Subject:
|
Re: suspended Bricklink shops
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 23 Aug 2004 17:13:30 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1572 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur wrote:
| |
Look at what has happened. The seller deliberately continued to break the
ToS! Given that Dan has a duty to protect buyers; how else could he react?
You appear to be suggesting he should have renegotiated the ToS!?
|
No ... he was attempting to comply with the ToS and proposed a solution when he
was cut off at the knees.
That’s my belief having read the discussion *and* having spoken with Lar. I’ll
defend him based on the interactions I’ve observed (recent and in the past) and
based on my knowledge of his character and intent. However, its not best coming
from me - Lar should really say his piece about what he was doing and make his
case if he so chooses. From what I understand, he’s unwinding from being on the
road for BrickFest and GenCon so he’s still getting caught up with all of this
nonsense.
-Tim
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: suspended Bricklink shops
|
| (...) Yes, read his very words: "Dan informed me yesterday that I needed to remove that wording as it's a ToS violation. I responded with a suggestion for a different approach." Scott A (...) (20 years ago, 23-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: suspended Bricklink shops
|
| (...) Look at what has happened. The seller deliberately continued to break the ToS! Given that Dan has a duty to protect buyers; how else could he react? You appear to be suggesting he should have renegotiated the ToS!? Scott A (...) (20 years ago, 23-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
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
|
|
|
|
