| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Orion Pobursky wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Jason Spears wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
http://www.bricklink.com/tos.asp
Unless I’m seriously misreading Item 8 of the TOS correctly, then
Bricklink has the right to revoke Lar’s membership without prior notice.
That means that his membership can be yanked because he has too many
letters in his name, because he parts his hair on the wrong side, or
because he actively engaged in fraud. By accepting the terms of service,
Lar accepted this possibility, and he has no stance to dispute it now. If
he objects to the TOS, that’s his right of course, but he entered into the
contract under the terms of the contract, and Bricklink is now enforcing
those terms.
|
Just because BrickLink has the right to pull Lar’s membership, doesn’t mean
BrickLink should. It’s my opinion that Admin shouldn’t have handled this
situation this way and I’m letting him know that I think he should have
handled it better. And that he still could change what has been done.
|
IMO BrickLink *should* pull the membership of any member who, in BrickLink’s
opinion, violates the TOS
|
This is like saying that your driver license should be revoked if you violate
even the most insignifcant traffic law or that you should be sentenced to
life in prison for jaywalking.
|
The difference is that Lar accepted the terms of the TOS, and I commend him for
stating this explicitly in his recent post. The TOS included the provision for
summary action, and BrickLink has taken that action.
The revoking of a driver’s license for a minor infraction would constitute a
change to the Driver’s License TOS, and no such change occurred in this case.
However, if, in accepting your driver’s license, you acknowledged outright that
it could be revoked for what you might perceive as minor infractions, then your
example would be fitting. Ditto with jaywalking.
It’s not about what you or I think is a suitable consequence of a “minor”
action; it’s about what the TOS stated at the time of agreement.
Dave!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
131 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
