To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 25514
25513  |  25515
Subject: 
Re: suspended Bricklink shops/
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Wed, 25 Aug 2004 23:25:43 GMT
Viewed: 
1947 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur wrote:
   In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks wrote:
   In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur wrote:

   No. He showed that he thought he could dictate the ToS.

Is there even the slightest shred of evidence for this statement?

Yes, his own 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.

Later: “...I responded rather tersely, suggesting that the implementation be fixed instead. In hindsight I should have either immediately removed the text or composed an explanation, but I was tired...

i.e. rather than bring his listings within the ToS, he suggested the ToS be altered. You(?) or I would have done as Dan had requested, then sought to contest the matter if it was significant enough.

To be fair, his response was “How about you implement bulk correctly instead? Seems a better solution to me.” (according to Dan). That doesn’t suggest that ToS be altered, rather that (as Lar saw it) a feature be (re-)implemented correctly.

ROSCO



Message has 2 Replies:
  Re: suspended Bricklink shops
 
(...) I confirm that was the exact wording. Too terse? Yes. Refusing to abide by the ToS? No. Asking that it be altered? No. (20 years ago, 25-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
  Re: suspended Bricklink shops/
 
(...) I'm not clear on what the distinction is; was he not suggesting a change in the way BL operates rather than bring his listing within the ToS? Does that not imply that he wanted the ToS changed? Or do you mean he wanted the wording to remain (...) (20 years ago, 26-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: suspended Bricklink shops/
 
(...) Yes, his own 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." Later: "...I responded rather tersely, suggesting that the implementation be (...) (20 years ago, 25-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
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR