ANSWERED:Not sure why I'm not allowed to make public trades anymore?

[Fuzzbucket]

3 hours ago, epickitty25 said:

Except that is I'm pretty sure fraud is illegal IRL.

Also, your explanation simply puts it on the same levels as links - there are malicious uses and non-malicious uses. Yet one gets you banned and the other doesn't.

 

The trouble with links is that they may not be at all what they appear to be - https://dragcave.net/view/DhIH2 - and there are - sadly - malicious players here.

 

And sure, fraud is illegal. But I don't think trades in a dragon game really come under that umbrella. Not least because you can ALWAYS check. Unlike ebay - where I actually and accidentally misdescribed something I was selling just last month. It can happen to the best of us.

 

2 hours ago, Ruby Eyes said:

Go to ebay and find all those private traders who describe item X (as shown in the trade photo) as item y and then sue them. There must be millions of such offers. Wonder why all these people weren't banned from ebay yet.

 

Fact is, if you see an egg on the teleport, you can SEE if it's a fabled Gold or just a gold-like looking Golden Wyvern. If it's a hatchling or an egg. If it's 1 item or 4.

Click the egg or hatchling and you SEE if it has parents or not, and so on. It's actually quite difficult to scam a trader on DC who pays just a little attention.

 

If you see a link, you will never know what it leads to until you click it. Especially offsite links are potentially dangerous.

 

Yup

 

https://dragcave.net/view/DhIH2

 

2 hours ago, JavaTigress said:

This! VERY much this! I always make it a point to look before I offer or accept.

 

I haven't been burned,myself , but I have heard of it happening, so I am careful. 

 

THAT said, I can totally see how a misgender can happen with out any malice or intent to defraud.

If a person is out of Aeons ( entirely possible when, as in my case, you have only got four!) They may have no choice but to influence the egg and hatch it for a trade. 

THAT being the case... influences CAN and do sometimes fail ( though it is rare). I have had it happen to me with stuff that I myself influenced.... so it totally could happen without any intent to cheat on the part of the trader. Just saying, so I would hate to see someone get 'reported' for a thing that wasn't there fault.

 

 

My first ever influence fail https://dragcave.net/view/iJbJ2

 

Quote

 

Claiming that a lineaged dragon is CB, that is another matter all together and I DO check for that!

I would add to that EVEN in that case, mistakes can happen.

 

 

I always check - but yes, I have traded with someone who made a mistake - apologised and replaced for me. It behooves us all to remember that we are all human, we all make mistakes and there are a few bad apples among us. But very few.

 

That said - yes, if you lose any privilege here, you should be told why.

[LuckyKitty]

41 minutes ago, Fuzzbucket said:

3 hours ago, Ruby Eyes said:

If you see a link, you will never know what it leads to until you click it. Especially offsite links are potentially dangerous.

 

Yup

 

https://dragcave.net/view/DhIH2

The thing is, I'm pretty sure you can't do that in the cave. If I'm correct, the way you do that is through a hyperlink that you then titled, making it look like a different link, correct? You can't do that in the cave. Whatever is there is the url of whatever site it will take you to. You have to manually copy and paste whatever link is there into your URL bar. So this really only applies to the forum, not the trading hub on the cave. (Yet if I'm correct links are allowed on the forum but not in the cave.) Still, I do see what everybody means now, as I've been told that numerous times in this thread.

Edited August 11, 2018 by epickitty25

[Alrexwolf]

literally all you have to do is hover over a link and look at what the actual url is that it's leading you to.

 

I can tell that fake link #1 leads to help, and fake link #2 leads to the guardian. Without clicking them.

 

if we're expected to look and verify eggs ourselves, even verify things we CANT like gender/precog/etc, why is it different for links? why can't we be expected to look and verify those ourselves? 

 

when is something "take care of yourself," versus "it's against the rules," when literally we can't see what gender an egg will be through a trade, influences fail when traded/precog can fail, whereas with a link you can literally do absolutely nothing, just hover over it, and see where it goes. 

 

also normally fake urls take html / css / bbc code, something that 1. we can't do in-cave anyway and 2. even if we could, 32 characters is not long enough for something like that. The only thing I could see working for fake links is something like tinyurl, but those links could be banned pretty easily/understandably. 

[LuckyKitty]

6 minutes ago, Alrexwolf said:

literally all you have to do is hover over a link and look at what the actual url is that it's leading you to.

 

I can tell that fake link #1 leads to help, and fake link #2 leads to the guardian. Without clicking them.

 

if we're expected to look and verify eggs ourselves, even verify things we CANT like gender/precog/etc, why is it different for links? why can't we be expected to look and verify those ourselves? 

 

when is something "take care of yourself," versus "it's against the rules," when literally we can't see what gender an egg will be through a trade, influences fail when traded/precog can fail, whereas with a link you can literally do absolutely nothing, just hover over it, and see where it goes. 

 

also normally fake urls take html / css / bbc code, something that 1. we can't do in-cave anyway and 2. even if we could, 32 characters is not long enough for something like that. The only thing I could see working for fake links is something like tinyurl, but those links could be banned pretty easily/understandably. 

Well, there's more of a risk with links. the worst that can happen with a "precog"/"influence" is that you don't get what you wanted in some adoptables game while links could be malware.

but about hovering and not even being able to do those kinds of links in the cave in the first place, exactly.

[Fuzzbucket]

I really can't see why links are needed in the hub, though. As you say - we can't see what way an egg has been influenced (even if it does gender as intended, which is not 100%). We can see its lineage, so we can be sure about that. I would like it if we could use our own Aeons on eggs/hatchies in trade that we want to check.

Edited August 11, 2018 by Fuzzbucket

[LuckyKitty]

10 minutes ago, Fuzzbucket said:

I really can't see why links are needed in the hub, though. As you say - we can't see what way an egg has been influenced (even if it does gender as intended, which is not 100%). We can see its lineage, so we can be sure about that. I would like it if we could use our own Aeons on eggs/hatchies in trade that we want to check.

I used it for fitting all of my wants when I couldn't fit them all in the wants box. For example, here's the link that got me trade-banned: https://www.quotev.com/CloversandKittens/journal/5346324/Wish-List

Because of the character limit, I wouldn't have been able to fit all of that without some sort of link. I now recognize it might have been better to put it in a forum post and link that, but that would still be a link.

Edited August 11, 2018 by epickitty25

[Fuzzbucket]

Indeed. And - no links. So....  Simpler wants seem to be the way to go

[Switch]

On 8/10/2018 at 8:25 AM, Alrexwolf said:

I think it's kind of... idk. Terrible? That something like being intentionally misleading (trying to scam people with a different type of egg) isn't bannable, but trying to do what the box says (via group links, etc etc) is...

 

I would have suspected dishonesty to lead to a permaban quicker than a group link. There's no nonmalicious reason behind that - there is for so many other things that are going on and getting people in trouble.

well, i would imagine he'd get in a lot more trouble for incurring the wrath of his employers than he would for treating his largely free to play userbase unfairly, so that's probably why rules enforcing things that could potentially do the former are evidently much harsher judging by how many people have been banned for them.

didn't someone already say this could easily be fixed by literally just adding a line saying don't do x, y, z, etc etc, debate about how good or fair the rules are and debate about the character limit being way too short aside, i was very surprised that the feature is lacking a clear cut list of rules.

Edited August 11, 2018 by Switch

[Starscream]

6 hours ago, epickitty25 said:

Except that is I'm pretty sure fraud is illegal IRL.

Also, your explanation simply puts it on the same levels as links - there are malicious uses and non-malicious uses. Yet one gets you banned and the other doesn't.

Keep in mind this game involves "Stealing eggs"

I am not saying I agree with people posting that saying they have something that isn't what they have.

 

People, used to sniper AP trades before we had AP trading. I know because on a few occasions I had intercepted a trade - I know this because of rude messages I received. Edit: (lets put it this way, I did not return the lost items because of the rude nature of the messages.)

 

You don't post links (I am, personally, not opposed to on site or group links, but Still avoid it please - until a solid answer regarding it is given) But given other links could be malicious - (I have encountered this) off site links are to be considered not safe. There is more risk to a person's actual data, actual computer, and actual identification that can be stolen through the use of a malicious link. I've had virus wipe out my computer, causing me to lose information that was irreplaceable. A person who is saying they have a CB egg, rather than the Bred egg, is going to have a lot less damaging ramifications to a user, than the potential of a bad link. Double check the trade before making an offer. its easier than trying to check a link.

 

As I said before, there is no way, currently, for staff to send a message to a given user on site. I can't give an answer s to how long your ban will be, but I am sure it will be sorted out in due time.
 

 

 

Edited August 11, 2018 by Starscream

[animatedrose]

So...bans are being passed and no explanations are being given? That's...kinda bad design, imo. And assumedly, since it's a permaban, it'll be permanent. At least until TJ changes the rules on that, if he ever does.

 

I think I'll be staying out of the Trading Hub until ALL rules are sorted and ALL things that will get you banned are ironed out. I'm not even taking the risk. It's just not worth it with how iffy the rules seem to be.

[Fuzzbucket]

TJ has posted extensively about all this, and it WAS a link to an external site. And it seems from that thread that there was more involved.

 

On 8/7/2018 at 9:33 AM, TJ09 said:

The linked post that you say is not in the right place directly quotes exactly what's on the site. That is, the rules in that post are already where they should be.

 

The one thing in that post that is not already on the site is "haves," which I specifically called out as "this is an exception being granted until the feature supports it." Which is to say, it's not going to be codified in the rules, it's just going to be properly supported in the feature. A single glance at the trading hub will show you plenty of trades already including haves, so it seems to be pretty obvious to people that it's an okay thing to do.

 

 

To bring up my prompt from the help thread here as well: given the text "help others understand what types of offers you are looking for," can you please explain what how you find it unclear whether "want to accept - you're locked" does/does not "help others understand what types of offers you are looking for." In my interpretation, it does not give me any information about what to offer except maybe "don't offer; I'm going to ignore this trade because it's low signal/irrelevant to almost every single person who uses the trading hub." Similarly, the phrase "PM for wishlist" does not tell me what you're looking for, nor does the text "dragcave.net/group/1338" Those things only have meaning if someone goes and does something else.

 

If the fact that your wants must be standalone is the main thing would help explain that the text "PM for <x>" does not "help others understand what types of offers you are looking for," that's fairly easy to add.

 

I will point out that the only case(s) where someone was banned for links in a description have pretty obvious evidence that the person knew what they were doing e.g. someone tried to submit a full link, saw their message was rejected, then went out of their way to remove the "http" to bypass that and submit a link anyways. And regardless of that, I have yet not banned anyone for linking to on-site groups, though I maintain it is indeed against the rules-as-written (per above).

 

Less than half a percent of people who have used the trading hub have been banned, and those who have were pretty obvious cases (e.g. multiple messages of "LOL" or "this is fun" and the like). There's a lot of "but what if it happens to me?" based on levels of pedantry that simply don't apply to the trading hub—if the rules were really that strict hundreds of people would've been banned by now just for posting "have: X" which is clearly not a "want."

 

It's pretty clear that a lot of the fear could be assuaged by more verbose rules, and they're going to be updated. Finding the right wording requires first understanding what people aren't reading about the current text.

Just saying.

[Herk]

Just a quick 'pretty please' to add to the discussion:

 

If putting

 

'need mate for xxxxx there' and xxxxx being a dragon code

 

than could we please have

 

'need mate for any of 123456' with 123456 being a group number allowed?

 

I mean it IS basically the same thing - a VERY reduced in-site link to SPECIFY our NEEDS.

 

I'm very aware that rules aren't imposed in a fascist way around here and our mods are wonderful people with more common sense than the average person, I'm just pointing a specific thing out that SHOULD allow groups for consistency

[Dekka]

since bbcode / html / css arent implemented in the "want" boxes in cave, what is the trouble with on site links?  it seems pointless to ban for something that is innocent and literally is on this same website -  there's not really a way to give a malicious link, if it leads to here.  making off site links against the rules makes sense, since those could be malicious &/or fake, but linking to a group or a dragon that is ON SITE doesn't seem harmful in the least...

[osmarks]

^

 

@Fuzzbucket You seem to be completely ignoring the fact that the only reason links can be disguised on the forum is that it explicitly supports it.

[Fuzzbucket]

We are not talking about the FORUM, but about the cave. Where links outwith the cave are not - and I think will not be - allowed. And the forum is outwith the cave. Links to the forum are NOT on-site.

 

Herk's solution works; it leads to cave pages. Groups are within the cave/game. I think ANYTHING other than that will not be permitted, as such links lead to pages outside the cave itself.

Edited August 12, 2018 by Fuzzbucket

[TJ09]

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.

[osmarks]

9 minutes ago, Fuzzbucket said:

We are not talking about the FORUM, but about the cave. Where links outwith the cave are not - and I think will not be - allowed. And the forum is outwith the cave. Links to the forum are NOT on-site.

 

Herk's solution works; it leads to cave pages. Groups are within the cave/game. I think ANYTHING other than that will not be permitted, as such links lead to pages outside the cave itself.

I meant that you could only disguise a link's true destination as you did because the forum allows it.

[Fuzzbucket]

18 minutes ago, TJ09 said:

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.

 

Thanks, TJ. Please also clarify about group numbers in the rule ("Want: a mate for dragons in group 26198" kind of thing.)

 

Fair enough osmarks - though I have done it all over the interwebz

[animatedrose]

Thank you for the update, TJ.

[Imzadi]

2 hours ago, TJ09 said:

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.

Hopefully (probably) easily found by forum and non forum people.  I've thought that maybe, when you click the trading link there could be a drop down for rules between "Trading Hub" and "Trading History."  There would be no excuse for not "seeing" it

[animatedrose]

^^^^^

This please!

[Dekka]

so, wait: is it going to be against the rules to direct people to your scroll so they could contact you? for example saying "pm me, check scroll for info" and having them see your highlighted groups?

Edited August 14, 2018 by Dekka

[animatedrose]

@Dekka Not sure about directing to your SCROLL but it definitely seems to be when it involves your FORUM. I wouldn't be surprised if it is against the rules, since it's communication. So unless you're renaming dragons to creation this communication...

[Moonlight_Eevee]

What bothers me is the fact that half the people here want everyone else to use the forums for the more complicated trades. No one should be forced to use the forums like with the IRC and the Discord (even though we're Unofficial) for everyday chatting in real time. You're more than welcome to use either or, but no one should be forced to use them and like wise, be driven into the forums for the more complicated trades and with the amount of rules only found on the forums for the trading hub is a letdown in itself and the rules are so restrictive on what you can put that non Forum members aren't going to know about

[Fuzzbucket]

Then you need to find a SHORT way to ask for really complicated stuff. One which doesn't mean others have to trawl your groups.

 

"Mate for *code*" - and YOU get to check if it's related to one you have - and reject any trade offer with a related one (FAR easier for you to do than for another player) works. There's no need to post a trade asking for - pretty much any one of 100 possibilities. Not on the forum either.