| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Kevin Blocksidge wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Kevin Blocksidge wrote:
> >
> > > I think that the point Suz was trying to make is that often Lar is right.
> > > Lar sees a problem, he doesn't stay quiet and live with it. He tried to fix
> > > the problem. In this case, he used something like civil disobedience to
> > > make a point.
> >
> > But the disobedient civilian must accept the price for his disobedience,
> > otherwise it's just posturing like a rhinoceros. In the same way that a
> > journalist should be willing to go to jail to protect his treasonous source, a
> > Bricklink customer should be willing to accept the ban if he willingly violates
> > the TOS on principle.
>
>
> I am not sure, but I haven't seen anything from Lar saying that he is mad or
> thinks he was treated unjust. If he has, I'll have to rethink my position
>
> > > It's not because it is "The Great Lar++", it is because Larry is consistently
> > > acting in the best interest of the community. If he didn't often point out
> > > problems and than help fix him, he wouldn't be "The Great Lar++".
> > >
> > > His history shows that people should consider what he says, not ban him for
> > > insubordination.
> >
> > As I read the thread-tree on Bricklink, he was banned for willful violation of
> > the TOS, in which case the ban is appropriate. As has been pointed out
> > elsewhere, Lar has vocally supported the banning of TOS-violators, and he's
> > endorsed elaborate ceremonies of capitulation to reinstate those violators.
> > Therefore he should certainly be held to that same standard.
>
> I agree, he was rightfully banned, no argueing there. But on the other hand,
> the rules themselves should be changed (ie: continuous stock)
He changed the wording from TOS violation, to non-TOS violation.
So why was he banned?
-Rob.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: suspended Bricklink shops
|
| (...) Why? It has been said many times why. (URL) as others pointed out this part of the BL ToS: (URL) Breach. -snip- We also reserve the right to terminate your membership and your data and deny you access to any of the site's features at any time (...) (20 years ago, 23-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
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
|
|
|
|
