Make trades time-limited (optionally)

[Shadowdrake]

2 hours ago, missy_ said:

what is the benefit to a trader, under this suggestion for a specially timed 24-hour trade, unless the offerer agrees to the same terms as the trader?

The appeal of a guaranteed result, of course. It would function basically the same as "I use decline" or "will be back in 8 hours"; that is, an impatient offerer knows they're not going to be left hanging, and are more willing to offer on these specific trades.

 

 

2 hours ago, missy_ said:

she specifies in her idea that the trader must, emphasize must, choose a number of hours their trade will remain up.

By the time you posted, the OP had already long changed their idea to make it a purely optional addition. Even the title calls it optional. Arguing against the idea of all trades needing a time limit is arguing with no one, at this point.

 

 

Also, 1 hour is far too short for being the only time limit. Having a dropdown with 1-24 hours or more is reasonable and flexible, since it lets traders give more info without wasting text and gives offerers an estimated timespan.

Edited July 14, 2021 by Shadowdrake

[missy_]

1 minute ago, Shadowdrake said:

The appeal of a guaranteed result, of course. It would function basically the same as "I use decline" or "will be back in 8 hours"; that is, an impatient offerer knows they're not going to be left hanging, and are more willing to offer on these specific trades.

But there is no guaranteed result. The trader is not guaranteed to accept one of the offers. What if they don’t like any of the offers? Then they don’t have to choose one. 

[Paradisiske]

I see no point in this. Seems like an extra hassle in coding imo. I wouldnt use this if it became a thing due to having an 11 hour work day Monday - Friday and no I cannot check on the game while I am at work basically. So these kinds of trades would lock me out of trading. And I would worry about these kinds of trades becoming the norm and thus the non timed trades being ignored. 

 

 

If you dont want to keep waiting for your offer to be accepted or declined then just walk away from the trade. 

[Shadowdrake]

1 minute ago, missy_ said:

But there is no guaranteed result. The trader is not guaranteed to accept one of the offers. What if they don’t like any of the offers? Then they don’t have to choose one. 

Then it's the guaranteed result of an automatic decline, and the offerer is free to go on their way. Any result is better than being left hanging.

[missy_]

9 minutes ago, Shadowdrake said:

 

By the time you posted, the OP had already long changed their idea to make it a purely optional addition. Even the title calls it optional. 

I know that. It is in her first post at the bottom, but that was not the part I was emphasizing:

On 7/12/2021 at 11:35 AM, Elizabeth Moonstone said:

Idea: when creating a public trade, a user must* choose the number of hours the trade will be up (between 1h and 24h). A timer is then displayed on the Trading page (x hours remaining for this trade). If the user has not accepted an offer by then, the trade is automatically cancelled.

 

Why? It helps people that offer on trade to have an idea when they will get an answer for their offer. 

 

Potential caveats: If a user hasn’t got any good offers in 24h, they will have to repost their trade. It could be a bit aggravating but I would argue that after 24h and no good offers, it might be better to repost the trade anyway to give it more visibility and maybe edit the requirements as well.

 

*Edit: after feedback, I realise that making trades time-limited should be optional. So we could have two public trading options: regular trade (as it is now) and time-limited “lightning” trades.

 

 

11 minutes ago, Shadowdrake said:

Arguing against the idea of all trades needing a time limit is arguing with no one, at this point.

I don’t know what you meant there.  “Arguing against the idea of all trades...” ==>> “Arguing for no trades...” (??) = (??) “Arguing for no trades needing a time limit is arguing with no one” (??) ... what? Sorry, I don’t get it.  It doesn’t matter, I have no response to that. 

In general, I don’t think we need timed trades unless it’s a really quick trade.  Otherwise I see no point to them.  I can see where a super short trade of an hour could be sort of like an Amazon “lightning deal“ where it happens really fast and then it’s over.

[Shadowdrake]

Basically, your argument that an offerer should have to put a time limit on an offer makes no sense, because the OP's idea of a time limit is already optional for a trader. The "must" part you emphasized earlier is clarified in her footnote (*) that she has changed her mind to make it optional. She simply did not remove her original suggestion so there will be context to why people argued against the initial idea. (Also because a time-limited offer makes no sense anyway, and if you wanted to limit offerers there are better ways than inconveniencing both the trader and offerer at the same time. Why would anyone want to time limit offers? Who does that benefit?)

 

We will have to agree to disagree on the idea that a lightning trade must be 1 hour maximum. I see plenty of point to having longer time-limited trades because it's extra information a trader doesn't have to add to their short "wants" field.

Edited July 14, 2021 by Shadowdrake

[Myoukin]

On 7/12/2021 at 12:59 PM, HeatherMarie said:

A better suggestion for helping *offerers* would be something like a push-notice, like if your offer hasn't been rejected/cancelled within 24 hours you could click a button that would act like a re-offer (as in, the person would get a new notification reminding them of the offer).

I like this suggestion provided it would have a timer/cooldown mechanic attached to it similar to what you mentioned (maybe 12 hours since 24's usually my threshold to move on). I already have someone who occasionally spams me with the same offer mere seconds after declining said offer over and over, and my only methods to combat it are to either ignore the notification until they take the hint that they won't bully me into accepting their offer (while hoping they don't spam cancel/re-offer) or remove the trade from the hub completely. 

 

Giving someone like that the ability to spam my notifications faster without some kind of cooldown sounds like a nightmare 😨

[missy_]

1 hour ago, Shadowdrake said:

Basically, your argument that an offerer should have to put a time limit on an offer makes no sense, because the OP's idea of a time limit is already optional for a trader. The "must" part you emphasized earlier is clarified in her footnote (*) that she has changed her mind to make it optional. She simply did not remove her original suggestion so there will be context to why people argued against the initial idea.

 

Forget about "regular trades." We aren't talking about regular trades here. You aren't, I am not, and the OP was not.  She made her idea (timed trades) optional, so that regular trades would remain, and timed trades are her idea. So there is no point in continuing to rehash this.  Her idea is about timed trades and it does not affect regular trades. 

 

1 hour ago, Shadowdrake said:

Basically, your argument that an offerer should have to put a time limit on an offer makes no sense, <snip> Why would anyone want to time limit offers? Who does that benefit?)

 

Actually, it makes a lot of sense, since we are referring to timed trades. 

 

The discussion below refers to the longest option, a 24-hour timed trade.  It could be applied to any length timed trade, one hour to 24 hours.

 

As an aside: This is just a loose idea; in reality, the trader can cancel a trade at any time, and the offerer can cancel an offer at any time.  So even a time commitment by a trader, or an offerer, isn't set in stone. Still, below is the explanation for why it benefits both trader and offerer, thus encouraging the trader to create a timed 24-hour trade (and creating these sorts of trades is of great benefit to the offerer, so the trader needs to see some upside to this arrangement).

 

For the trader, it makes sense because the offerer would, in theory, match the terms of the trader's time-limited trade.  The benefit to the trader is that by having a relatively long trade of 24 hours, the offers will still be there.  With a normal trade, the offerer could leave, and the trader could return to no offers.   While technically the offerer could still leave, given their commitment not to leave, there is a greater chance the trader will return to some offers.

 

For the offerer, the benefits are: 1. a definite answer (even if it is a closed trade, that is still an answer) within 24 hours; 2. committing to the same time limit as the trader encourages the trader to have confidence that the offers won't disappear, thus 3. trader confidence in offers leads to traders taking more advantage of timed trades; increased opportunities for timed trades means more timed trades for offerers to peruse.

 

Example of a 24-hour timed trade in which both trader and offerer commit to the same time limit: The trader creates a 24-hour timed trade. The offerer makes an offer, and also commits to the 24-hour time limit for their offer.  The trader benefits from knowing offers will be there. The offerer benefits by knowing they will get a definite answer within the trade's time limit. 

 

1 hour ago, Shadowdrake said:

We will have to agree to disagree on the idea that a lightning trade must be 1 hour maximum. I see plenty of point to having longer time-limited trades because it's extra information a trader doesn't have to add to their short "wants" field.

 

I agree the "wants" field is way too short!  It would be great if we had a field where we could give some indication what our timezone is or when (since people play at different hours, even within the same timezone) we will be back to check on our trades/offers on others' trades.

 

Also for the want box: things like "I use decline" -- I assume everyone does, but I guess not everyone does? I would also like check boxes for: Influenced? yes/no Precogged? yes/no   Anyway, I digress. 

 

Edited July 14, 2021 by missy_

[HeatherMarie]

3 hours ago, Shadowdrake said:

 

Also, 1 hour is far too short for being the only time limit. Having a dropdown with 1-24 hours or more is reasonable and flexible, since it lets traders give more info without wasting text and gives offerers an estimated timespan.

 

Very much agree here. A 'lightening trade' feature that *only* has an option of 1 hour would be rather useless in most cases, honestly. Unless you have a CB Gold or 2g Prize or something, the chance of getting *any* offers before a 1-hour trade is automatically cancelled is pretty slim (and forget getting an actual *good* offer in that time limit....) There would need to be multiple options, sure 1 hour could be an option if people would actually use it but there also needs to be longer amounts of time. I don't care if it's a dropdown with every hour from 1 to 24, or if it's spaced out like 1 hour/5hour/10hour whatever, but *just* 1 hour would be way too restricting to even be worth implementing.

[Shadowdrake]

I don't think they'd be too useless. 1-hour trades would be the perfect excuse to spam-bump the hub :p

[Elizabeth Moonstone]

 

 I love the idea of the little lightning bolt next to quick trades.

Edited July 14, 2021 by Elizabeth Moonstone

[Nalyua]

The problem is still time zones.

 

Again please keep in mind that there are players all over the world.

 

So especially those "Quick Trades" are a big NoNo to me because I would be supremely annoyed if I repeatedly miss stuff like that from say Amercians just because I live in Europe.

 

I agree that it is annoying that trading goods are blocked while offered in a trade. But I would suggest the option to be able to offer an egg to more than one trade. If one offer is accepted then the others are automatically cancelled as the egg is no longer available. That way my dragon is not blocked in a trade, especially if some trader might not use the decline option.

[HeatherMarie]

I'm not sure why a 'lightening trade' option would be any different than what we have now in terms of time zones. Missing out on trades because of time differences already happens plenty. Missing out on trades because you are sleeping when other people are playing, or because you are at work, or because you can't be online at certain times... That already happens. I know from experience that *plenty* of trades are posted and completed during the times I'm usually asleep (I know this because of those not-rare-enough nights when I can't sleep and take a peek online at 2-3am my-time). Not having a 'quick trade' feature doesn't mean people aren't currently *doing* quick trades while you are away. Is it possible that trades that may have stuck around longer would move faster with a 'quick trade' feature and thus you wouldn't see them, of course, but I don't think it would be a huge difference from what already happens now. 

[Nalyua]

But if it's not any different then why not simply cancel the trades if it takes too long?

 

Again, I understand that it is annoying if stuff ist blocked in trades for long, but I think a big red clock next to the trade is really not the way to go about this. 🤷‍♀️

 

I don't see any benefit from it.

[schmupti]

17 minutes ago, Nalyua said:

But if it's not any different then why not simply cancel the trades if it takes too long?

 

Again, I understand that it is annoying if stuff ist blocked in trades for long, but I think a big red clock next to the trade is really not the way to go about this. 🤷‍♀️

 

I don't see any benefit from it.

 

I've accidentally left people hanging when my schedule went weird. A lightning trade option would have freed them up to make offers elsewhere, and helped my conscience. I've also avoided making trades when I didn't want to risk having a valuable egg hung up indefinitely on someone else's timetable.

 

A lighting trade says the trader is motivated - they want this thing off their scroll ASAP. That might mean more offers, since there's a built-in guarantee for other users that they're not going to be waiting indefinitely for an answer.

 

Of course, I'd also love the option to offer things on more than one trade, to go to whichever accepts first.

[Fuzzbucket]

2 hours ago, Nalyua said:

The problem is still time zones.

 

Again please keep in mind that there are players all over the world.

 

So especially those "Quick Trades" are a big NoNo to me because I would be supremely annoyed if I repeatedly miss stuff like that from say Amercians just because I live in Europe.

 

I agree that it is annoying that trading goods are blocked while offered in a trade. But I would suggest the option to be able to offer an egg to more than one trade. If one offer is accepted then the others are automatically cancelled as the egg is no longer available. That way my dragon is not blocked in a trade, especially if some trader might not use the decline option.

 

I agree with this - not that I support the idea anyway.

 

1 hour ago, HeatherMarie said:

I'm not sure why a 'lightening trade' option would be any different than what we have now in terms of time zones. Missing out on trades because of time differences already happens plenty. Missing out on trades because you are sleeping when other people are playing, or because you are at work, or because you can't be online at certain times... That already happens. I know from experience that *plenty* of trades are posted and completed during the times I'm usually asleep (I know this because of those not-rare-enough nights when I can't sleep and take a peek online at 2-3am my-time). Not having a 'quick trade' feature doesn't mean people aren't currently *doing* quick trades while you are away. Is it possible that trades that may have stuck around longer would move faster with a 'quick trade' feature and thus you wouldn't see them, of course, but I don't think it would be a huge difference from what already happens now. 

 

Because - a one hour trade rules out pretty much everyone at any distance from your own time zone, basically. Yes we miss out plenty by benign in other time zones - but this would make it way worse; a trader would very likely have to accept a dull offer, when by staying up longer, the trade could attract better possibilities. IN a lightning trade - does the trader HAVE to accept one of the offers ? If not - there is no point at all to this - they just try and get a quick offer and if they don't like it, rinse and repeat.

[KageSora]

I think some folks who are getting up in arms are not paying attention to the "optional" part.  It also seems to me, possibly, some of those distressed by the idea on the basis of "missing out on trades due to time zone" are simply upset because this highlights something they can ignore otherwise:  They're already potentially missing out on countless fantastic trades because of things like time zones.  This just highlights that.

 

All that aside, many of us would continue to use regular trades even with this implemented--a "lightning trade" would simply be an option if we just wanted to try and move something quickly.  If we want to deliberate on offers we'd still be able to use a standard trade.  I, for one, would still primarily trade via regular trades.  The only real use I'd have for a "lightning trade" is for trades I already do quickly.

 

Personally, I don't have a stake either way--I don't think it would necessarily cause a sudden lack of regular trades with decent stuff in them, but I also don't think it would bring about some sort of trading revolution making it a huge boon to the game.  I think it'd just shuffle how things work a bit.

[HeatherMarie]

6 hours ago, KageSora said:

I think some folks who are getting up in arms are not paying attention to the "optional" part.  It also seems to me, possibly, some of those distressed by the idea on the basis of "missing out on trades due to time zone" are simply upset because this highlights something they can ignore otherwise:  They're already potentially missing out on countless fantastic trades because of things like time zones.  This just highlights that.

 

All that aside, many of us would continue to use regular trades even with this implemented--a "lightning trade" would simply be an option if we just wanted to try and move something quickly.  If we want to deliberate on offers we'd still be able to use a standard trade.  I, for one, would still primarily trade via regular trades.  The only real use I'd have for a "lightning trade" is for trades I already do quickly.

 

Personally, I don't have a stake either way--I don't think it would necessarily cause a sudden lack of regular trades with decent stuff in them, but I also don't think it would bring about some sort of trading revolution making it a huge boon to the game.  I think it'd just shuffle how things work a bit.

 

Yes, agreed. This is an *optional* thing, it's not going to change how all trading works, and really it's just a suggestion for a formal infrastructure for what *already* happens in the hub. Also the part I bolded. As I said before, this exact issue is already present in DC, time zones already make people miss out on trades or hunting or the beginning of a new release or whatever. This exact issue is already happening in the hub, there are already 'quick trades' that people miss out on because of time zone issues. This isn't bringing a brand-new function to trades that will freeze out people in other time zones, this is simply making something that *already* happens 'official'. And yeah, I guess I can see why something like this would make the time zone inequalities more obvious, but again those exact issues already happen. 

 

As for optional, and continuing to do regular trades... Yeah. I can't see a 'quick trade' feature significantly reducing normal-trades overall, because *most* trades simply aren't going to move fast to begin with. And *most* people have lots off offline time, school/work/etc, so there will still be plenty of demand for regular trades. As I said above, I see this as more just making something 'official' that already happens now, and the people who don't/can't do quick trades now probably won't use something like this to begin with. I would most likely only use a 'quick trade' sort of thing if it was something I knew would get sick if I left it in a trade for hours. 

 

I'm pretty neutral here, I don't think this is something super-needed but I also don't agree that it's some horrible thing that would create a sudden bias with timezones.

Edited July 14, 2021 by HeatherMarie

[purplehaze]

I honestly don't see this as a game-changer. A lot of trades are already quick. If I get an acceptable offer I almost never wait to see if someone will offer something better. I doubt I would use this, but it could be a nice option for some.

As others have said, it might highlight the time-zone "misses" but it wouldn't likely increase them.

I am neutral for myself, but support it for those who want it.

[Fuzzbucket]

7 hours ago, KageSora said:

I think some folks who are getting up in arms are not paying attention to the "optional" part.  It also seems to me, possibly, some of those distressed by the idea on the basis of "missing out on trades due to time zone" are simply upset because this highlights something they can ignore otherwise:  They're already potentially missing out on countless fantastic trades because of things like time zones.  This just highlights that.

 

All that aside, many of us would continue to use regular trades even with this implemented--a "lightning trade" would simply be an option if we just wanted to try and move something quickly.  If we want to deliberate on offers we'd still be able to use a standard trade.  I, for one, would still primarily trade via regular trades.  The only real use I'd have for a "lightning trade" is for trades I already do quickly.

 

Personally, I don't have a stake either way--I don't think it would necessarily cause a sudden lack of regular trades with decent stuff in them, but I also don't think it would bring about some sort of trading revolution making it a huge boon to the game.  I think it'd just shuffle how things work a bit.

 

I saw the "optional" - just agreeing with those who point out that lightning trades DO rule out people on the other side of the world, even more than regular trades which are snapped up at once do (and that applies every which way, I do realise that !) and also - if the trader has to accept one of the offers, they may get stuck with less than they could have got - and if they don't have to, they will just decline everything and no-one is any further ahead. So I truly don't see the point. I'm not agin it, I just don't see the benefits. Anyone can offer on any trade the second it goes up; why would they do so any faster for a "lightning" one ? You offer when you see something you want.

Edited July 14, 2021 by Fuzzbucket

[HeatherMarie]

1 hour ago, Fuzzbucket said:

 

I saw the "optional" - just agreeing with those who point out that lightning trades DO rule out people on the other side of the world, even more than regular trades which are snapped up at once do (and that applies every which way, I do realise that !) and also - if the trader has to accept one of the offers, they may get stuck with less than they could have got - and if they don't have to, they will just decline everything and no-one is any further ahead. So I truly don't see the point. I'm not agin it, I just don't see the benefits. Anyone can offer on any trade the second it goes up; why would they do so any faster for a "lightning" one ? You offer when you see something you want.

 

Okay, I admit I have a horrible memory but has anyone in this thread actually suggested the trader would *have* to accept an offer in a lightening-trade? I very much agree that wouldn't be good and shouldn't be a requirement, but I haven't actually seen that mentioned unless my mind is just totally blanking. I also see no reason to assume that a trader would 'just decline everything' if they aren't being forced to accept an offer any more than assuming a trader would just decline everything as it stands now. The trader doesn't benefit from deliberately declining everything, they waste their own time (and a Magi cooldown...). Traders need to be *able* to decline offers, and not be forced to accept a totally crap offer, but I don't understand why this suggestion would make it more likely for a trader to 'decline everything'. (And again, that already happens... There are people who post a trade in the hub and decline everything with no intention of actually trading it, that's happened multiple times..)

 

1 hour ago, Fuzzbucket said:

Anyone can offer on any trade the second it goes up; why would they do so any faster for a "lightning" one ? You offer when you see something you want.

 

As for this specifically, I think the main appeal of a suggestion like this is the certainty aspect on the offerer's side. Yes, anyone can offer on a trade the second it goes up, but then that offerer is left hanging for however long it takes for the trader to respond (which could be days, even if the trade was *just* posted). The act of offering isn't what's being focused on here, it's the knowledge of how the trade is going to progress. A 'lightening' trade would guarantee that if you offer on it, you'll get a response in a specific amount of time, whether it's accept or decline or trade cancelling. You won't be left hanging indefinitely. I think that's the main benefit here, it's less about offering/posting/trading and more simply the peace of mind of knowing what to expect. 

[Fuzzbucket]

2 hours ago, HeatherMarie said:

Okay, I admit I have a horrible memory but has anyone in this thread actually suggested the trader would *have* to accept an offer in a lightening-trade?

No - but if they don't - my point was - what's the point of a lightning trade, then - you post it, don't like the offers and pull it. How does that help anyone.

 

2 hours ago, HeatherMarie said:

I very much agree that wouldn't be good and shouldn't be a requirement, but I haven't actually seen that mentioned unless my mind is just totally blanking. I also see no reason to assume that a trader would 'just decline everything' if they aren't being forced to accept an offer any more than assuming a trader would just decline everything as it stands now.

 

The trader doesn't benefit from deliberately declining everything, they waste their own time (and a Magi cooldown...). Traders need to be *able* to decline offers, and not be forced to accept a totally crap offer, but I don't understand why this suggestion would make it more likely for a trader to 'decline everything'. (And again, that already happens... There are people who post a trade in the hub and decline everything with no intention of actually trading it, that's happened multiple times..)

Sure it does - and some traders who indeed to trade forget about it and don't accept anything and all sorts. I don't really see how having timed trades would make any difference to that.

 

2 hours ago, HeatherMarie said:

As for this specifically, I think the main appeal of a suggestion like this is the certainty aspect on the offerer's side. Yes, anyone can offer on a trade the second it goes up, but then that offerer is left hanging for however long it takes for the trader to respond (which could be days, even if the trade was *just* posted). The act of offering isn't what's being focused on here, it's the knowledge of how the trade is going to progress. A 'lightning' trade would guarantee that if you offer on it, you'll get a response in a specific amount of time, whether it's accept or decline or trade cancelling. You won't be left hanging indefinitely. I think that's the main benefit here, it's less about offering/posting/trading and more simply the peace of mind of knowing what to expect. 

 

The way I run with that is I make an offer - and if I don't get a response in a reasonable (to me) time, I cancel the offer. (I also have a list of the people who kept me waiting for ages, and don't offer on their stuff any more !) What I think would help more than anything more than this, even - would be being able to offer the same thing on more than one trade.

[UnicornMaiden]

If this were implemented I wouldn't use it. I find it annoying that a trade auto-cancels if the egg hatches. I don't want more things that would make me have to repost it.

 

On a side note, I rarely get left hanging when I make offers. It happens occasionally, but most of the time people either accept or decline my offers within a day. What I have a much bigger problem with is how many people cancel their offers before I even get a chance to look at them. I can't count how many times I've gotten a notification that someone made an offer on my trade and it's already gone when I click on the bell. When I have a trade up I usually check on it a few times a day, and it seems that a lot of people won't wait even a few hours before cancelling their offers.

[Astreya]

3 minutes ago, UnicornMaiden said:

What I have a much bigger problem with is how many people cancel their offers before I even get a chance to look at them. I can't count how many times I've gotten a notification that someone made an offer on my trade and it's already gone when I click on the bell. When I have a trade up I usually check on it a few times a day, and it seems that a lot of people won't wait even a few hours before cancelling their offers.

I guess I'm often guilty of that as I offer something and then find a trade that fits my needs even better where I then want to offer the egg I used before. That's why I really would like to be able to offer the same egg to, say, three trades or so.

This would also be an incentive for someone who offers a trade to react a bit faster, which IMO would solve some of the waiting problems.

[HeatherMarie]

1 hour ago, UnicornMaiden said:

If this were implemented I wouldn't use it. I find it annoying that a trade auto-cancels if the egg hatches. I don't want more things that would make me have to repost it.

 

On a side note, I rarely get left hanging when I make offers. It happens occasionally, but most of the time people either accept or decline my offers within a day. What I have a much bigger problem with is how many people cancel their offers before I even get a chance to look at them. I can't count how many times I've gotten a notification that someone made an offer on my trade and it's already gone when I click on the bell. When I have a trade up I usually check on it a few times a day, and it seems that a lot of people won't wait even a few hours before cancelling their offers.

 

This is pretty much exactly why I won't even put up a trade unless I know I'll be around for awhile, because it *sucks* when an offerer cancels the offer before you can even see it but it also sucks to be the offerer waiting around for hours for a response, and I don't want anyone to feel that way about my trades. 

 

1 hour ago, Astreya said:

I guess I'm often guilty of that as I offer something and then find a trade that fits my needs even better where I then want to offer the egg I used before. That's why I really would like to be able to offer the same egg to, say, three trades or so.

This would also be an incentive for someone who offers a trade to react a bit faster, which IMO would solve some of the waiting problems.

 

Same. Especially when it comes to vague trades (like offering on a trade that just says 'offers' or 'something pretty'), I may offer on one but soon after a trade is posted specifically asking for what I have and I'll probably have a better chance offering it there instead. I'd love to be able to offer the same thing on more than one trade, that way you aren't missing out on other trade opportunities while waiting for someone to respond (and at the same time it may be less disappointing if your offer is declined, if you are able to offer on different things at once).