Marketplace

[olympe]

However, what about short, user-written wishlists? Like this: "Want: Any (mostly) green-colored EG dragon from (mostly) green-colored ancestors only, no duplicate sprites in CB line. The higher the generation, the better." (Stupid example, but you get the idea. For some of the more creative wishes.)

[LadyLoki]

^Basically what Dragonmarket allowed on EATW. Able to write down what we wanted for people to see, but no actual communication between scrolls/users. This is exactly the type of Marketplace I would like within DC. (I'm among those that don't want actual messaging between scrolls) But I would like the ability to write down exactly what I want, if it's a specific lineage or something. ^.^ And like with Dragonmarket (rip), that didn't require communication between scrolls.

[HeatherMarie]

I wouldn't mind a spot to write down specifics like that, but I wonder about possible abuse/language there, since it would actually be on-site. Descriptions and names come with rules and have consequences if there is foul language, I'm assuming something like free-form 'wants' would probably have to have something like that as well. 

[Fuzzbucket]

Report and ban anyone posting like that from trading where needed.

[LadyLoki]

Oh yes, I absolutely agree with the above. *nodnod* There would HAVE to be rules set in place concerning foul language within the Marketplace like that, just like with names/descriptions.

[OMGitsKairi]

+1 support for this. I used to use the EATW market a lot, especially during holiday times.

 

Also I agree with @olympe. I feel like both the market proposed in this thread and the Trader's Canyon would be able to coexist.

[DigitalGarden]

I would love it in such form as well. 

[olympe]

1 hour ago, Fuzzbucket said:

Report and ban anyone posting like that from trading where needed.

 

Banning someone from trading might be a little bit harsh. Maybe ban them from writing notes in their trades? Should suffice and stop them from repeating their mistake.

[Guillotine]

I don't see why it would be harsh. You abuse an on-site feature, you lose access to that feature. We have precedence for that kind of punishment.
 

[Fuzzbucket]

1 hour ago, Guillotine said:

I don't see why it would be harsh. You abuse an on-site feature, you lose access to that feature. We have precedence for that kind of punishment.
 

 

Exactly.

[olympe]

Sure, and I know of at least one situation where said abuse was accidental. (A non-native speaker named one of her chickens "I love cocks" instead of "I love roosters" because most online dictionaries lead us astray. I checked, too, and could corroborate the story.)

 

Besides, if you abuse the "wishlist" feature, you shouldn't be punished with removal of access to the market place. (If you post an inappropriate description, you neither get a warning on the forums, nor do you get punished by having your naming feature revoked, either. You just get your describing rights revoked - right?)

[Fuzzbucket]

If you post a bad enough name you DO lose your naming rights, it seems....

 

And a case like the one you cite is not in the same class as - some names I have reported in my time ! (I would think cocks was fine, actually. MOST parts of the world would see that as probably referring to a rooster.)

[olympe]

Yes, you can lose your naming rights when you name your dragons (and stuff) bad things. But you don't lose your naming rights for making bad descriptions.

(And, no, cocks weren't fine, because apparently, in the US, that never refers to male livestock, but only to male anatomy. The chicken was killed by TJ, btw. And, I think, later resurrected because it was an honest mistake, and we couldn't rename yet?)

[JavaTigress]

20 hours ago, Fabula said:

Oh yes, I absolutely agree with the above. *nodnod* There would HAVE to be rules set in place concerning foul language within the Marketplace like that, just like with names/descriptions.

Still, since such is in place for both those features, I suspect expanding it to a market wouldn't be that hard?

 

ETA- Personally, I would LOVE for this idea and Traders Canyon to both be a thing.

Edited January 23, 2018 by JavaTigress

[cyradis4]

3 hours ago, Guillotine said:

I don't see why it would be harsh. You abuse an on-site feature, you lose access to that feature. We have precedence for that kind of punishment.
 

IT'd only be harsh if it was a one-word accidental typo. But for the most part, its pretty clear that the person intentionally tried to post something nasty, and I'm sorry but if you DON"T know that posting innuendo and using a potty mouth aren't permitted on a site like this.... then you deserve to loose your trading rights. Perhaps have the first time offenders slapped with a "no trades" for a month, 2nd offense is 6 months, 3rd offense is perma-ban. 

 

Cheers!
C4. 

[JavaTigress]

1 hour ago, cyradis4 said:

IT'd only be harsh if it was a one-word accidental typo. But for the most part, its pretty clear that the person intentionally tried to post something nasty, and I'm sorry but if you DON"T know that posting innuendo and using a potty mouth aren't permitted on a site like this.... then you deserve to loose your trading rights. Perhaps have the first time offenders slapped with a "no trades" for a month, 2nd offense is 6 months, 3rd offense is perma-ban. 

 

Cheers!
C4. 

And, I think examples were given where in event of honest mistakes the consequences were mitigated somewhat.... but in GENERAL I agree with C4 on this one. 

 

It is spelled out pretty plainly in naming for example what the consequences of using naughty names might be.

It WOULD, I hope, be the same for something like this. That way there are basically NO excuses for INTENTIONALLY writing something abusive/offensive.

[olympe]

Since I seem to be the only one who doesn't get this: Why revoke trading rights, instead of the rights to post a self-written wish list? In my opinion, the latter serves the same purpose (stopping a player from posting stuff not meant to be posted), yet doesn't affect as badly as a total ban from the trading market. (Also consider the possibility of evil siblings trying to "prank" a player...) Please explain! 

[Fuzzbucket]

People do KNOW when they are posting pottymouth style. Honest mistakes can be dealt with on a case by case basis. But you don't need handholding to tell you that you can't post (well I can't actually give an example ) and expect not to face consequences.

 

As for evil siblings - if anyone is daft enough to stay logged in when AFK, if those creatures are in the house, they have only themselves to blame.

 

cyradis4 has the ideal suggestion. Scaled penalties.

[HeatherMarie]

The self-written wishlist is a part of the 'marketplace' trading system. They go hand in hand. You abuse one, it affects the other. It's like... Stealing from the meat department of the grocery store, they don't only ban you from the meat department, they ban you from the whole store (or, they should). The wishlist and the trading are not two separate things, they are a part of each other, so they should be affected together.

 

And really, I'm sure true cases of sibling pranks and such can be dealt with separately, but in *general* if someone is going to abuse a *part* of the trading system, then their trading rights should be revoked.

Edited January 23, 2018 by Marie19R

[olympe]

Well, in this case, you should stop them from using teleport at all... just saying. /sarcasm

[Fuzzbucket]

There's no facility for foul language there.

 

/NOT sarcasm

 

As one who recently turned in a scroll full of vileness, this issue does need to be taken more seriously.

[JavaTigress]

17 hours ago, Marie19R said:

The self-written wishlist is a part of the 'marketplace' trading system. They go hand in hand. You abuse one, it affects the other. It's like... Stealing from the meat department of the grocery store, they don't only ban you from the meat department, they ban you from the whole store (or, they should). The wishlist and the trading are not two separate things, they are a part of each other, so they should be affected together.

 

And really, I'm sure true cases of sibling pranks and such can be dealt with separately, but in *general* if someone is going to abuse a *part* of the trading system, then their trading rights should be revoked.

This exactly

I can understand leniency in cases where someone's scroll was hacked or 'pranked' by a sibling ( THOUGH as someone else pointed out, if you have a sibling given to doing such things, you REALLY ought to know better than to leave it it accessible and unattended.) The OTHER case I can think of where a little mercy might be in order is in cases of someone whose first language isn't English, and/or maybe was legitimately UNAWARE that a term had an innuendo double meaning. ( Example- the case mentioned where someone used a word that can refer to both male FOWL and to male anatomy). 

 

In general, tho.... there really isn't an excuse for doing so deliberately. The rules are pretty clear.

[Dragon_Arbock]

Could possibly do something like this;

 

Just a quick mock-up, but having a few places to enter data from pre-approved menus could avoid foul language.

[The Dragoness]

48 minutes ago, Dragon_Arbock said:

Could possibly do something like this;

 

Just a quick mock-up, but having a few places to enter data from pre-approved menus could avoid foul language.

Oooh, I really like this. 

[HeatherMarie]

Yeesss I like that! It's very straight forward, not complicated or confusing at all, and it seems like it could cover like 99% of the possibilities.