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

6 hours ago, Fuzzbucket said:

"Want: the 3rd gen gold I just accidentally rejected". I imagine that's OK, and I'm sure it's specific enough that the person offering would see it if they really wanted the egg (I did, and I got it !) it seems to me that that kind of thing is both legit and doesn't cross the line ?

That would be modded, yes.

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, Starscream said:

That would be modded, yes.

Why? It's a thing you want, it seems a useful thing to ask, and I don't think it was mentioned in that rule post TJ09 made, though I don't remember exactly what was on it.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Starscream said:

That would be modded, yes.

What about this: "Want: Third gen gold. The offer I just accidentally rejected was perfect!"

 

It's still open to other, similar offers. It tells everyone what they can offer - and likely get accepted. Plus, it informs the other party anonymously about the mishap.

Share this post


Link to post

Let's just say that I was very glad to have the chance to offer again - it made no sense as I had offered exactly what was asked for !

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, olympe said:

What about this: "Want: Third gen gold. The offer I just accidentally rejected was perfect!"

 

It's still open to other, similar offers. It tells everyone what they can offer - and likely get accepted. Plus, it informs the other party anonymously about the mishap.

Still won't fly.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Starscream said:

Still won't fly.

If that's the case, maybe add a confirmation box or require password to reject an offer?  I have rejected offers I wanted due to misclicks.  I reposted the trade but the original user never offered again.  I am guessing he/she thought I didn't want their egg.  :(

Share this post


Link to post
20 minutes ago, QVic said:

If that's the case, maybe add a confirmation box or require password to reject an offer?  I have rejected offers I wanted due to misclicks.  I reposted the trade but the original user never offered again.  I am guessing he/she thought I didn't want their egg.  :(

That would be a very good suggestion. But I don't have the power to add these. Hopefullly TJ'll have a poke through here. I worry about accepting an offer I want to decline too. Also sounds like you had the opposite effect. I reject offers and the people are spammng me back with the same/ other offers.

 

Share this post


Link to post

So we are at page 47 and the rules are getting more and more restrictive, and a lot of these are about things that are permitted on forums in trading.  This is why people are concerned.  We really need the final rules put up on trade hub page.

Share this post


Link to post

And regarding PM users on the forum, would it be possible to add an option for scroll user to check it 'on / off' if they want to be PM on the forum?  Similar to the option allowing user to decide to hide or show their scroll.

Share this post


Link to post

I personally don't think any sort of PM options are necessary, there is no direct communication on-site so there doesn't need to be any sort of do/don't communicate. I can see a case for allowing some sort of 'PM name on forum' note on the trade, but actual do/don't settings for a completely different site seems unnecessary. Again, the forum is separate. Separate log-in, etc. I think it needs to be treated that way. The hub is completely separate from the forums so it doesn't need any forum-related settings.

Share this post


Link to post

*jumps down the rabbit hole of insanity*  We're all crazy here. 

Would it be alright to put on your trade wants, "offers and re-offers, I accidentally hit decline"?

*talks to self* of course they will say no, but that would be consistent and what crazy person is consistent?...

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, QVic said:

And regarding PM users on the forum, would it be possible to add an option for scroll user to check it 'on / off' if they want to be PM on the forum?  Similar to the option allowing user to decide to hide or show their scroll.

 

No, because that is off-site (CAVE site) communication, and loads of people CANNOT be on forum. There is no interscroll communication and TJ has said there cannot be - add this is not to do with his preferences, it's to do with his day job; the hub is on scroll, and therefore is expected to stick to on scroll stuff. So group numbers (but not actual links) should be OK, but PM requests are not.

 

And of course it is more restrictive than the forum. The forum is designed for detailed communication; the hub is not. Think of it like shopping. You go to the supermarket (trade hub) and buy the products on your list, substituting where necessary. But for that glue you need for your specialist construction project  - which you aren't sure will stick the materials you are using for the legs, you go to a specialist forum and ask others who know their stuff if this brand or that will stick - say - plastic to glass and also manage feathers. And there will be discussion and then you will decide. You can't do that in a mass high speed store. Same here. The hub is for quick and dirty trades; for detail you need the forum, even though the hub can cater for some of the not quite as complex stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, 49ER said:

So we are at page 47 and the rules are getting more and more restrictive, and a lot of these are about things that are permitted on forums in trading.  This is why people are concerned.  We really need the final rules put up on trade hub page.

 

This is the biggest problem imo. The mods seem to just be making up what is/isn't against the rules; and it's not their fault, either. With no clear rules two moderators could potentially see the same situation and one could let it slide while another would mod it.

 

That's why a clear, hard list is required. A list for the mods to follow to a T that we also have access to... It's only fair.

 

Will people do things that are against the rules but not listed? Yes. This is how rules come to encompass all situations with few exceptions. In this case, warnings and explanations + updated rules if it is deemed logical enough, but not bans right off the bat, make sense.

 

This is how rules work pretty much everywhere else. I find it so weird that people are so against it?

Share this post


Link to post

I'm all for rules, clearly stated. But what I am also saying is 1) Give it time. The hub is new; the need to spell things out then came up, and the mods and TJ are trying to get it absolutely right before opening a new can of worms with the "BUT YOU NEVER SAID... " posts that will follow. I personally hope the rules will be on the main cave help page and linked from the hub page when you click "public trade".

 

and 2) there are people IN THIS THREAD who have been told repeatedly that something is against the rules - and still say "well it shouldn't be". Especially - it has been spelled out many times that there will never be any off site links of any kind allowed in the hub because of TJ's job. And this forum is NOT A PART OF THE CAVE. People HAVE to get over that. So asking for PMs, and linking to profile want lists simply isn't going to happen. Giving a group number is at least aiming for something that's within the actual cave so saying "mate for anything in group 2730I thing may end up being OK - but not "Mate for anything in https://dragcave.net/group/43612." as that is actually a link and I think will/should  auto-censor itself ?

Share this post


Link to post

I'm all for giving it time for the rules to be fully fleshed out. We need thorough rules when it's put in place. Or as thorough as possible.

 

My issue is that even at this very moment, the ban hammer is at the ready to kick people from the Hub, no explanations given unless you can ask here in the forums. Which isn't even a guarantee that anyone who knows why will even tell you. And that ban hammer is permanent with no idea when that will be rescinded, if at all. I don't understand how people are A-okay with that just because they're not getting tagged or haven't gotten tagged with it yet for rule violations. I could get it if only extreme cases currently were being banned...but it's anyone unfortunate enough to get modded by a set of rules not in place yet for the banned to reference and realize "oh, that was wrong, okay".

 

That's my main concern. The rules are not complete, not posted, yet the punishment for breaking them is already flying and confirmed as permanent until TJ changes it in however many months/years it takes to do so. How is this accepted as perfectly okay??

Share this post


Link to post

I think Starscream has made it very clear that bans are not likely to be permanent except perhaps in the case of people who - as TJ said up the thread, clearly knew exactly what they were doing.

 

And from another thread, he said:

 

Quote

To update everyone: The rules are going to be updated, specifically to make it clearer that any use of the message for anything other than wants/haves is forbidden. It'll also call out that links are forbidden. As for bans, things are going to be restructured to have a few phases before reaching permanent status. This will apply retroactively to those who are banned. ETA within the next two weeks, alongside a few other updates.

 

Edited by Fuzzbucket

Share this post


Link to post

It's not as if there's been a facility for non-permanent bans mentioned. EDIT: oh, so there is one, but it does not actually exist and people are banned.

 

Again, adding more rules does not mean that they will be looser! The reason we have restrictive rules now is that there's been creative misinterpretation of that useless want box sentence by the moderators. It should not take long to copy-paste the rules TJ09 posted on that thread onto the hub.

 

EDIT AGAIN: and don't people not get told what they did because of the "no onsite communication" thing? This really needs fixing quite badly.

Edited by osmarks

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, osmarks said:

and don't people not get told what they did

Apparently not. Some time ago, someone lost their naming function (due to massively naming dragons inappropriate things) and came to the forum asking for the reason. A moderator then told them the reason (massively naming dragons inappropriate things).

Share this post


Link to post
31 minutes ago, Ruby Eyes said:

Apparently not. Some time ago, someone lost their naming function (due to massively naming dragons inappropriate things) and came to the forum asking for the reason. A moderator then told them the reason (massively naming dragons inappropriate things).

 

I have to say that as one who saw several of those names at the time (I used the wayback machine after the player posted) there was no excuse at all. The note you get when naming warned what happens with inappropriate names and trust me, inappropriate did not begin to describe them.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, osmarks said:

 

EDIT AGAIN: and don't people not get told what they did because of the "no onsite communication" thing? This really needs fixing quite badly.

I think the mods have already said that they have no way to communicate with people about trade hub violations. So, unless those people come to the forum to ask, they will likely not be told. From what I understand, the no onsite communication problem seems to have to do with TJ's actual employment and as such is probably non-negotiable.

 

@Ruby Eyes What you say is true, but that was because the person asked on the forum.

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, purplehaze said:

I think the mods have already said that they have no way to communicate with people about trade hub violations. So, unless those people come to the forum to ask, they will likely not be told. From what I understand, the no onsite communication problem seems to have to do with TJ's actual employment and as such is probably non-negotiable.

 

@Ruby Eyes What you say is true, but that was because the person asked on the forum.

Sure, I can accept that, but it means that we need clear rules and temporary bans so people don't end up horribly confused.

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe it would be possible - where someone is banned - for there to be a button next to the greyed out wants button, leading to a note of the various reasons for bans - that should be enough to point to what they did. If that list says things like "Posting stuff not related to dragons/posting links/posting .... whatever else" - they should be able to remember what they did that fell foul of it all.

 

And after all - on the help page there IS a link under contact information to email TJ. That should do, surely ?

Edited by Fuzzbucket

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, purplehaze said:

 What you say is true, but that was because the person asked on the forum.

But that's exactly what I said. :blink:

Share this post


Link to post

Okay, so after all the Want-box defending I've done, I now have a question about the rules there myself: Is 'will decline x' appropriate, if it goes with other specific wants? Example, 'Messy-lineaged Dorsal or Ridgewing (Messies only, will decline CBs)' ... would that be allowed? (Because omg why do people keep offering CBs when I'm asking for messies?!)

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.