK
In General, pitz8008 writes:
  (...) That makes them competitors. And as such, I can't fathom why people don't understand why Bricklink wouldn't want someone having links to a website that has links to Brick Owl.

I don't understand why BrickLink would have the right to make demands about
what members do on their own, private site.

BrickLink can make friendly requests. Propose to link to both sites or something
like that. Or ask the member to stop posting links to that site if the perceived
problem is big enough.

But banning a member for links on an external site? That looks extortion and
abuse of power to me.
 Author: manganschlamm View Messages Posted By manganschlamm
 Posted: Mar 27, 2020 07:58
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 68 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

manganschlamm (1406)

Location:  Germany, Rheinland-Pfalz
Member Since Contact Type Status
Mar 8, 2016 Contact Member Buyer
Buying Privileges - OK
In General, WoutR writes:
  In General, pitz8008 writes:
  (...) That makes them competitors. And as such, I can't fathom why people don't understand why Bricklink wouldn't want someone having links to a website that has links to Brick Owl.

I don't understand why BrickLink would have the right to make demands about
what members do on their own, private site.

BrickLink can make friendly requests. Propose to link to both sites or something
like that. Or ask the member to stop posting links to that site if the perceived
problem is big enough.

But banning a member for links on an external site? That looks extortion and
abuse of power to me.


This highlights the difference between the concepts of rule of law and rule of
power. Someone may not have a legal right to demand something, but exercise power
instead.
 Author: calsbricks View Messages Posted By calsbricks
 Posted: Mar 27, 2020 08:00
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 93 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

calsbricks (6023)

Location:  United Kingdom, England
Member Since Contact Type Status
Aug 12, 2008 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: CalsBricks
In General, manganschlamm writes:
  In General, WoutR writes:
  In General, pitz8008 writes:
  (...) That makes them competitors. And as such, I can't fathom why people don't understand why Bricklink wouldn't want someone having links to a website that has links to Brick Owl.

I don't understand why BrickLink would have the right to make demands about
what members do on their own, private site.

BrickLink can make friendly requests. Propose to link to both sites or something
like that. Or ask the member to stop posting links to that site if the perceived
problem is big enough.

But banning a member for links on an external site? That looks extortion and
abuse of power to me.


This highlights the difference between the concepts of rule of law and rule of
power. Someone may not have a legal right to demand something, but exercise power
instead.

It was once said with great power comes great responsibility
 Author: manganschlamm View Messages Posted By manganschlamm
 Posted: Mar 27, 2020 10:03
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 73 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

manganschlamm (1406)

Location:  Germany, Rheinland-Pfalz
Member Since Contact Type Status
Mar 8, 2016 Contact Member Buyer
Buying Privileges - OK
In General, calsbricks writes:
  In General, manganschlamm writes:
  In General, WoutR writes:
  In General, pitz8008 writes:
  (...) That makes them competitors. And as such, I can't fathom why people don't understand why Bricklink wouldn't want someone having links to a website that has links to Brick Owl.

I don't understand why BrickLink would have the right to make demands about
what members do on their own, private site.

BrickLink can make friendly requests. Propose to link to both sites or something
like that. Or ask the member to stop posting links to that site if the perceived
problem is big enough.

But banning a member for links on an external site? That looks extortion and
abuse of power to me.


This highlights the difference between the concepts of rule of law and rule of
power. Someone may not have a legal right to demand something, but exercise power
instead.

It was once said with great power comes great responsibility


Well said. And someone else said that if you really want to get to know people
give them power. Or experience hard times like now together with them.

We can measure the level of personal integrity by the amount of toilet paper
packages people buy these days. Maybe this will become the TP index one day.
 Author: yorbrick View Messages Posted By yorbrick
 Posted: Mar 27, 2020 11:57
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 55 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

yorbrick (719)

Location:  United Kingdom, England
Member Since Contact Type Status
Apr 11, 2011 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store Closed Store: Yorbricks
  It was once said with great power comes great responsibility

In some cases, you can flip it around. With responsibility comes great power.
 Author: bje View Messages Posted By bje
 Posted: Mar 27, 2020 11:24
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 76 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

bje (1368)

Location:  South Africa, Western Cape
Member Since Contact Type Status
May 24, 2010 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: JE Bricks
In General, manganschlamm writes:
  In General, WoutR writes:
  In General, pitz8008 writes:
  (...) That makes them competitors. And as such, I can't fathom why people don't understand why Bricklink wouldn't want someone having links to a website that has links to Brick Owl.

I don't understand why BrickLink would have the right to make demands about
what members do on their own, private site.

BrickLink can make friendly requests. Propose to link to both sites or something
like that. Or ask the member to stop posting links to that site if the perceived
problem is big enough.

But banning a member for links on an external site? That looks extortion and
abuse of power to me.


This highlights the difference between the concepts of rule of law and rule of
power. Someone may not have a legal right to demand something, but exercise power
instead.

Also it says something when one of the preferrd (gasp) partner (gasp) sites does
not even have a single direct link back to BL, but only to a competitor.

Its not so much power abuse as an unsubtle set of double standards.
 
 Author: randyf View Messages Posted By randyf
 Posted: Mar 27, 2020 14:27
 Subject: Re: Banning members who contribute much more...
 Viewed: 94 times
 Topic: General
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

randyf (381)

Location:  USA, Ohio
Member Since Contact Type Status
Sep 16, 2009 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store Closed Store: The Bricking Spectre
BrickLink Inventories Administrator (?)
In General, bje writes:

  Also it says something when one of the preferrd (gasp) partner (gasp) sites does
not even have a single direct link back to BL, but only to a competitor.

I know the point you are trying to make, but that is not completely true. If
you go to the page of a part on Peeron, it will list affiliated stores that are
on BrickLink with links directly to the stores. I don't think it was automatic
though. I believe you had to become an affiliate of Peeron to get your store
listed.

Cheers,
Randy