Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

FWIW, in my -not small- trading experience I've learned that, if you're going to allow trading, you're eventually going to attract scammers and dishonest traders.

If you have scammers and dishonest traders, and you've decided to KEEP your trading area, you NEED some public way of warning people about them.

Eric

I don't know why they'd have done that. Seems fine to me.
FWIW, your thread title would have been fine over on Bartertown:
http://www.bartertown.com/trading/
Come hang out with us, if you want. : )


Eric

Breotan wrote:I've been thinking that the mandatory thread layout should be modified slightly for eBay auction threads.

Currently using the [H][W] tags for eBay auctions is clumsy and redundant since all auction threads are selling items for money and not conducting trades. Using the [H][W] tags in auction threads also makes it a little more difficult to quickly skim past them if you are just looking for people interested in trading.

I suggest eBay (and only eBay) subject format be changed as follows:

[eBay] Stuff that is being listed on eBay [USA]

This will make it easier to find or ignore these threads depending on what you are looking to do.

Great idea.
I think this is a stellar suggestion.

MODS, make it so!
lol


Eric

Maybe you're being too limiting, if it's such a headache?
For example, why require the brackets? When I'm looking at ads here and BTown, it's not hard to discern H:/W:.

Also, instead of fixing the ads for people, have you thought about just deleting them? Someone spends a half hour putting something together, only to find it's been deleted and they've got a PM telling them why and notifying them that they still have to wait 4 days to repost an ad, and they'll catch on quick enough.
It would be easy to have a separate "hidden" forum for things just like this. Just move the ad there and PM the OP (which could be done via a "form letter" PM).

If you keep fixing them for people, they won't learn.

Eric


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Or, rather than REQUIRING it, then ALLOW [Ebay] as a tag. It will catch on quick if people want to use it.

Just a thought.

Erif

you'd be surprised how vitriolic and abusive some people can be just because I have had the temerity to delete the thread

I think you'd find me QUITE sympathetic. ; )

No harm or criticism was intended in my last post, BTW.

I wasn't referring to the H & W in general. Only to the use of brackets. It's easier to just "H:" a line.
You are, of course, correct about getting people to even use them at all. It's like herding cats. That's why I think it would be easier on you to not require brackets.

Question:
If someone posted an ad and, rather than saying [h] and [w], it said [ebay], would that person have problems with staff or would you overlook it, due to it's more specific nature?

Regardless, in the end, it's your Swap Shop, so you make the rules. I won't criticize the way you do it. That's for sure.

Eric

RiTides wrote:MagickalMemories - The idea of making the optional ebay formatting "optional" would, I think, be the correct way to implement it if we decided to make it an option. However, I'd be concerned that loosening the title rules would open the door to people not using the tags... as the stricter we are with them, the more people seem to use them. The square brackets are likewise- requiring them seems to get people to use more tags in general (in my opinion) whereas allowing any kind of tag formatting seems to result in more tagless threads. However, none of it keeps new users from not reading the rules / looking at the thread titles posted and just making a tagless title, which are the majority of the ones we have to edit (and why we wouldn't delete after the first offense or two, or without PM'ing).

Well, you've definitely got a point there.
That's something that *ahem* I underrstand intimately. lol If you don't put many limitations on titling, you get some real doozies. : )

Like I said, no criticisms here, just spitballing, so-to-speak... The problem that you'll eventually run into with ebay ads - or, more specifically, the problem you're running into with ebay ads- is that a lot of people get ticked at posts (myself included) that [W] PayPal, only to open it and find links to auctions... If I wanted to bid on auctions, I'd go to feebay.
More and more, people are going to get annoyed with it. It's one of those little things that snowballs.

That's why BTown gave them their own forum and polices it with prejudice. We got so many feebay ads slipping in with the trade ads that it was a PITA to find a trade ad at times. lol
Not to say you should be like BTown, mind you. You've got a good thing here. I'm just mentioning it as an example of WHY we did it and not necessarily as an example you should follow.

Eric

the Swap Shop is still a relatively small and minor portion of the site and there are ultimately larger sites dedicated to trading

Definitely. This is also why I agree with your assessment on separating out an auction forum... the size of your trade section just doesn't support it. If you guys were going to expand your trade area, then a separate forum might be worth looking into.
It's the same reason BT has unusual pairings in some forums (like board & video games together). Individually, they're each too small for their own forum, but they do just enough combined to have their own. Same issue with feebay ads here.

Also, regarding the []'s - they're there to provide a visual break for people perusing the forum. It's a lot easier to define where the Haves and Wants are by breaking up the text with the brackets than without.

Damn you and your new fangled "logic!" Why, back in my day, we had to make due with suppositions and outright guesses!
That's a good point. It's a definite visual break.

I'm curious; What would cause a change to current policy? Would it have to be member or staff instigated? I mean, what if you suddenly had 20 members clamoring for some type of feebay segregation, even if only by a different bracketing requirement? Would that make it a higher priority consideration?

No real reason for asking, other than I'm wondering. I'm always looking for ways to do things better, and it helps to pick the brains of those with informed opinions.

Eric

I'd support it.

Eric