Trading Hub Feedback

[olympe]

6 hours ago, HeatherMarie said:

 

I'm not sure what this has to do with misusing the Want box? TJ has not shut down a 'have' box, or a way to tell the offerer they are egglocked, or anything like that. 'A feature not currently being available' is in no way the same as 'unwilling to help it's users'. And 'wanting and desiring' better features is not the same as 'misusing a feature because those other ones don't exist'. You can definitely want a feature without misusing another feature to make up for it. Just because a few really helpful features haven't been implemented yet does not mean they never will be, or that the site (or TJ) is unwilling, or anything like that. 

 

I also don't really understand the idea that, because someone wants a feature that they think will make the game easier/better, it's somehow 'unfair' to not have that feature. These features being talked about would be helpful and making trading easier sometimes, certainly, but it's not like the Trading Hub is completely unusable without them. Hundreds of trades have been made on the hub so far, without those features. It's not some horrible injustice that those features don't exist yet. Just because they may make things easier doesn't mean they *have* to be there for the hub to function. And it certainly doesn't mean users 'deserve' the feature just because it would make things easier.

Well, I remember pretty much everyone here misusing the abandoned/code thing for trading through the AP before we had teleport - including TJ, or so I've heard. I also remember people actually filling the AP with eggs so their "trade" wouldn't be visible. Users abusing features sometimes leads to new features (teleport...). 

People still abuse the re-naming feature to ask for auto-abandoned eggs back - or abuse the parents' names for notes on trades. (I recently offered an ungendered, lineaged magma hatchie from a checker line and temporarily renamed the dad "magma baby influenced male". Because there was no other way to tell the person (who was looking for checkers) that the hatchling had been influenced correctly.)

 

Personally, I think it's a good idea to allow us to write short notes on trades, either as the person creating the trade or as the person offering. I know we can usually see what's on offer, but notes like "influenced male", "ND will turn out ungendered", "can only take 1 egg ATM", "need to wait one hour for egg to hatch" and so on are things that can make trading that much smoother. (Of course, we can put these things in as the name of the parents of a bred egg - but what about CBs?)

 

3 hours ago, Fuzzbucket said:

It's new; it works for very many people; it isn't that it doesn't make sense (You can carry on trading as you always have after all.) We don't "deserve" anything; this game is free and we are lucky to have it. Some changes would be nice, but we absolutely do not deserve them.

 That's coming off wrong, really. (No offense meant, of course.) You yourself always stress how not everyone can use the forums. Now that we have the trading hub, even fewer people will frequent the trading threads. Considering how often my own trades posted in that section didn't get any offers at all, I feel safe to claim that it didn't work all that well then, and works even less now. And then you tell them to just go back to trading through the forums? ROFLMAO! Maybe Sextonator's word choice was a little less than ideal, but that doesn't mean she doesn't have a point or two. First of all, the trading hub still needs some improvements (pagination...), and other improvements (better communication, independence from encyclopedia) are very desirable to allow us to better use the feature.

 

Of course, better communication is no counter-argument to improving teleport, nor vice versa.

 

And I seriously think that an in-cave messaging system becomes more and more of a necessity. If some people want to opt out of it, fine. That doesn't mean that nobody should be allowed to have it. If only for the trading part of the game. (I still think that a blacklisting/whitelisting feature should exist. Parents could allow messaging of personally known friends or themselves, but not the rest of the player base - just to name one example where a whitelist would be a good thing.)

[Toyo]

7 hours ago, Naraku said:

Haves in the message is indeed unavoidable. I like those because it's convenient, so I'd hate to see them be illegal to use. The "haves" are unrelated to "help what others understand what you want rule", so they may be considered "misuse/spam". How about just remove the "wants" word entirely, and rework it into a general trade message... something like "Note:"? 

 

This would be great!

 

I mostly use mobile. It is so much easier to see what is available at a glance, as opposed to clicking each trade link and then lineage link, and then back again.(Though of course one should check lineages before making a trade, blah, etc etc).

[Fuzzbucket]

3 minutes ago, olympe said:

 That's coming off wrong, really. (No offense meant, of course.) You yourself always stress how not everyone can use the forums. Now that we have the trading hub, even fewer people will frequent the trading threads. Considering how often my own trades posted in that section didn't get any offers at all, I feel safe to claim that it didn't work all that well then, and works even less now. And then you tell them to just go back to trading through the forums? ROFLMAO! Maybe Sextonator's word choice was a little less than ideal, but that doesn't mean she doesn't have a point or two. First of all, the trading hub still needs some improvements (pagination...), and other improvements (better communication, independence from encyclopedia) are very desirable to allow us to better use the feature.

 

Of course, better communication is no counter-argument to improving teleport, nor vice versa.

 

And I seriously think that an in-cave messaging system becomes more and more of a necessity. If some people want to opt out of it, fine. That doesn't mean that nobody should be allowed to have it. If only for the trading part of the game. (I still think that a blacklisting/whitelisting feature should exist. Parents could allow messaging of personally known friends or themselves, but not the rest of the player base - just to name one example where a whitelist would be a good thing.)

 

This is very true. I do say that, a lot. But still - the concept of  DESERVING has no place here. And it is a word that gets bandied around. Along with "entitled", "rights",  and others. We can ask; we can agree that thing in some areas need to change, but we have no rights of any kind.

[olympe]

@Fuzzbucket: As I said, the word choice was less than ideal. But this is quickly becoming an emotional topic, and when people get emotional, they don't always weigh their words.

 

Let's phrase it slightly differently: The trading hub deserves to be improved.  In every sense of the word.

[Jazeki]

I support changing Want to Note if that cuts down on confusion.

[Sextonator]

I was hormonally angry last night, but I stay by my stance. Especially since there are users who donate to keep the site up and pay for an ad free experience. We might not “deserve” anything, but we do offer an incetive to be listened to and to get the features we want, how we want them.

[Fuzzbucket]

Fair enough, Sextonator. 

 

But there are so many posts that do not have any such "excuse" saying that we are ENTITLED to this, that and the other. Sure TJ should listen to his user base, but...

[Starscream]

8 hours ago, osmarks said:

It's completely self-explanatory, but as people can't post "I'm egglocked" etc anywhere else, people "misuse" wants.

 

A solution to that would be short messages to/with offers/trades (either ~32 chars or just a dropdown of options), or possibly a few automatically-added indicators to traded things (like "precognitions X gender") and egglock indicators (some sort of warning when posting a trade saying "other player is egglocked").

Its misuse not "misuse" - the wants is only for wants.

 

actually, posting your wants: ""Non lineaged Gold Wyvern, Xynomoph - hatchlings only as I'am egglocked."  would work.  (I would not moderate this)

 

"Non lineaged Gold Wyvern, Xynomoph - Thanks bob i'll love it!" is misusing it. - I know people would try to work around it that way. (I would moderate this.)

 

Its easy.

 

or just decline something when someone offers you more than what you can handle. I still think the ability to remove the necessary items off the offer would be ideal - much like picking out fruit at the supermarket. but I am egglocked is not a want ergo it does not belong there unless its part of your.

 

I am now also, for a timer that would prevent a specific teleport from being resubmitted (1 - 3 hours) - so if I used my dragon Lagmonster to teleport and then place it in the trading section, then I can't resubmit it for a while. Editing the trade wants, I think could work, providing a reason is submitted - that is viewable by mods.

 

 

 

[olympe]

Want: XXX, hatchling in trade is influenced female => not exactly a want, but trade-relevant information. If I offered on a CB gold and only needed a male, I wouldn't want to offer on a female hatchling. So, misuse?

[HeatherMarie]

4 hours ago, olympe said:

 

Let's phrase it slightly differently: The trading hub deserves to be improved.  In every sense of the word.

 

Now *that* I can completely agree on! The trading hub is such an awesome feature in general, it deserves to be able to live up to it's full potential. 

 

I would support changing the 'Want' label to 'Notes about the trade', but *not* just to 'Notes'. Because that's way more vague and ambiguous then 'Wants', and we'll have even more people asking what is and isn't allowed and why they were banned from using the field. I mean, 'this is my 100th dragon' is a 'note', isn't it? But certainly not relevant to trading. 

[Shadowdrake]

1 hour ago, Starscream said:

I still think the ability to remove the necessary items off the offer would be ideal

That's be fantastic! Of course at the rate of updates it'd probably take another year if not longer, considering this specific idea has always been a good prospective feature yet has never seemed to catch TJ's attention as far as I know.

 

1 hour ago, Starscream said:

I am now also, for a timer that would prevent a specific teleport from being resubmitted 

Sure, that sounds reasonable soon as we get editing and pagination and any trade that vanishes off the page isn't practically lost in the void. How often do the search terms get used anyway, compared to offers made? I can't imagine it'd be often when making a trade or offering on the available trades is so much faster and more convenient while the search facility remains both incredibly narrow and non-specific.

 

1 hour ago, Starscream said:

Editing the trade wants, I think could work, providing a reason is submitted - that is viewable by mods.

That sounds incredibly inconvenient if an edit has to be mod-approved before it gets posted; chances are it'd hit repost-able time before a mod gets around to it with all the extra work. And if it's not for mod approvals, wouldn't a simple edit log and the already built system of reports do the same job? We already have a "reason for edit" field on the forums and it hardly gets any use because most edits are self-explanatory, and any "misuse" edits will be reported once visible, or will not be visible and thus defeat the point of editing anyway.

 

 

 

 

edit: And I'd like to say that pagination should absolutely be a priority. I can't imagine that people would be fine if the forums only showed 20 posts visible at a time.

Edited July 25, 2018 by Shadowdrake

[Starscream]

1 hour ago, Shadowdrake said:

That sounds incredibly inconvenient if an edit has to be mod-approved before it gets posted; chances are it'd hit repost-able time before a mod gets around to it with all the extra work. And if it's not for mod approvals, wouldn't a simple edit log and the already built system of reports do the same job? We already have a "reason for edit" field on the forums and it hardly gets any use because most edits are self-explanatory, and any "misuse" edits will be reported once visible, or will not be visible and thus defeat the point of editing anyway.

 

You misunderstand me. its just so mods can check back and see if abuse has occurred, not mod approved. I never said mods had to approve it. I said viewable to mods. the hypothetical idea was, if a complaint came in, mods could check back on the edits.

[olympe]

2 hours ago, Starscream said:

Editing the trade wants, I think could work, providing a reason is submitted - that is viewable by mods.

I'd say a history of the field content (before editing - after first edit - after second edit...) should be enough. Or you'll get reasons like "typo", "wrong description", "(my) grammar sucks" and so on all the time - and would still be unable to see if it's true.

[GhostMouse]

I searched this thread and didn't see this, sorry if someone has already brought this up. I would like to get a notification when my offer is declined, whether it is because the user chose to decline it, or because they accepted another offer, or because the trade was canceled. Knowing the reason would be nice ("This user has accepted another offer," or "This trade has been canceled," etc), but even a generic "Your offer was not accepted" or something would be fine.

I happened to be in the trading hub and saw one of my offers disappear but I don't have any notification for it. If I hadn't already been in there I wouldn't have known my offer was gone, which means I would still be waiting around for an answer when instead I could be making an offer on another trade.

I also recently had another offer disappear without knowing it, I assume because I was offering an egg that hatched. A notification that, "Your egg has hatched, this offer was automatically cancelled," or "Your trade was automatically cancelled," would be really useful, if that is the case. And if it was declined for one of the above reasons, then I would still like to know so I could offer it elsewhere.

[HeatherMarie]

@GhostMouse That has been suggested multiple times in this thread, I agree it would be very very helpful! When I'm offering on a trade I'm constantly checking to see if my offer is still active on that trade (I usually just click the 'actions' link for that egg since it takes me right to the trade page if it's still active there), that can get very annoying. I'd love to know when the offer is declined, or the trade itself is cancelled, or they accept a different offer... Just in general if the offer isn't active on that trade anymore. A notification for that would be great.

[Lucere]

Can we please, please, please have some sort of sticky, or notification on the actual site (because not everyone visits the forums) that clarifies what is and isn't okay to put in the want-box? I know I've said this before, but "misuse" is rather vague for me, as I've seen examples that I had thought would've been fine be considered "spam" or "inappropriate". And by clarification I mean more like "examples of what is allowed" and "examples of what is not allowed". 

 

Because now apparently something like "wants: 2G Arias from Garlands, not related to https://dragcave.net/groups/99999" is no longer allowed. I'd really appreciate a heads-up on these kinds of things. Please.

[Moonlight_Eevee]

Is there anyway to remove the holiday breeds from the list of trading until the season actually rolls around? I mean, there's no point in having them on the list just yet until they become breedable and it would save a ton of confusion for new people who haven't visited the forums/wiki at all/haven't gotten around to it.(I just saw someone wanting holiday breeds)

[HeatherMarie]

57 minutes ago, Lucere said:

Can we please, please, please have some sort of sticky, or notification on the actual site (because not everyone visits the forums) that clarifies what is and isn't okay to put in the want-box? I know I've said this before, but "misuse" is rather vague for me, as I've seen examples that I had thought would've been fine be considered "spam" or "inappropriate". And by clarification I mean more like "examples of what is allowed" and "examples of what is not allowed". 

 

Because now apparently something like "wants: 2G Arias from Garlands, not related to https://dragcave.net/groups/99999" is no longer allowed. I'd really appreciate a heads-up on these kinds of things. Please.

 

I'm not sure an actual list of what is and isn't allowed would be possible, since there will *always* be things not on the list that would be inappropriate. Plus, that list would be rather long! We've been told by a mod that links in the Wants section is not okay, so that's what the issue is there, which makes sense because allowing links opens up the potential for a *lot* of inappropriate links. 

 

Just trying to go off what you've said.... Examples of what's not allowed could be 'no song lyrics/poems/quotes', 'no direct messages to a specific user', 'no links', 'no random nonsense words/phrases'.... But I'm sure that doesn't encompass everything. I think a much easier thing to do would be simply tweak the text above the Want box to specify that it is *ONLY* for notes about what you are looking for on that trade (and maybe mention no links). That will include pretty much everything that people have been banned/warned about, I think?

[Sextonator]

A clarification that the wants box is for wants only would probably be the best option. It’d be great if there was an automatic filter for links, tho, that when you try to submit one it stops you and lets you know it’s not allowed.

[Lucere]

31 minutes ago, HeatherMarie said:

 

I'm not sure an actual list of what is and isn't allowed would be possible, since there will *always* be things not on the list that would be inappropriate. Plus, that list would be rather long! We've been told by a mod that links in the Wants section is not okay, so that's what the issue is there, which makes sense because allowing links opens up the potential for a *lot* of inappropriate links. 

 

Just trying to go off what you've said.... Examples of what's not allowed could be 'no song lyrics/poems/quotes', 'no direct messages to a specific user', 'no links', 'no random nonsense words/phrases'.... But I'm sure that doesn't encompass everything. I think a much easier thing to do would be simply tweak the text above the Want box to specify that it is *ONLY* for notes about what you are looking for on that trade (and maybe mention no links). That will include pretty much everything that people have been banned/warned about, I think?

 

Yeah I suppose a tweak would be fine. Something like "This text must include only what you are looking for in a trade. No direct messaging or links are allowed" would be better than what we have now.

 

And yeah, I understand that someone could've thrown in a link to something inappropriate (not sure if it's been an issue or not), but it would've been nice if dragcave links were whitelisted or something. It is going to be difficult going forward if I want to trade for a specific 2G pairing but don't want anything related to what I already have now. 

 

Since links are not allowed, would something like: "Wants: 2G Aria from Garland, unrelated to Group 99999" (or whatever the number is for the group) ok? Or something "Wants: 2G Aria from Garland, PM me for a list of pairings I already have" ok? I'd hate to have a bunch of people breed their pairings of whatever, only to reject their offer because I already have a sibling from that pair. 

 

14 minutes ago, Sextonator said:

A clarification that the wants box is for wants only would probably be the best option. It’d be great if there was an automatic filter for links, tho, that when you try to submit one it stops you and lets you know it’s not allowed.

 

There is a filter currently for links (only the http(s) part though, so if it doesn't have that it still goes through); however, the failed submission page doesn't exactly tell you that it was the link part that was blocked. Currently, it shows this (I just put https://dragcave.net in the want-box and tried to submit)   :

 

 

It would be nice if it showed which part was blocked, but I don't know if that is doable.

 

Edited July 28, 2018 by Lucere
I can't spell. Also random emoji thing got thrown in for some reason

[HeatherMarie]

6 minutes ago, Lucere said:

Since links are not allowed, would something like: "Wants: 2G Aria from Garland, unrelated to Group 99999" (or whatever the number is for the group) ok? Or something "Wants: 2G Aria from Garland, PM me for a list of pairings I already have" ok? I'd hate to have a bunch of people breed their pairings of whatever, only to reject their offer because I already have a sibling from that pair. 

 

Good question! @LadyLyzar since you were the one to confirm links aren't okay in the Tiny Little Questions thread, could you weigh in on this? 

[LadyLyzar]

33 minutes ago, Sextonator said:

A clarification that the wants box is for wants only would probably be the best option. It’d be great if there was an automatic filter for links, tho, that when you try to submit one it stops you and lets you know it’s not allowed.

 

As noted above, this is already in play.  It appears to have come in this afternoon.  I didn't know it was coming, but it does make sense.  However, I am in complete agreement that the guidelines could be made a bit more clear as to what is allowed and what is not.  I wouldn't even call it "wants only" as it can also give some information about your own offer.

 

28 minutes ago, Lucere said:

Since links are not allowed, would something like: "Wants: 2G Aria from Garland, unrelated to Group 99999" (or whatever the number is for the group) ok? Or something "Wants: 2G Aria from Garland, PM me for a list of pairings I already have" ok? I'd hate to have a bunch of people breed their pairings of whatever, only to reject their offer because I already have a sibling from that pair.  

 

I see no issue with specifying a group number.  That being said, I'm not the one writing the system, so I would not take my word as gold here.

 

By the way, this here is exactly why I think an in-game messaging system between traders, and only initiated by the person posting the trade, would be helpful.  Many users don't have forum accounts, and for those that do, their scroll names and forum names often don't match.  If you are looking for very specific items and need to discuss, it would be nice to be able to have a private (albeit reportable for any shenanigans) message conversation to square things away, as well as avoid situations where a trading partner is unknowingly locked.

[Moonlight_Eevee]

@LadyLyzar is there anyway to get the holidays off the trading list until the correct holidays roll around? New people aren't going to know that some of the breeds are holiday dragons (I've seen people ask for holidays already) also I think everyone skipped over my post since people are more concerned about links in trades than this

[LadyLyzar]

3 minutes ago, Dalek Raptor said:

@LadyLyzar is there anyway to get the holidays off the trading list until the correct holidays roll around? New people aren't going to know that some of the breeds are holiday dragons (I've seen people ask for holidays already) also I think everyone skipped over my post since people are more concerned about links in trades than this

 That would definitely be up to TJ, not me!  I don't do any of the site coding, and you should be thankful for that because I'm terrible at it!

 

It does make sense for unavailable breeds to either not appear in the list or be grayed out, however, I'm not sure how easy that will be.  With creative use of BSAs, some growing holiday dragons are available for awhile after their initial breeding and/or drop period.

[HeatherMarie]

25 minutes ago, LadyLyzar said:

 That would definitely be up to TJ, not me!  I don't do any of the site coding, and you should be thankful for that because I'm terrible at it!

 

It does make sense for unavailable breeds to either not appear in the list or be grayed out, however, I'm not sure how easy that will be.  With creative use of BSAs, some growing holiday dragons are available for awhile after their initial breeding and/or drop period.

 

That's a good point, though I think that could maybe be gotten around by only allowing the holiday dragons to show the month of that holiday? I mean it would be better if it were like only two or three weeks after the breeding period starts, but I'm assuming it would probably be easier to code them to simply show up for one month. I know nothing about coding, but there must be some way it can just be specified that such-and-such breed doesn't appear in the trading list except for such-and-such month/time (kind of like whatever coding makes only specific Lunars and Fire Gems drop, I'd assume?)