Trading Hub Feedback

[49ER]

Exactly!  When I pm'd somebody about not putting PM contact information, she asked where she could find that rule and I had to send her to the suggestions section.  She rightfully said that is not where one would expect to find the rules.  Not only that, the thread is over 30 pages to read through to find them.

[olympe]

19 minutes ago, HeatherMarie said:

 

But why on earth should *legit* cancellations be punished just because some people abuse the bumping? That's a horrible way to enforce rules, honestly, punishing everyone who is totally innocent along with the wrong-doers.

Every cancellation is as legit as any other one. A one-time cancellation won't do much to impact you. A two-time cancellation isn't much of a problem. Even with a 20% penalty. 100 cancellations in less than two hours - won't be possible any more. Which is what we all want, isn't it?

 

Quote

And it will still *heavily* affect people who trade a lot (5 Magis left?? I can use more then that in 15 hours!).

The example was for someone who owns only 11 magis. I'm pretty sure you have way more than that. Probably over 100?

 

20 minutes ago, osmarks said:

I find your idea of punishments for cancelled teleports both useless and too punitive.

 

Disabling 20% (one fifth) of your magi with a stupid cooldown will make it difficult to do legitimate things like, well, bumping at all, changing wants, having stuff grow, etc, and will disproportionately impact new players with few magi.

 

@olympe

 

Once pagination is there, bumping shouldn't be necessary at all. For changing wants, we could have an editing feature, maybe? I know it's been suggested... Auto-cancelled teleports  (egg hatches, hatchling grows up...) shouldn't be punished any more than they already are.

 

The thing is: As long as a couple of people abuse the bumping feature, other players will feel the need to do the same to keep up. Which is a very bad thing overall. 

Edited August 6, 2018 by olympe

[49ER]

What about cancellations period?  I often cancel my trades when I am going to sleep or AFK for several hours because I know that I hate waiting an eternity for someone to accept or decline a trade.  So I take mine down and then when I come back to it, I put it up again.

[Pixxelation]

If people are being banned from using the trading hub for seemingly-innocuous things such as asking not to be PMed on the forums, I feel strongly that there really does need to be a Rules section that outlines what does and doesn’t constitute fair use of the “want” box. This feature is something users were really looking forward to, and it’s unfair to ban them from using it for breaking rules that aren’t clearly outlined on-site.

[osmarks]

^

Exactly! There's a lot there which can't be inferred from the text there.

[HeatherMarie]

I only have 32 Magis, but that's not the issue. People should not be *punished* for using a feature in a completely legitimate, by-the-rules way. Cancelling a Teleport has never put the Magi on cooldown (to my knowledge) and certainly has never come with a punishment, why on earth should that change now just because some people are abusing it in a new feature? And *why* would putting 20% of your Magis on cooldown even make sense at all?? 20% of your Magis are not using their magic for that Teleport, only one is. Completely rewriting the lore of how Magis use that power and how many it puts on cooldown just to punish *everyone* for something that's only a problem because of a few people..... No. Just no. 

 

Edit: Also, 20% really doesn't make sense, because that means it would be a different number of Magis being put on cooldown depending on how many you have, and how on earth does that make sense? It takes more Magis to use their power the more you have?? Huh?

Edited August 6, 2018 by HeatherMarie

[49ER]

Actually I think if offers have been made on it, (albeit junk offers)  it will cancel the teleport once you take it down.  So will an egg hatching or hatchie growing up.

[JavaTigress]

35 minutes ago, olympe said:

And "sometimes" is not a problem if there's a penalty of 20% of your magi population going on cooldown. So, you have 11 magis. You post 1 trade (10 magis off cooldown left), cancel it (due to penalty, only 8 magis off cooldown left). You do it again and still have 5 magis left.

 

It's not like this system prevents bumping/reposting. It merely punishes, which is especially noticeable when used extensively. And I never meant to punish people for teleports self-cancelling due to stuff hatching or growing up.

 

And, yes, someone cited an example of one player keeping 5 trades on the top of the trading page for 20 minutes through constant bumping.

It's nice for some slightly clearer rules to be put on the forum, but they're needed on-site for everyone who doesn't have a forum account and happens to know where to look. And your quote doesn't even get covered by what's on the site.

 

 

If they have done that then yes, it is a problem, and yes its a nuisance.

That said, I still don't support your solution to the problem.

That seems like a case of the cure is as bad as the disease it is meant to treat.

 

besides, as @49ER pointed out.... it makes no sense for a full 20% of your magi to be put on CD for it. You could justify the one doing the teleporting maybe, but 20%? e

 

I think adding pagination and allowing easier searching and browsing of trades will lessen the 'bumping' problem.

Edited August 6, 2018 by JavaTigress

[osmarks]

Bumping should be fixed by pagination and not stupidly excessive punishment for a thing which is mostly done legitimately.

[olympe]

9 minutes ago, 49ER said:

What about cancellations period?  I often cancel my trades when I am going to sleep or AFK for several hours because I know that I hate waiting an eternity for someone to accept or decline a trade.  So I take mine down and then when I come back to it, I put it up again.

That's... really problematic. Maybe a slightly different mechanism. Once an egg/hatchling was in a public teleport that got cancelled manually, it gets "charged" for an hour. If the same egg/hatchling gets put up for another trade, the penalty happens? 

 

7 minutes ago, HeatherMarie said:

I only have 32 Magis, but that's not the issue. People should not be *punished* for using a feature in a completely legitimate, by-the-rules way. Cancelling a Teleport has never put the Magi on cooldown (to my knowledge) and certainly has never come with a punishment, why on earth should that change now just because some people are abusing it in a new feature? And *why* would putting 20% of your Magis on cooldown even make sense at all?? 20% of your Magis are not using their magic for that Teleport, only one is. Completely rewriting the lore of how Magis use that power and how many it puts on cooldown just to punish *everyone* for something that's only a problem because of a few people..... No. Just no. 

Punishment because people are abusing the feature? And I gave a lore-related reason in the first post I came up with the idea: Magical backlash - because the tele-portal had to be taken down unexpectedly.

At the very least, let's take the one magi that did get used for a teleport that got magically cancelled on cooldown. At the very, very least. Because auto-cancelled teleports already do that anyway.

Edited August 6, 2018 by olympe

[Shadowdrake]

I don't feel like arguing about rules anymore because it's clear that Kaini has decided on her stance and until another mod chimes in we'll have to deal with help threads asking why they've been banned from trading because there's no rules to explain beforehand or after.

[49ER]

1 minute ago, olympe said:

That's... really problematic. Maybe a slightly different mechanism. Once an egg/hatchling was in a public teleport that got cancelled manually, it gets "charged" for an hour. If the same egg/hatchling gets put up for another trade, the penalty happens? 

 

Punishment because people are abusing the feature? And I gave a lore-related reason in the first post I came up with the idea: Magical backlash - because the tele-portal had to be taken down unexpectedly.

At the very least, let's take the one magi that did get used for a teleport that got magically cancelled on cooldown. At the very, very least. Because auto-cancelled teleports already do that anyway.

How is it a problem if someone chooses not to leave their trades up overnight and takes them down?  Maybe they need to fog it.  I do not consider the same thing being put up 6 to 8 hours later worthy of a penalty, nor should it be considered a bump.  A bump is when someone puts something up, 4 other trades come in behind it and they cancel and immediately put theirs back to the top

[Kaini]

1 minute ago, Shadowdrake said:

I don't feel like arguing about rules anymore because it's clear that Kaini has decided on her stance and until another mod chimes in we'll have to deal with help threads asking why they've been banned from trading because there's no rules to explain beforehand or after.

 

It's not as if I'm solely responsible for banning anyone or making the rules - I'm most certainly not. Just in my own opinion they don't need changing. TJ did ask what was unclear about them, so maybe he'll re-word them. It's up to him.

[49ER]

Kaini have you banned anyone from Trade Hub?  And if you have, for how long?  (Still trying to get answer about ban lengths)

[osmarks]

1 minute ago, Kaini said:

 

It's not as if I'm solely responsible for banning anyone or making the rules - I'm most certainly not. Just in my own opinion they don't need changing. TJ did ask what was unclear about them, so maybe he'll re-word them. It's up to him.

You do, at the very least, seem to claim that banning people according to arbitrary rules probably not even agreed upon by all moderators and spread across the nebulous haze and not where you actually trade is fine.

 

Also, with no warning or non-forum appeals process!

[JavaTigress]

18 minutes ago, olympe said:

Punishment because people are abusing the feature? And I gave a lore-related reason in the first post I came up with the idea: Magical backlash - because the tele-portal had to be taken down unexpectedly.

At the very least, let's take the one magi that did get used for a teleport that got magically cancelled on cooldown. At the very, very least. Because auto-cancelled teleports already do that anyway.

You could justify for the magi DOING the teleport. ( AND TBH, I'd be less opposed to that,) But not a whole 20%. 

 

I still don't agree with something QUITE that harsh.

 

Edited August 6, 2018 by JavaTigress

[Shadowdrake]

3 minutes ago, Kaini said:

 

It's not as if I'm solely responsible for banning anyone or making the rules - I'm most certainly not. Just in my own opinion they don't need changing. TJ did ask what was unclear about them, so maybe he'll re-word them. It's up to him.

Perhaps but until someone else has a say here in we're getting only one official viewpoint and you've made your stance clear. So not much point in debate now.

[Sextonator]

7 minutes ago, Kaini said:

 

It's not as if I'm solely responsible for banning anyone or making the rules - I'm most certainly not. Just in my own opinion they don't need changing. TJ did ask what was unclear about them, so maybe he'll re-word them. It's up to him.

Your refusal to even consider how the rules could be improved is really demoralizing, though. How are users supposed to feel like they're actually being listened to if a mod just kind of brushes off their concerns?

[HeatherMarie]

27 minutes ago, olympe said:

That's... really problematic. Maybe a slightly different mechanism. Once an egg/hatchling was in a public teleport that got cancelled manually, it gets "charged" for an hour. If the same egg/hatchling gets put up for another trade, the penalty happens? 

 

Punishment because people are abusing the feature? And I gave a lore-related reason in the first post I came up with the idea: Magical backlash - because the tele-portal had to be taken down unexpectedly.

At the very least, let's take the one magi that did get used for a teleport that got magically cancelled on cooldown. At the very, very least. Because auto-cancelled teleports already do that anyway.

 

But why would lore suddenly change that way? Why would 'magical backlash' suddenly be a thing when it never has before? It still doesn't make sense. And, as I've said many times before, many people cancel and/or bump trades *because* of the current limitations of the hub, and I really really don't want to see people punished for that in any way. I don't think it's fair to punish someone for cancelling a teleport because, for instance, they need to change their Wants or made a mistake about the gen they need but the hub doesn't allow editing Wants. I don't think it's fair to suddenly *punish* people for something that has for *years* held no punishment or consequence at all. I don't think it's right to suddenly change how things work in a way that punishes totally innocent people, just because a small handful of people are abusing the bumping property of cancellation.

 

I don't think cancelling a teleport should be punished in ANY way until some of those completely legitimate reasons for bumping/cancelling are dealt with. If we were able to edit our Wants, we wouldn't *need* to cancel every single time we needed to change something. If there was pagination, we wouldn't *need* to bump our trades in order for them to actually be seen. Yes it's frustrating that some people abuse this by remaking their trades constantly all the time, but punishing *everyone* for that is simply not right. And chances are that a *lot* of cancelling/bumping will go way down once certain features are added to the hub.

 

edit: I don't totally mind the one Magi you used being put on cooldown, but I still don't think it's the right way to handle things.

Edited August 6, 2018 by HeatherMarie

[olympe]

17 minutes ago, Kaini said:

 

It's not as if I'm solely responsible for banning anyone or making the rules - I'm most certainly not. Just in my own opinion they don't need changing. TJ did ask what was unclear about them, so maybe he'll re-word them. It's up to him.

Well, a lot is unclear about them.

1. "Haves" being acceptable.
2. Status of Influence/Precognition probably being acceptable.
3. Any kind of direct user-to-user communication ("XX, want to accept - you're locked!") being unacceptable.
4. Any kind of requests for communication being unacceptable.
5. Any kind of link being unacceptable.
6. Any kind of indirect on-site link (group "need mates") being unacceptable.

[HeatherMarie]

Would it help the whole 'bumping abuse' if there was a limit on how many times you could make the *same* trade within a certain amount of time? Like, for instance, I make a trade with Magi A for egg B, and then I cancel and remake it... I can only do that maybe three times before I have to wait a few hours to make that same trade. Would that help? It would help stop constant bumping while not punishing people who have to remake for other reasons.

[Stromboli]

People are accustomed to making trade requests that usually state upfront and in more detail about what they have (since not everyone loves having to click through a bunch of lineage links to find out), and they're accustomed to being able to do things like say "PM me to discuss offers," or "Check my wish list" due to how the forum trades have been since trading was added.

 

So yeah, if things like that are not going to be allowed now, I think that needs to be made abundantly clear. And the rules (well, rule) as it is does not make that clear to me.

[49ER]

Well often times, a remake would be a different set of dragons (like I clicked wrong one, or forgot one) or need to edit the text.  So that is not the exact same trade.  Other than that, I think bumping once every 6 hours or so is sufficient.

[HeatherMarie]

6 hours? Trades can disappear into no-mans land within 30 minutes. Even if you filter by a specific breed it may only show to past hour of trades depending on how many people are trading that breed. Within an hour or two your trade can become *completely* unseeable, and because of that I think 6 hours is entirely too long. Bumping every 5 minutes is abuse, sure, but bumping every 2-3 hours is usually because people literally *cannot* see the trade otherwise. 

[49ER]

I don't know, the ones that fall off the filter are usually prize dragons and metals but those can be seen by filter at least over 6 hours.  I guess my real hope is while these rules are being clarified here, is they can state what is a bump is, and how often it can be done.  Especially once Pagination is done.  Then there should be a ruling, I would hope.  For right now, it is legal until something is decided and worked out about that