Subject:
|
Re: suspended Bricklink shops.
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 23 Aug 2004 18:52:52 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1831 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tim Courtney wrote:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur wrote:
> > > My post was based only on undisputed comments.
> > >
> > > Scott A
> >
> > No -- it is not undisputed that the reason he was banned was a TOS
> > violation. He broke it, was corrected, and made an earnest attempt to
> > comply.
>
> Can you please define what you mean by "earnest"?
>
> Are you saying his "earnest attempt" put him inside the ToS?
It does not matter what Tim thinks is inside or outside the ToS. It is not his
call to make. Obviously, Dan thought it was not inline with the ToS - and thats
really the only view that means anything here - right?
Mark P
LoB
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: suspended Bricklink shops.
|
| (...) Mark, What are you trying to gain by the repetition of this idea? We get it. You think that we don't have a right to an opinion. I happen to disagree. If you're merely pointing out that we don't have the power to change anything over at BL, (...) (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: suspended Bricklink shops.
|
| (...) Can you please define what you mean by "earnest"? Are you saying his "earnest attempt" put him inside the ToS? (...) You or I would have deleted the whole of the text and shrugged the matter off. Larry tried to play it smart and it backfired. (...) (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
|
|
|
|
