Will ASSEMBLED minifigures be DELETED in the future?
Is it really a 'violation of TOS'?
I got this message from BrickLink:
'We have reviewed your content following a report from another user. After
careful consideration, we have determined that it violates our terms of service.
Lot 286067225, Item Albus Dumbledore - Dark Red Robe, Light Bluish Gray Hair
was removed because it is incorrectly defined as NEW. Assembled minifigures would
make the condition USED. This is a violation of our Item for Sale Condition guidelines.
You may re-list the item but please correctly label the condition of the item.
The violating content has been removed from the platform. If you believe this
decision was made in error, you have the option to appeal. Visit theAppeal Content
Moderation page to begin the appeal process. Alternatives are available to you
if your appeal is unsuccessful, including our internal complaint escalation process,
out-of-court dispute settlement, and judicial redress. Please review our terms
of service for more information.'
After I sent an appeal in which I pointed out that there is no passage in the
TOS that prohibits this, I received the following reply:
'Appeal reviewed
Hello,
After reviewing your appeal regarding your removed content, our moderation team
has determined that the content violates our terms of service. The removal decision
will remain in place. As previously shared, additional options are available
to you if your appeal is unsuccessful, including our internal complaint escalation
process, out-of-court dispute settlement, and judicial redress. Please review
our terms of service for more information.
Thanks for your patience while we keep our community safe.
Kind regards,
BrickLink® Team'
So what do you, sellers, think about this NEW RULE?
I was buying and selling minifigures at BrickLink for now 22 years. At least
30% of the minifigures I bought came ASSEMBLED, but were offered as NEW.
This is an important change, that was NOT ANNOUNCED before, as I know.
This will effect the prices of minifigures massively.
Why wasn't this discussed before in the forum?
Or do most sellers agree with this new TOS?
Where is the paragraph in the TOS that I am alleged to have violated?
The answer from BL does not contain any hint to this paragraph.
I don't think it is a new rule, just a customer service staff member not
knowing the rules and making stuff up to justify their decision.
From what I understand, once something is removed they can't reinstate it
anyway. I had a custom item removed because someone reported it as incomplete.
It was incomplete and that was why it was listed as a custom item (saying that
a neck attachment was not present) and not under the catalogue entry. The annoying
thing is that they remove the custom photo and location/remarks data too. When
I complained, after a few weeks they eventually said I would have to list it
again. But in the meantime I had already sold it on ebay.
Yes, I could list it again, but they didn't change their statement: Violation
of TOS
And they didn't tell me which paragraph of the TOS prohibits this.
Yes, I could list it again, but they didn't change their statement: Violation
of TOS
And they didn't tell me which paragraph of the TOS prohibits this.
I agree. And in your case it might be dangerous to list again if they still deem
it to be a violation since they could try to punish you for a second violation.
When removing something they should always be clear why it is being removed,
pointing to the exact rule that it breaks to educate the seller so they do not
make the same mistake again. And in doing so they need to be clear of the rules
themselves. I don't agree with assembling new minifigures for sale, but unless
they specifically make it an offense to do so and publicise this, then assembled
new figures should not be removed.
This is an important change, that was NOT ANNOUNCED before, as I know.
This will effect the prices of minifigures massively.
Why wasn't this discussed before in the forum?
Or do most sellers agree with this new TOS?
Where is the paragraph in the TOS that I am alleged to have violated?
The answer from BL does not contain any hint to this paragraph.
Especially: 'Minifigures may be listed as New either assembled or unassembled.'
FWIW, I've seen sellers list minifigures as "New" if they were "for
display only" - I don't know whether that's what happened here. If
it was merely assembled and never put on display then no, it's not in violation
of the TOS, just (as yorbrick says) customer service person who doesn't know
the actual rule and probably a BL user (the one who reported the content) who
doesn't know the rule either.
Hi, been known for many years, honestly I don’t remember where I got the information,
must have been the forum. For me and a few friends that have BL shop, it’s a
well known fact.
Will ASSEMBLED minifigures be DELETED in the future?
Is it really a 'violation of TOS'?
I got this message from BrickLink:
'We have reviewed your content following a report from another user. After
careful consideration, we have determined that it violates our terms of service.
Lot 286067225, Item Albus Dumbledore - Dark Red Robe, Light Bluish Gray Hair
was removed because it is incorrectly defined as NEW. Assembled minifigures would
make the condition USED. This is a violation of our Item for Sale Condition guidelines.
You may re-list the item but please correctly label the condition of the item.
The violating content has been removed from the platform. If you believe this
decision was made in error, you have the option to appeal. Visit theAppeal Content
Moderation page to begin the appeal process. Alternatives are available to you
if your appeal is unsuccessful, including our internal complaint escalation process,
out-of-court dispute settlement, and judicial redress. Please review our terms
of service for more information.'
After I sent an appeal in which I pointed out that there is no passage in the
TOS that prohibits this, I received the following reply:
'Appeal reviewed
Hello,
After reviewing your appeal regarding your removed content, our moderation team
has determined that the content violates our terms of service. The removal decision
will remain in place. As previously shared, additional options are available
to you if your appeal is unsuccessful, including our internal complaint escalation
process, out-of-court dispute settlement, and judicial redress. Please review
our terms of service for more information.
Thanks for your patience while we keep our community safe.
Kind regards,
BrickLink® Team'
So what do you, sellers, think about this NEW RULE?
I was buying and selling minifigures at BrickLink for now 22 years. At least
30% of the minifigures I bought came ASSEMBLED, but were offered as NEW.
This is an important change, that was NOT ANNOUNCED before, as I know.
This will effect the prices of minifigures massively.
Why wasn't this discussed before in the forum?
Or do most sellers agree with this new TOS?
Where is the paragraph in the TOS that I am alleged to have violated?
The answer from BL does not contain any hint to this paragraph.
Will ASSEMBLED minifigures be DELETED in the future?
Is it really a 'violation of TOS'?
I got this message from BrickLink:
'We have reviewed your content following a report from another user. After
careful consideration, we have determined that it violates our terms of service.
Lot 286067225, Item Albus Dumbledore - Dark Red Robe, Light Bluish Gray Hair
was removed because it is incorrectly defined as NEW. Assembled minifigures would
make the condition USED. This is a violation of our Item for Sale Condition guidelines.
You may re-list the item but please correctly label the condition of the item.
The violating content has been removed from the platform. If you believe this
decision was made in error, you have the option to appeal. Visit theAppeal Content
Moderation page to begin the appeal process. Alternatives are available to you
if your appeal is unsuccessful, including our internal complaint escalation process,
out-of-court dispute settlement, and judicial redress. Please review our terms
of service for more information.'
After I sent an appeal in which I pointed out that there is no passage in the
TOS that prohibits this, I received the following reply:
'Appeal reviewed
Hello,
After reviewing your appeal regarding your removed content, our moderation team
has determined that the content violates our terms of service. The removal decision
will remain in place. As previously shared, additional options are available
to you if your appeal is unsuccessful, including our internal complaint escalation
process, out-of-court dispute settlement, and judicial redress. Please review
our terms of service for more information.
Thanks for your patience while we keep our community safe.
Kind regards,
BrickLink® Team'
So what do you, sellers, think about this NEW RULE?
I was buying and selling minifigures at BrickLink for now 22 years. At least
30% of the minifigures I bought came ASSEMBLED, but were offered as NEW.
This is an important change, that was NOT ANNOUNCED before, as I know.
This will effect the prices of minifigures massively.
Why wasn't this discussed before in the forum?
Or do most sellers agree with this new TOS?
Where is the paragraph in the TOS that I am alleged to have violated?
The answer from BL does not contain any hint to this paragraph.
I will pass this back to the team to ensure our standards are upheld in making
these decisions.
Thanks,
The BrickLink Team
Maybe you need to start signing actual names or at least individual identifiers
to messages. In this case it seems that "The BrickLink Team" disagrees
with the decision of "BrickLink® Team". Are they the same people, are
they different? When talking to LEGO customer service, names are used rather
than "LEGO Team" and so if you have a follow up complaint about the service
that you received, then you can name the person. Having different people using
variations in name based on the bricklink name is not very helpful.
[…]
Maybe you need to start signing actual names or at least individual identifiers
to messages. In this case it seems that "The BrickLink Team" disagrees
with the decision of "BrickLink® Team". Are they the same people, are
they different? When talking to LEGO customer service, names are used rather
than "LEGO Team" and so if you have a follow up complaint about the service
that you received, then you can name the person. Having different people using
variations in name based on the bricklink name is not very helpful.
Well, they specifically created that account to personalize BrickLink (and depersonalize
issues) on the forums, the Gallery, and social media.
So it wouldn’t be “start” but “go back to” as using personal accounts is what
they did before
I also remember forum posts asking if the signer were some modern Susan Williams¹?
That being said, as far as I can tell from my interactions with HelpDesk, customer
service messages are signed, it’s the moderation messages that aren’t signed.
I’m pretty sure they aren’t using the same tools….
Maybe you need to start signing actual names or at least individual identifiers
to messages. In this case it seems that "The BrickLink Team" disagrees
with the decision of "BrickLink® Team". Are they the same people, are
they different? When talking to LEGO customer service, names are used rather
than "LEGO Team" and so if you have a follow up complaint about the service
that you received, then you can name the person. Having different people using
variations in name based on the bricklink name is not very helpful.
This is a great idea. Any other company I can think of where I need to communicate
with someone through chat, email or other means has the employees identify themselves.
It wouldn't even have to be their real names; just something to track specific
communication so that mistakes in that communication can be addressed instead
of staring into limbo wondering who said it.
Mistakes like the one Bricklink made against coloredbricks are embarrassing for
the whole platform.
But if I am already sending an appeal with a request for further verification,
why are the FACTS not verified, but simply sent the same statement again: TOS
violation?
Will ASSEMBLED minifigures be DELETED in the future?
Is it really a 'violation of TOS'?
I got this message from BrickLink:
'We have reviewed your content following a report from another user. After
careful consideration, we have determined that it violates our terms of service.
Lot 286067225, Item Albus Dumbledore - Dark Red Robe, Light Bluish Gray Hair
was removed because it is incorrectly defined as NEW. Assembled minifigures would
make the condition USED. This is a violation of our Item for Sale Condition guidelines.
You may re-list the item but please correctly label the condition of the item.
The violating content has been removed from the platform. If you believe this
decision was made in error, you have the option to appeal. Visit theAppeal Content
Moderation page to begin the appeal process. Alternatives are available to you
if your appeal is unsuccessful, including our internal complaint escalation process,
out-of-court dispute settlement, and judicial redress. Please review our terms
of service for more information.'
After I sent an appeal in which I pointed out that there is no passage in the
TOS that prohibits this, I received the following reply:
'Appeal reviewed
Hello,
After reviewing your appeal regarding your removed content, our moderation team
has determined that the content violates our terms of service. The removal decision
will remain in place. As previously shared, additional options are available
to you if your appeal is unsuccessful, including our internal complaint escalation
process, out-of-court dispute settlement, and judicial redress. Please review
our terms of service for more information.
Thanks for your patience while we keep our community safe.
Kind regards,
BrickLink® Team'
So what do you, sellers, think about this NEW RULE?
I was buying and selling minifigures at BrickLink for now 22 years. At least
30% of the minifigures I bought came ASSEMBLED, but were offered as NEW.
This is an important change, that was NOT ANNOUNCED before, as I know.
This will effect the prices of minifigures massively.
Why wasn't this discussed before in the forum?
Or do most sellers agree with this new TOS?
Where is the paragraph in the TOS that I am alleged to have violated?
The answer from BL does not contain any hint to this paragraph.
I will pass this back to the team to ensure our standards are upheld in making
these decisions.
Thanks,
The BrickLink Team
Hi,
Some sellers list a highly-incomplete set under the set's listing, instead
of a custom item. I was used to report them and they were always removed by BL
team. However this is not removed this time. I posted a thread about it:
Germany, Baden-Württemberg
United Kingdom, England
USA, New Jersey
Canada, Quebec
France, Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur
Austria, Wien
