Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | brickerking  | | Posted: | Mar 12, 2024 17:26 | | Subject: | Re: BEWARE! HACK TRIALS!! | | Viewed: | 76 times | | Topic: | General | |
|
| In General, UTLF writes:
| | | | People are more likely to listen if you are more diplomatic. (Which is very hard sometimes)
|
I've tried that and get the same type of reply or treated like I'm
braindead
I'm beyond frustrated with leadership at this point
|
Keep banging the drums, it's the only way to be heard! There are so many
apologizers for BL on the forum it seems like no one is listening, but it's
the only forum we have.
|
 |
| Author: | brickerking | | Posted: | Mar 12, 2024 17:16 | | Subject: | Re: BEWARE! HACK TRIALS!! | | Viewed: | 72 times | | Topic: | General | |
|
| In General, DanialR writes:
| | In General, Saitobricks.ca writes:
| | In General, UTLF writes:
For me it may be 8 months!
I’d better be quiet now.
|
The Bricklink team has to play a very difficult balancing act. Unless you've
walked in their shoes you can't understand the challenges they face.
I've supported some of the largest web sites on the internet, but I'd
be a fool to think I know the Bricklink teams' challenges or how to solve
them.
Sometimes it's best to practice "The Thumper Rule".
|
That is so untrue. Your profile says you're american, the land of the free,
right? Well here's a pep-talk. America didn't become free without people
who were willing to stand up and do something. Same goes for Bricklink, which
we all pay a fee to use, which gives us a say. If no one says anything, no one
is ever held accountable. If you want to see a community succeed, you have to
be part of it, not just sit on the sidelines and watch while it falls apart.
If you see something, say something, better yet, do something, or the freedoms
you take for granted will disappear. Bricklink's challenges are your challenges.
The thumper rule is for the uninvolved - get involved - care about the LEGO community
- be an american hero! (GI-JOE?)
|
|
| Author: | brickerking | | Posted: | Mar 12, 2024 14:32 | | Subject: | Re: Selling Removed Stickers | | Viewed: | 53 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, edk writes:
| | In Selling, brickerking writes:
| | In Selling, crazylegoman writes:
| | In Selling, brickerking writes:
| | So this came up after i ordered a sticker sheet from a seller, not realizing
it was incomplete and receiving just one sticker that was obviously pulled off
a piece, shipped on a felt backer, and was dirty on the sticky side (which was
no longer sticky). I’m just having a hard time understanding if this is an intended
use case for stickers on BL (regardless of the condition i received my sticker
in).
|
Ah, I see. If the seller didn't add an extended description letting buyers
know that the sticker was used and then pulled off of a part and was unable
to be restuck, then that seller had a bad listing.
Sellers can list anything as used, but if it's unable to function how it's
intended to, then they have to describe that in the item's extended description.
Of course, used stickers are far more unlikely to be reused than parts,
gear, etc, so it's even more important for sellers to describe those accurately.
David
|
OK, I see that sticker sheets can be sold if incomplete as used: https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=102
I don't think selling stickers peeled off lego parts and sold as incomplete
sticker sheets should be a thing. To me, it seems misleading. They should be
listed on the parts they were found on as stickered parts. If that part isn't
in the catalog, add it. This is a lazy loophole that should be fixed.
Since LEGO stickers are not intended to be removed (they are not marketed as
reusable as far as I know), why can they be listed after removal from a part?
Doesn't make sense to me. I suppose you can list broken lego parts if they
are clearly marked that way, and maybe that's the justification, but why?
A sticker sheet is a physical thing. If the original sticker sheet from lego
is absent, then can a few peeled off stickers from that sticker sheet still be
called a sticker sheet? I don't believe expectations are being met by listing
peeled off stickers as used sticker sheets.
Please tell me why i'm wrong.
|
Look at my listing for the stickers I mentioned. Nothing misleading. Also if
you had an understanding of the complex assembly they were applied to would help.
Not just across 2 bricks. Take in account there were 6 sheets for sale priced
$12-$25 I figured someone would be happy to get these for the $6. If there were
individual sticker listings I would have used that but the way I did it is the
best option available.
|
Arg... my ipad ran out of juice and I lost my reply. Here it is in a nutshell:
You are not trying to be misleading, you are doing everything you can within
the confines of listing stickers to present the truth.
However, when one is buying a used sticker sheet, I don't think the assumption
is that the buyer will receive stickers that have already been stuck on parts
and then peeled off with no sticker sheet included. That's why peeled off
stickers are not mentioned at all on the condition listing help page. LEGO stickers
are not marketed as reusable and in most cases, they are not. Sticker backing
glue cannot be measured to guarantee stickiness. 
Also, when taking a picture of the stickers, you can't post two photos showing
the front and back, so it's not actually full disclosure.
The limitation here is that there is no category for stickers outside the sticker
sheet (nor am I advocating for that). So that means being misleading is inherent
to listing stickers without a sticker sheet.
|
|
| Author: | brickerking | | Posted: | Mar 12, 2024 14:08 | | Subject: | Re: Selling Removed Stickers | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, zorbanj writes:
| | In Selling, brickerking writes:
| |
OK, I see that sticker sheets can be sold if incomplete as used: https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=102
I don't think selling stickers peeled off lego parts and sold as incomplete
sticker sheets should be a thing. To me, it seems misleading. They should be
listed on the parts they were found on as stickered parts. If that part isn't
in the catalog, add it. This is a lazy loophole that should be fixed.
Since LEGO stickers are not intended to be removed (they are not marketed as
reusable as far as I know), why can they be listed after removal from a part?
Doesn't make sense to me. I suppose you can list broken lego parts if they
are clearly marked that way, and maybe that's the justification, but why?
A sticker sheet is a physical thing. If the original sticker sheet from lego
is absent, then can a few peeled off stickers from that sticker sheet still be
called a sticker sheet? I don't believe expectations are being met by listing
peeled off stickers as used sticker sheets.
Please tell me why i'm wrong.
|
The requirement states:
"Sticker sheets missing stickers must be listed as used."
To me that's vague enough to include re-applied peeled off stickers.
|
That’s talking about sticker sheets - so one would think the original sticker
sheet is included and some stickers are missing. It’s not talking about previously
applied stickers at all. It’s not vague, per say, just not addressing this issue.
| |
edk makes a good point:
"Carefully removed, adhesive stayed with the stickers, placed them on a waxy
backer
sheet, scanned an image and listed as used. I do not see a problem with this
method."
|
If there was a listing for just that sticker then, yes that makes sense, but
there isn’t. This would be listed as a used sticker sheet. Where’s the sticker
sheet in this equation. Was this the intention of sticker sheet listings?
| |
Also, what about high quality stickers that were applied to the wrong part?
|
What about high quality parts that are broken… i throw them out personally -
because i wouldn't be happy to receive it.
|
|
| Author: | brickerking | | Posted: | Mar 12, 2024 12:48 | | Subject: | Re: Selling Removed Stickers | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, crazylegoman writes:
| | In Selling, brickerking writes:
| | So this came up after i ordered a sticker sheet from a seller, not realizing
it was incomplete and receiving just one sticker that was obviously pulled off
a piece, shipped on a felt backer, and was dirty on the sticky side (which was
no longer sticky). I’m just having a hard time understanding if this is an intended
use case for stickers on BL (regardless of the condition i received my sticker
in).
|
Ah, I see. If the seller didn't add an extended description letting buyers
know that the sticker was used and then pulled off of a part and was unable
to be restuck, then that seller had a bad listing.
Sellers can list anything as used, but if it's unable to function how it's
intended to, then they have to describe that in the item's extended description.
Of course, used stickers are far more unlikely to be reused than parts,
gear, etc, so it's even more important for sellers to describe those accurately.
David
|
OK, I see that sticker sheets can be sold if incomplete as used: https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=102
I don't think selling stickers peeled off lego parts and sold as incomplete
sticker sheets should be a thing. To me, it seems misleading. They should be
listed on the parts they were found on as stickered parts. If that part isn't
in the catalog, add it. This is a lazy loophole that should be fixed.
Since LEGO stickers are not intended to be removed (they are not marketed as
reusable as far as I know), why can they be listed after removal from a part?
Doesn't make sense to me. I suppose you can list broken lego parts if they
are clearly marked that way, and maybe that's the justification, but why?
A sticker sheet is a physical thing. If the original sticker sheet from lego
is absent, then can a few peeled off stickers from that sticker sheet still be
called a sticker sheet? I don't believe expectations are being met by listing
peeled off stickers as used sticker sheets.
Please tell me why i'm wrong.
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
Canada, Alberta
