Debate : 25456


Off-Topic / Debate / 25456	25455 \| 25457

Subject:	Re: suspended Bricklink shops
Newsgroups:	lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.market.brickshops
Date:	Mon, 23 Aug 2004 20:51:10 GMT
Viewed:	4278 times

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.

-Orion

Message has 1 Reply:

		Re: suspended Bricklink shops
(...) 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 (...) (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.market.brickshops, FTX)

Message is in Reply To:

		Re: suspended Bricklink shops
(...) IMO BrickLink should pull the membership of any member who, in BrickLink's opinion, violates the TOS, and any second-chances or probationary periods are entirely up to BrickLink. People who enter into contracts of membership explicitly (...) (20 years ago, 23-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.market.brickshops, 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

Custom Search