Jump to content
TJ09

Trading Hub Feedback

TJ09

Please report all bugs in the Help section. This thread is for discussion and feedback only.

Message added by TJ09

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, SHODAN said:

Also finally, blank trades? I see them personally as "offer whatever." Are they fine or no?

 

They also may be the result of disciplinary action. People who have had their ability to post in the want box due to misuse, will probably have a blank. If they decline, then that's their choice. Also if its left empty, it probably is offer whatever.

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, olympe said:

And yet, that does not cover texts like...

  • Want: The gold from the person whose offer I accidentally rejected.
  • Haves
  • Want: 3 eggs; can't take eggs for another 2 hours

All of these could be considered user-to-user interaction and don't exactly meet the rules (save for the first).

 

Personally, I'd say "Hey, X, I'd like to accpet but you ar locked." is a want. It says quite clearly "I want what you're offering NOW!" 'And very much so.

 

And because of that - and the fact that even you mods don't agree on all points, we need rules and guidelines. As "easy to understand" as it is, at easy it is to disagree on what's acceptable and what isn't.

 

THIS so much!!

 

Also afaik I don't see the problem with bumping, if you want to spend your life canceling and recreating trades, go for it! I was gonna propose some time limit to offering the same egg, but too short and that only hurts people that might want to fix a typo in their trade-lot. (no point to "bump" if you're already the most recent). Too long and you may as well give up on the egg, it's basically not yours/a new caveborn for all its trading usefulness.

Share this post


Link to post

I'd like to mention again how *great* it would be if it would show the offer you were accepting on the password-confirmation page when you go to accept an offer. Right now it doesn't show the sprite(s) of what you are accepting, it doesn't show a code or *anything* to confirm that you actually clicked the correct 'accept' button. I've posted before about how close the accept/decline buttons are to the offer above it, and it not always easy to see what buttons go to what offer. On BSAs like Influence and Incubate it shows the sprite of the egg you are about to use that action on. I'm sure it couldn't be too difficult to do that for the accepting page, right?

Share this post


Link to post

Okay. I know we're not supposed to report bumping, but is anything going to be done for users who have posted multiple offers (like four individual trades for every minute of the past 20ish) in a row and fill the hub?

Edited by Jazeki
Clarity

Share this post


Link to post

But they absolutely have to bump their trades constantly so their trades and only their trades stay on top - who cares about all the other people trying to trade anyway? After all, they're free to do the same...

Edited by olympe
Typo'ed

Share this post


Link to post
20 minutes ago, Jazeki said:

Okay. I know we're not supposed to report bumping, but is anything going to be done for users who have posted multiple offers (like four individual trades for every minute of the past 20ish) in a row and fill the hub?

 

Yeah, I saw somebody just a few minutes ago with seven trades in a row of one singular purple Siyat for "Offers?". That's much more space consuming then deleting and bumping one or two trades or your own, personally.

Share this post


Link to post

I really don't see how it can be avoided actually, but I can understand the potential here for abuse if say someone posts 21 possible offers and then start to delete and bump -  honestly they are  not doing anything illegal -  but I'll prod the powers that be regarding it.  - I understand the concerns here.

Share this post


Link to post

I definitely understand the concern with people posting and bumping tons of trades at once so their trades are all that are visible, but how can that be curbed in a fair way? It doesn't seem like a good idea to limit how many trades people can make at a time, if they are all legitimate trades people would get very very frustrated with having to wait a random amount of time to post another trade... Limiting bumping is also iffy, because where is the cut-off? Trades can drop off the main page within 15 minutes or less, so people *need* to be able to bump, until we get pagination....

Share this post


Link to post

Well, it would already alleviate the problem to quite some extent if every cancelled teleport put the executing magi on cooldown... Because if someone actually has four trades and reposts them every minute for at least 20 minutes straight, that's... 80 magis used. 

 

Sure, people could and would hoard magis, but it's a first step. Maybe lengthen the cooldown for cancelled teleports to two weeks instead of  two days due to "magical backlash"? 😈Worse, have a certain percentage (20%?) of all your other magis affected as well.

Edited by olympe

Share this post


Link to post

Or at least add pagination. It would help a little...

Share this post


Link to post

That, too. But just a little. So I'd rather have two things that help a little. Or three. (The percentage thing helps a lot, as it uses up your magis pretty quickly, no matter how many you have.)

 

I just made an excel sheet in order to find out how quickly a 20% of all magis (off-cooldown, rounded up) would work.

If you have 100 magis, you reach your limit after 12 bumps. (You can still post one more trade with your last available magi.)

If you have 1000 magis, you reach your limit after 20 bumps. (Well, if I counted correctly. I'm very tired right now.)

In any case, it should nip extreme bumping behavior in the butt.

Edited by olympe

Share this post


Link to post
17 minutes ago, olympe said:

That, too. But just a little. So I'd rather have two things that help a little. Or three. (The percentage thing helps a lot, as it uses up your magis pretty quickly, no matter how many you have.)

 

I just made an excel sheet in order to find out how quickly a 20% of all magis (off-cooldown, rounded up) would work.

If you have 100 magis, you reach your limit after 12 bumps. (You can still post one more trade with your last available magi.)

If you have 1000 magis, you reach your limit after 20 bumps. (Well, if I counted correctly. I'm very tired right now.)

In any case, it should nip extreme bumping behavior in the butt.

.  But even with people with 20 - 50+ magi (unaltered), they';ll still reach their limit in short order. (annoying but it will end)

 

I would not agree with penalising a cancelled teleport. I have cancelled mine after discovering some people repeatedly sending me the same offers over and over, until I decided it was not worth the hassle at that time.  I would not be pleased if I found that the teleport was disabled *that much longer* and it would be worse for a person who only has a few magi (less than 10).

 

I'm still thinking a flood control type system - maybe limiting to  2 - 4 teleports per user per 20 minutes. Then again the pagination would be ideal. Also, not sure the maths and coding here, it might be a great idea to have a number beside the breeds in teh filter: Gold Dragons (43)  FluffyButt dragons (260) Vampires (10) (may or may not be useful... could be... could be my jaw-ache talking too)

Share this post


Link to post
40 minutes ago, Starscream said:

 

I would not agree with penalising a cancelled teleport. I have cancelled mine after discovering some people repeatedly sending me the same offers over and over, until I decided it was not worth the hassle at that time.  I would not be pleased if I found that the teleport was disabled *that much longer* and it would be worse for a person who only has a few magi (less than 10).

 

Very very very much agree here. Penalizing *all* canceled teleports is not fair at all because there are plenty of completely legit, non-bumping reasons why someone may cancel a teleport. I often cancel and re-make, for instance, if I'm not getting any good offers and decide to ask for something different (I'd love to be able to edit Wants!). I've also done as Starscream mentioned and canceled after I got blasted with several unwanted offers from the same person. I've also canceled a public trade and immediately remade it as a one-way when I decided I didn't want to wait for offers and instead wanted to gift it in the departures thread. Penalizing all those completely legitimate cancellations is not the right way to go about things. 

 

Honestly I don't really think anything drastic should be done at all to curb bumps/reposts, not yet, because right now there is a completely legit reason why people need to be allowed to do such things. *When* we finally get pagination, there could be something implemented to stop people from re-making the same trade within a certain amount of time, or maybe even a way to report people who do such things, but right now it's sort of a necessary evil.

Share this post


Link to post

Wait, so you cannot do contact info for IOU trades?  I had a couple CB Silvers up for trade for a specific type of 2g prize and I knew someone prolly would not be able to do that at a drop of a hat, so I put that someone could pm me to arrange an IOU.  The trades in Trade Hub are seen by a lot more people so I get much better results posting in there rather than the forum.

The constant bumping abuse is unfair because they are burying everyone else's trades to keep theirs at the top of page.  It is not fair to expect everyone to have to keep re-bumping.  

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, 49ER said:

Wait, so you cannot do contact info for IOU trades?  I had a couple CB Silvers up for trade for a specific type of 2g prize and I knew someone prolly would not be able to do that at a drop of a hat, so I put that someone could pm me to arrange an IOU.  The trades in Trade Hub are seen by a lot more people so I get much better results posting in there rather than the forum.

The constant bumping abuse is unfair because they are burying everyone else's trades to keep theirs at the top of page.  It is not fair to expect everyone to have to keep re-bumping.  

Contact information for anything is not acceptable.  IOU's is not something we support on this site anyway (mostly because of problems arising from arrangements going south.)

 

Just keep the information in the box to strictly what you want, and what you have. ( No mods will have an issue of people indicating what the egg in the trade is)

 

Avoid: (what I know is bannable)

PM's for IOU's

PM's (username) or wahtever

Outside site links (with or without the url)... I am pretty sure indicating a group on site is okay. (be on the safe side and avoid it)

 

Just what you have and what you want.

 

As for the bumping, its unavoidable for the moment. If you need to rebump because it got bumpped off, then so be it - rebump. Mods won't take action on a want box report that is within the parameters of what a want is.

 

For something as specific as a G2 prize want, you may still wish to utilise forums as the choice medium.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

Question: Can I put "no forum messages" in my want-box as part of my wants? Something like: "Have: 2G Prize; Want: Offers. No forum messages please"

 

I'd like to be able to put up certain things for trade in the near future but I don't want people sending me PMs asking for an IOU.

Share this post


Link to post
37 minutes ago, Lucere said:

Question: Can I put "no forum messages" in my want-box as part of my wants? Something like: "Have: 2G Prize; Want: Offers. No forum messages please"

 

I'd like to be able to put up certain things for trade in the near future but I don't want people sending me PMs asking for an IOU.

 

That does not describe which offers you would like to receive, so no.

 

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, TJ09 said:

 

That does not describe which offers you would like to receive, so no.

 

 

Oh ok. I had seen other in-cave artists do the same so I thought it was ok. 

 

Just to be clear, something like "Have: 2G prize; Wants: Offers" is still ok, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Lucere said:

 

Oh ok. I had seen other in-cave artists do the same so I thought it was ok. 

 

Just to be clear, something like "Have: 2G prize; Wants: Offers" is still ok, right?

Yep.

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe these enforced-by-banning rules should be somewhere other than spread across several pages of forum thread in a nebulous haze?

Edited by osmarks
autocorrect being evil

Share this post


Link to post

Something I've seen that really kinda bothers me is just "use the forum." That's all well and good until someone wants to contact someone making an offer to discuss an issue, only to discover they don't have a forum account - or maybe they do, but not under the same name, so you can't find them anyway. And it really doesn't matter what any given player's reason for not having a forum account is, the relevant bit is that they don't have one. Not everyone uses the forum, and no one should be forced to; even in integrated games like flight rising you don't have to participate in forum stuff. 

 

Now, I agree with guidelines posting onsite, and that the wants box should only contain wants and maybe a quick description of what you're trading, but I do disagree that the only solution to not being able to contact a person offering on your trade is "use the forum." 

 

I feel like a better solution is implementing an ability to accept/decline parts of an offer, where the trader has the option of removing things from an offer without having to decline or accept the whole thing entirely.

Or even just creating a dropdown menu available to the trader for use on each offer with some basic preset messages, like "you are egg/scroll locked, please make space" or "i will accept this as soon as i have space" or somesuch like that.

 

It's correct to say that communication is what the forum is for, but that really only works if everyone has a forum account to contact (AND it relies on them having the same name on the forum as the site!).

Share this post


Link to post

In addition, are we expected to use the forums or not? Unsolicited contact by PMs on forum is okay but saying that we don't want it or that we welcome it is not? Is there a reason why?

Edited by Shadowdrake

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, osmarks said:

Maybe these enforced-by-banning rules should be somewhere other than spread across several pages of forum thread in a nebulous haze?

 

Oh hey, how's that for an idea! Enforcing rules that are clearly stated! On-site! Instead of expecting people who have never set foot on forums (and everyone else, for that matter) to wade through this hellbeast of a thread! Revolutionary concept! Wow!

 

(Seriously if somebody comes at me again with how the rules are common sense I swear I will slap a ****. If there are dozens of pages of this thread dedicated to "what is allowed", it's because it's not clear. It's because it's not intuitive. It's because we've been told that certain things like linking to a list of things you want (which certainly fits under "helping people understand your wants") will get you banned, despite it clearly following the on-site guidelines. It is ANYTHING BUT common sense).

Share this post


Link to post

Even excluding problems with inconsistency and the lack of canonical on site rules, there are still large problems.

1. Is the public trade ban message actually remotely clear? Does it EXIST?

2. Is there an appeal process other than the forums?

3. How are people meant to express "mate for X group" without links, since that mostly won't fit in the textbox?

4. Is there even an agreed non-vague ruleset?

5. Why no pagination? Seriously? It's a simple feature, the scroll has it, it's necessary.

6. Needing to look at eggs several times or have them just to filter for them makes trading annoying.

Share this post


Link to post

I find it ridiculous we are not allowed to put "PM me on forums" or something similar in the box. I think what this game needs most is a better way to communicate, some sort of messaging system - but I have been told this is not possible because of TJ's irl work. Okay. Fair enough.

 

But to then forbid other messaging options? You're literally giving us a great addition to the site, the trading hub, reaching so many more people than we could before on the forums alone... only to build some sort of thick wall around it saying no, you are not allowed to communicate at all, everything has to stay within these strict perimeters.

Instead of being able to merge the two trading worlds, you made a new separate one.

 

Communication is so incredibly important in a game where there is no set worth of things... you have to be able to haggle, to bribe, to bargain, whatever. So many potential trades are now lost because we're not allowed to communicate. Imagine going to a marketplace and saying "I have a sheep, I want a cow." and the other person goes "I want a sheep, I have donkeys." End of conversation. Because their trade was not as simple as 1+1=2. If only they could have made a compromise, going between the offers...

 

I'm confused why trading on the forums is acceptable then, too. We're literally using the same game, we're trading, and talking and PM'ing about it, we just started at the other end of the equation. So I'm allowed to PM here with a user, then trade on the Dragoncave site, but I can't make a trade offer on the Dragoncave site and then work out the specifics here by PM. Doesn't that seem backwards to you? Why is one allowed and the other isn't? It's still merging offsite-communication and onsite-trading, isn't it?

 

I'm not going to pretend I know the exact reason why all of this isn't allowed. If TJ isn't allowed cause of his work, or if he simply doesn't WANT to, sure. Nothing we can do about that. But I do find it really absurd and questionable. I just can't imagine a scenario that makes sense, to be honest. Like I get that you're sometimes not allowed to make a competitor or something similar or whatever. But to forbid referencing a system that is already in use. HOW is that not okay...? Even in terms of work-related rules...

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.