| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tim Courtney wrote:
> > 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.
>
> But the fact the TOS said what it did (summary action) isn't disputed, at
> least, I don't think. Did Dan have the right to ban Larry? Yes. Was it right
> for him to ban Larry, given the situation? No.
>
> Dan can do whatever the heck he wants with his own site. He can require users
> purchase a pink MegaBlok with every purchace or face banning and be well
> within his rights as the owner of BL. Just cause he has the right, doesn't
> make all of his BL-related actions prudent or just.
But what are you using as the standard of judgment? I can't think of any
justification to judge Dan's actions except in terms of consistent application
of the TOS.
Has he failed in this regard?
I don't think so.
Do some people find his decision to be objectionable?
Apparently.
Is that relevant to the correctness of his decision, in terms of the TOS?
Not really.
> At least the way I'm reading you, you want to argue that justice is whatever
> Dan decides is justice.
I suppose I may have come across that way, but that's not how I meant it. Let
me clarify: By entering into contract with BrickLink, the user explicitly
grants to BrickLink the authority to enforce the TOS. Questions of justice or
propriety are therefore secondary to the contractually-agreed TOS. If users
object to Dan's handling of the TOS, then they should communicate this in a way
that doesn't come across as an attempt to subvert the TOS. Alternatively, if a
user wishes to engage in civil disobedience, then the user must accept the
consequences of that disobedience.
> IMNSHO that couldn't be further from the truth -- and
> he's illustrated his lack of concern for doing the right thing in this
> situation -- and even further so with his refusal (by silence) to correct it.
Again, you are judging "the right thing" by a different standard than is
relevant here. You or I might prefer one result over another, but your
preferences and mine are irrelevant.
The consequences of enforcing the TOS may seem objectionable to some, and they
may have repercussions affecting BrickLink and the LEGO reseller community at
large, but these, too, are irrelevant.
> I hope in the long run, competition forces Dan to grow up.
I beg your pardon, but insulting Dan for enforcing the TOS is hardly productive.
> His paranoia and rash actions have created their fair share of fear in
> certain individuals I've spoken with -- people who depend on BL far, far
> more heavily than I do (which is next to nothing).
Let them voice their fears, or else they have no claim to object to the
consequences of their silence. Otherwise, I can't comment on their fears.
> Dan's service (the site) is great, but I'm very
> unimpressed with his administration of it, his choice of mouthpiece (official
> or unofficial, bridled or unbridled), and the way he deals with his members.
> It's unfortunate for the community BL is effectively a monopoly.
It has been suggested that there's no such thing as a natural monopoly. If
users (or spectators) find it unfortunate that BrickLink appears currently to
wield monopoly power, then the market has ways of dealing with it. Let someone
else rise to the challenge, and the community will benefit from the wider field
of choices. It may be inconvenient or off-putting for some, but that's how the
market works..
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
|
|
|
|
