5 ms·
> if there was a side of the story where the details exonerated the company, you'd think they would share those details Here is that side, published last week:
by paulddraper 5mo ago
> if there was a side of the story where the details exonerated the company, you'd think they would share those details
Here is that side, published last week: https://bricksandminifigs.com/blog/blog/2026/05/21/salem-oregon-bricks-and-minifigs-store-situation/ https://bricksandminifigs.com/blog/blog/2026/05/21/salem-ore...
And some further elaboration today: https://bricksandminifigs.com/blog/blog/2026/05/28/bricks-minifigs-salem-oregon-clarity-and-resolution/ https://bricksandminifigs.com/blog/blog/2026/05/28/bricks-mi...
- usehand 5mo agoBesides the overall lack of information in these, they were also found to be lying in them
- krisoft 5mo ago[flagged]
- paulddraper 4mo agoThat user won't say. [1] One discrepancy is that B&M says consignment was against their operating instructions, yet the former franchisee shared the franchise contract, which explicitly allowed it. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48318473 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48318473
- usehand 4mo agoAnd that's the reason I won't. You can see yourself how insanely easy it is to find this info (you replied with one you probably found pretty quickly yourself), and yet these people who are full of quickly-formed opinions are constantly trying to offload the work onto others.
- krisoft 4mo ago> people who are full of quickly-formed opinions My quickly formed opinion is that you are emotionaly disregulated and unpleasant to chat with. That is the only opinion i hold about the whole topic. > constantly trying to offload the work onto others. You claimed something. I’m not a a mind reader to figure out what you meant.