deskthority

chuckdee wrote: All MOQs are is an agreement to purchase at a price for a certain number of orders

For my offerings, the MOQ are something that the manufacturer requires to offset the very high fixed cost of fabricating some part.

I could be mistaken, but the ToS only applies to the terms of membership, not the legally binding terms of a purchase. I'm pretty sure MassDrop can not circumvent all the laws (international or domestic) that protect buyers from fraud, just like members can't circumvent all the laws that require payment for goods (or services) received.

The practical outcome of changes to the ToS will be to cover things like terminating membership for foul behavior(s) they haven't thought of (and expressly prohibited) yet. Behaviors nobody would endorse in any civilized gathering. I think it takes a keenly suspicious and untrusting mind to convince oneself (and others) that MassDrop's policy towards their ToS is nefarious in intent and should be grounds for boycotting them.

zslane wrote: I could be mistaken, but the ToS only applies to the terms of membership, not the legally binding terms of a purchase.

Line 1 of the ToS: These Terms and Conditions of Service ("Terms of Service") govern your membership on Massdrop.com and its associated mobile sites (the "Massdrop Sites" or the "Sites") and your purchases and use of products and services available through the Massdrop Sites.

webwit wrote:

zslane wrote: I could be mistaken, but the ToS only applies to the terms of membership, not the legally binding terms of a purchase.

Line 1 of the ToS: These Terms and Conditions of Service ("Terms of Service") govern your membership on Massdrop.com and its associated mobile sites (the "Massdrop Sites" or the "Sites") and your purchases and use of products and services available through the Massdrop Sites.

They can say whatever. But it doesn't mean anything until tested in court.

XMIT wrote:

chuckdee wrote: All MOQs are is an agreement to purchase at a price for a certain number of orders

For my offerings, the MOQ are something that the manufacturer requires to offset the very high fixed cost of fabricating some part.

Do they not give drop levels in order to change that price?

It means exactly what is written and you agreed to, unless you hire an expensive lawyer who manages to prove otherwise against their more expensive lawyers in court.

webwit wrote: It means exactly what is written and you agreed to, unless you hire an expensive lawyer who manages to prove otherwise against their more expensive lawyers in court.

Not until tested, was my point. Have they made a contentious change that has not been communicated? That's test one- if not, there's no reason to do anything. Once they do, what's their response? If it's a mea culpa or something in the consumer's favor- again, there's no reason to do anything. Then, if someone is willing to take them to court, it goes... and is tested based on the rule of the judge I mean law. Only the lawyers win if it gets that far.

One might bring up something in regards to their TOS, but changing it is something that costs more than most people know. Lawyers are expensive. So... leave it in place until you have to change it.

the curious thing regarding Massdrop, for Romania at least, is that if I buy a product that it is available locally, (e.g. Audio-Technica ATH-M50x Headphones), the price with taxes and shipping included is higher than the one in the local stores.

chuckdee wrote: Not until tested, was my point. Have they made a contentious change that has not been communicated? That's test one- if not, there's no reason to do anything. Once they do, what's their response? If it's a mea culpa or something in the consumer's favor- again, there's no reason to do anything. Then, if someone is willing to take them to court, it goes... and is tested based on the rule of the judge I mean law. Only the lawyers win if it gets that far.

One might bring up something in regards to their TOS, but changing it is something that costs more than most people know. Lawyers are expensive. So... leave it in place until you have to change it.

The term is designed to give the consumer the middle finger at any time, such as when the shit hits the fan, and erode consumer rights. It is definitely not ok, the very presence of such a term shows they cannot be trusted to do the right thing. It's another attempt to defend such a company, which is really silly because I think you erode your own rights willingly and actively because you got some funky keycaps. And here you are, a knight in shiny armor, crusading with logical fallacies against people who are critical of bad contracts.

webwit wrote:

chuckdee wrote: Not until tested, was my point. Have they made a contentious change that has not been communicated? That's test one- if not, there's no reason to do anything. Once they do, what's their response? If it's a mea culpa or something in the consumer's favor- again, there's no reason to do anything. Then, if someone is willing to take them to court, it goes... and is tested based on the rule of the judge I mean law. Only the lawyers win if it gets that far.

One might bring up something in regards to their TOS, but changing it is something that costs more than most people know. Lawyers are expensive. So... leave it in place until you have to change it.

The term is designed to give the consumer the middle finger at any time, such as when the shit hits the fan, and erode consumer rights. It is definitely not ok, the very presence of such a term shows they cannot be trusted to do the right thing. It's another attempt to defend such a company, which is really silly because I think you erode your own rights willingly and actively because you got some funky keycaps. And here you are, a knight in shiny armor, crusading with logical fallacies against people who are critical of bad contracts.

Not a Knight in shining armor, I've already said there are several things that you could hold them to task over. This just isn't one.

Well I disagree, a corrupted ToS is very bad, and the reason I have never bought from them.

So here is how I do shopping online:
It is mostly figuring out

1. what I want
2. where to get it
3. what I pay including every cost
4. checking their reputation
5. agreeing to ToS/ giving my credentials/ anything like that
6. buying the item

I will not agree to ToS, or read any ToS to browse a website. So I won't browse their website. I don't see a website as a "service" for me, it is just their advertisement.
Maybe MAP is a thing where they sell their stuff (thanks for pointing that out), but it isn't where I buy stuff. (You see what I did there?)

I also don't get MAP.
What if I had a shop selling stuff from company A agreeing to their MAP. I have 100 of their item on stock. Company B now brings a better product to the market for the same price. I will never be able to sell my 100 items and they occupy valuable space in my warehouse. Fuck you company A, why would I screw myself agreeing to a MAP! You made your cut, let me do what I feel necessary to run my shop, please!

Yes it is. Webwit's issue is entirely valid in a legalistic sense.

On the other hand, I'm willing to deal with the devil if it means I get... Well, deals.

Some people aren't willing to engage with shady legalese, and that's their prerogative.

Well, I don't want anyone to think I believe they should abandon their principles (or their paranoia) just to be a consumer. By all means stay away from MassDrop.

Unfortunately, MassDrop has a large enough membership, and enough marketplace clout, to remain an attractive vehicle for selling custom mech keyboard gear. Anyone is of course free to pressure folks like XMIT to go elsewhere, but others are equally free to push back and try to counteract the FUD.

I suspect that if XMIT were living in Cologne instead of Austin, we wouldn't be seeing his Hall Effect boards on MassDrop. The lottery of birthplace strikes again. Probably the best bet for Europeans is to simply convince someone with more relaxed principles in the US to proxy for them.

It is a shit term, not paranoia of the one who calls it what it is. Thank you.

webwit wrote: It is a shit term, not paranoia of the one who calls it what it is. Thank you.

Yep. That was another thinly veiled ad hominem from zslane.

If I were based in the EU I would have contacted other partners such as The Keyboard Store to help with distribution. Or, I would have gone the long, slow road of incorporating a business, importing those boards as a business, keeping inventory, paying all applicable fees, filling out all applicable forms, etc. while complaining loudly. You wouldn't see boards until next summer. Or maybe I would have hired help to assist me with a group buy.

Go read my long post on the Hall effect thread for my complete rationale as to why I'm going with Massdrop. Sure, dump on me for where I live or work or where I was born, but the fact is that I'm familiar with the way business works in the SF Bay Area and want to leverage what I know to move forward with my group buy. That means using the network of friends and contacts that I've built over the years.

Another fact of Massdrop is that it is somewhat more accessible to my non-enthusiast friends. These include former classmates, current and former colleagues, and even family members who simply want to support what I'm doing. Working with Massdrop lets me scale more quickly, and reach a wider audience, than I could hope to do myself. I'm just one person, writing these updates while also doing my day job (e.g. waiting for builds to finish, waiting for other e-mail responses, or maybe in meetings where I don't have much to contribute).

If you know a better way to do EU distribution - really, if you have a concrete suggestion that I can execute - I'm all ears. Lots of forum friends are in the EU, many want a Hall board, and several have said that shipping China - US - EU is not feasible for them.

webwit wrote: It is a shit term, not paranoia of the one who calls it what it is. Thank you.

I call it paranoia only because I am seeing a fear of something that could happen, but hasn't yet, and for which there is no evidence that it ever will.

It astounds me that you cannot see the difference between principle and paranoia.

ohaimark wrote: It astounds me that you cannot see the difference between principle and paranoia.

Of course there is a difference. There are also times when one appears to fuel the other.