This is a good point for discussion Killer #1. In addition to what MacP says, we do talk about situations like this amongst ourselves and weigh up the pro’s and con’s of any rule introduction. We’ve learnt from previous experience that any limitation or procedure implemented on the site has to be properly justified, as people tend not to take kindly to having their perceived liberties curtailed, despite the fact this isn’t a public service.
We’re always trying to work in the best interests of our community, because we’re very proud of it and want to do the right thing by everyone. We took a decision some time ago not to allow people to sell third-party items on the site, as it could very well cause more trouble for the buyer, seller and LB than it was worth. It’s far easier to encourage the true seller to join up and post-up themselves.
Second-hand helmets… We’ve thought about it but couldn’t justify any limitation on their advertised sale on LB. It’s not for us to act like this government does and be a nanny-state, people have to make their own decisions on issues like this where common-sense should prevail in the majority. It’s a thin line because there ARE logical reasons why we shouldn’t facilitate the sale of second-hand lids, but I personally believe it’s just too draconian in this case to restrict it.
Perhaps we should just put a warning up in the Classifieds forum about second-hand helmets and then let people make their own mind up? Either way, we look at all potentially problematic situations on a case by case basis, hence the third-party bike sale rule.
It’s hard trying to balance the desire to look after our community, and providing an open and transparent place for people to interact and trade. Perhaps harder than some people might think initially. There’s so many different levels of experience between our members, that we would love for our more experienced ones to share their wisdom with the less experienced ones. This is something we’re also trying to nurture.
Rideouts!
BigSV, LB doesn’t organise any ride-outs itself, for the exact reason you’ve mentioned, insurance is the issue, you need it to protect yourselves as an organisation, but it’s too expensive to actually obtain. Ride-outs that happen between LB members are just that, they’re organised by members who are individuals, not organisations.; LB as an organisation merely documents the event, but can’t be held responsible for any organisation or incidents that may potentially result during the event.
We’ve looked into this before, and we’d love to be able to have official LB ride-outs which would arguably benefit the member more, but unless we act like cowboys and for-go insurance, then it’s just not possible, and we won’t do that, we like to think we’re more professional than that. It would only take one incident claim to topple most organisations who do something like this without appropriate and adequate insurance, hence why we won’t risk it.
Things like disclaimers don’t actually have any legal standing when it comes to it, and certainly aren’t any use in legal defence. You can’t absolve yourselves of criminal neglect, and as far as we’ve been able to tell, they don’t work with insurance claims either! It’s a lesser known fact that track-day indemnity forms aren’t really worth the paper they’re printed on.
This ‘civilised’ culture thing is a real drag at times, eh 
”