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.

Here is a simple way i look at this swap shop rules , its just my opinion so , not that it matters anyways.

1) If the original title is useful in its description , more useful than the [H] Unknown [W] Unknown , keep it.
Since you are going to post a reply in it of linking the posting rules , just do that and leave the title alone.
If the user feels like complying , yay, if not? no matter .

2) "It is really the only area monitored so tightly and consistantly within the Swap Shop. " Why? do people see convenience in seeing this enforced so tightly?
I think making editing ebay seller into their titles + taking care of scammers are a more important priority.

toon, in general i think dakka is a lot more friendly than warseer. on warseer, the modding in general is a heck of alot stricter and threads gets closed down not necessarily because they're breaking the rules but because they're annoying the mods. i don't necessarily mind that because those same threads tend to annoy me as well but its certainly not a more lax environment. outside of the swap forum which needs it (and to a lesser extent news/rumors), the modding is a lot more lax.

back to dakka, i prefer the unknown unknown titles in the swap shop. i check there daily and the old "i'll post a subject with no actual details so people will check it out anyways just to see what's there" thread titles were quite annoying so i welcome the change. the unknown/unknown format forces them to change it rather than forcing the mods to do the work of people that don't read the stickies. frankly, i came here to post that i think dakka should make some official rules or at least guideline regarding WHEN to post trade transaction reports. with the increased number of bad trader reports, people have started posting them WAY too early. someone posted one last week when they didn't hear back from someone after 4 days accusing them of scamming and threatening to call the police. today we have someone expecting to recieve minis 10 days after sending his part of a trans-pacific trade.

warboss wrote:frankly, i came here to post that i think dakka should make some official rules or at least guideline regarding WHEN to post trade transaction reports. with the increased number of bad trader reports, people have started posting them WAY too early. someone posted one last week when they didn't hear back from someone after 4 days accusing them of scamming and threatening to call the police. today we have someone expecting to recieve minis 10 days after sending his part of a trans-pacific trade.

Well, we do recommend having some patience with regard to transactions to reasonable extent. If someone's genuinely concerned that a drop in contact could be fishy, I don't think we should necessarily prohibit a TR.

One aspect that I like about the TR's is that it can be a reflection of both the person who the TR was raised about, and the person who raised the TR. Remember - your behavior in calling out a trader demonstrates to others what kind of a trader you are yourself. So if you are a bit quick to shoot off a TR, it exhibits a tendency toward impatience. That being said, I understand why people would feel nervous about losing contact during a trade, especially when dealing with larger trades and why they may feel easily inclined to post a TR. For that reason, I wouldn't personally ever delete a TR unless I thought it was _completely_ unreasonable (ie, "I sent you this two days ago, where's my stuff?!??") though I will actively moderate the thread and PM individuals to mitigate things.

Tooooon wrote:I simply posted on the title what I put on warseer which was: "W: LOTR Stuff, H: Money and a few bits [UK]". I then get it changed to "H: Unknown, W: Unknown"

GoFenris wrote:Your post within here (Nuts & Bolts) is causing me to re-evaluate my little program and make improvements.

I'm glad that the feedback from Tooooon is helping iron out the process. I'd like to make a suggestion about the process, too. If it's one of the user's first attempts (you mentioned three strikes) and they put details in the title such as Tooooon did, simply rearrange the title. For example, if I'm a new user and I post:
"W: fantasy chaos bits H: paypal"

You could change it to:
"[H] paypal [W] fantasy chaos bits"

This wouldn't involve much extra labor, just rearranging the existing title, instead of the Unknown-unknown title. I also saw a lot of complaints about these titles, and I didn't realize that it was due to an editing. I think keeping existing details (if it was within the first 3 strikes, or whatever system you are using) would be a lot more helpful overall.

Also... thanks for the hard work, swapmods


--------------------------------------------------------------------


Unrelated to the above

Here's an idea: What about a separate area for transaction reports? I know that would be a legoburner question, and it's probably too much work to implement. But gosh if there aren't a lot of those things floating about, now!

RiTides wrote:

Tooooon wrote:I simply posted on the title what I put on warseer which was: "W: LOTR Stuff, H: Money and a few bits [UK]". I then get it changed to "H: Unknown, W: Unknown"

GoFenris wrote:Your post within here (Nuts & Bolts) is causing me to re-evaluate my little program and make improvements.

I'm glad that the feedback from Tooooon is helping iron out the process. I'd like to make a suggestion about the process, too. If it's one of the user's first attempts (you mentioned three strikes) and they put details in the title such as Tooooon did, simply rearrange the title. For example, if I'm a new user and I post:
"W: fantasy chaos bits H: paypal"

You could change it to:
"[H] paypal [W] fantasy chaos bits"

This wouldn't involve much extra labor, just rearranging the existing title, instead of the Unknown-unknown title. I also saw a lot of complaints about these titles, and I didn't realize that it was due to an editing. I think keeping existing details (if it was within the first 3 strikes, or whatever system you are using) would be a lot more helpful overall.

Also... thanks for the hard work, swapmods

Thanks. I usually do just fix them when it is the first time or almost there. I must have been testy that day. Not an excuse, however, which is why I am trying to write something up for myself so that I can always be impartial regarding this stuff.

Suggestion... in the Reputable Trader thread, in addition to having a list of those who say the other trader is ace.. why not also stick a note in there in red (or other visible color) when someone has a transaction report opened against them..

that way there is both positive and negative notations when you look up a potential trader. (and yes, I know this has a potential for more work for the SwapMods)

porkuslime wrote:Suggestion... in the Reputable Trader thread, in addition to having a list of those who say the other trader is ace.. why not also stick a note in there in red (or other visible color) when someone has a transaction report opened against them..

that way there is both positive and negative notations when you look up a potential trader. (and yes, I know this has a potential for more work for the SwapMods)

Noted

This could also be implemented only if the transaction report is "unresolved"... i.e., while it's unresolved, the note is there, which motivates people to work to fix things quickly and have it removed.

This is currently undergoing discussion in the mod forum, and a version may very well be implemented.

i've noticed from the closed thread posts by mods that the policy on how many threads a user is allowed in the swap shop seems to have stealth changed. i didn't see an official policy listed in the sticky on this matter. in the past, it seemed like our valiant mods would close people's additional threads after two were started (later with a cavaet that two were allowed IF completely different types of things... i.e. one for 40k, one for fantasy); i noticed today a closure with a message about having only a single active post and not starting *any* new threads in the 4 day bump moratorium. can you guys add that maybe as a new post in the swap shop guidelines away from the walls of text in other posts?

warboss wrote: mods would close people's additional threads after two were started (later with a cavaet that two were allowed IF completely different types of things... i.e. one for 40k, one for fantasy)

We have been allowing posters who regularly update their threads to have two for vastly different offerings that they have a Lot of. One for 40k and one for fantasy is not needed unless that post really has SO much to offer that it justifies two threads.

warboss wrote:i noticed today a closure with a message about having only a single active post and not starting *any* new threads in the 4 day bump moratorium.

This has been in response to ebay sellers posting a LOT of new threads in the subforum. I.e., they post a thread linking to a single auction one day, and then a new thread linking to another a day or two after.

This certainly does not fall within the above guidelines (which you laid out and is approximately what we're going by atm) about having two threads. So can you explain what the problem is?

I would have thought cracking down on multiple new threads started for single ebay items and the like would be welcome by regular swap shop posters. At least one person who has been doing this recently agreed to start compiling their offerings into a single thread and simply updating it. Imho, it makes things much cleaner and easier to keep track of.

Grey areas like this are only fleshed out as we go- if you have suggestions, I would love to hear them. But people posting up new threads for single items a few days after another seems to have become the "new bump" so to speak, and that is why we've been cracking down on it.

i think you've got it wrong... i actually *like* the change to restrict people to one active thread and frequently report posts/threads that bump my poor trade thread down the list illegally. i just think it'd be a good idea to codify the policy in the swap shop guidelines threads (i didn't see anything there about it when i looked). there is no *problem* to speak off.

Ah, that's what I would have thought! I have been meaning to go over the rules and see if the language in the bumping section isn't explicit enough to cover this... so that will happen very soon.

Would mandating a minimum number of posts required before being able to post in the Swap Shop Forum be beneficial? I was a member of a paintball forum years ago which had some issues with "trolls" and "scammers" to which requiring a minimum post count in order to make a B/S/T thread turned out very beneficial. I believe the amount of monthly "offenses" was cut in half.

Essentially, new users that didn't have the minimum post count were still allowed to browse said forums, just unable to start a new thread if they did not meet the minimum post requirement.

I understand DakkaDakka is a "use at your own risk" site, but it seems that due to the amount of Transaction Reports (Albeit not high), is slowly devolving the Swap Shop into a bit of a game of paranoia. When I say paranoia in the sense that even if a buyer/seller doesn't respond in a few hours people assume the worse.

Anyway, sorry for the text wall, just an idea.

Good idea MM, I know it has been considered before as well. I'll see if I can't find the discussion we had on it and see what the arguments were; I believe the reason it wasn't implemented was due to it being restrictive to new members (obviously). People certainly are more trustworthy who are invested in the community, which a higher post count (or even better, prior reputable trades) definitely point to.

The main precaution people should be taking, especially when dealing with new users, is to use Paypal. It gets a lot stickier if it's a two-way trade, rather than a purchase... which some of the recent TRs seemed to be.

RiTides wrote:Good idea MM, I know it has been considered before as well. I'll see if I can't find the discussion we had on it and see what the arguments were; I believe the reason it wasn't implemented was due to it being restrictive to new members (obviously). People certainly are more trustworthy who are invested in the community, which a higher post count (or even better, prior reputable trades) definitely point to.

The main precaution people should be taking, especially when dealing with new users, is to use Paypal. It gets a lot stickier if it's a two-way trade, rather than a purchase... which some of the recent TRs seemed to be.

Sounds good sir. I tried taking a look for a discussion because I am sure it has been discussed before. I figured that even with a lower minimum count (possibly 50?) that even a new member would hit that mark on an average within 10 days or so. I also have seen it prevent "one-time" users from just signing up to sell things, generally with no prior reputation. If it is something that makes more work for you and the other mods, then definitely just disregard it. You guys do a great job as it is.

Hey, I'm pretty sure it's been answered, as it must be a common question, but can I post up items that are not Gaming related, but wanting Gaming items in trade for it?

A little consistency in moderating the swap shop should be implemented. As it stands certain posts are locked for having more than one trade thread or bumping within the 4 day limit whereas others are not. For a latter example take the following two cases. Here a thread has been bumped violating the 4 day bump rule. Note that it was first bumped on October 3 and again on October 6. Also note, however, that it remains unlocked. Similarly, here a thread has been bumped violating the 4 day bump rule. It was started on September 27 and bumped on September 30. In contrast to the previous example, however, it was locked. The swap shop rules are consistent with the latter example, see here. Is there something I am missing or are certain users posts able to slip through the cracks so to speak?

The answer: SwapShop moderators are human. We try to catch what we can, but are dependent on time zones and personal time to spare, alas. If you see anyone breaking the 4 day bump rule however, feel free to hit the mod alert button, and then we can see and deal with ASAP.

Sekai wrote:Hey, I'm pretty sure it's been answered, as it must be a common question, but can I post up items that are not Gaming related, but wanting Gaming items in trade for it?

For the most part, yes. Some things (namely, high-end electronics) we generally discourage as this is really not an appropriate venue for those kinds of items (even if you are attempting to trade for gaming items).

Barksdale wrote: Is there something I am missing or are certain users posts able to slip through the cracks so to speak?

As Ketara mentioned: we're human. Most times it's just as simple as bad mental arithmetic on our parts or us overlooking something by accident. We tend to get most infractions of the rule, but some slip by. As Ketara said, though, a quick Mod Alert on the offending post and one of us (probably filbert, since he's a ninja like that) will likely be on top of it.

Thanks for the responses guys! I was unsure whether the moderators had something special to indicate infractions. I'll try to help out and hit the alert whenever I browse the swap shop and see a violation.

Ketara wrote:The answer: SwapShop moderators are human. We try to catch what we can, but are dependent on time zones and personal time to spare, alas. If you see anyone breaking the 4 day bump rule however, feel free to hit the mod alert button, and then we can see and deal with ASAP.

Keep on mind too that a non-Swap Shop mod can intervene as well. Not often, but it is possible for another mod to step in too, especially if it is pointed out that a Swap Shop moderator is not operating at that time.

Here is the latest example from yesterday from Commisar Wolfie. First bumped on October 8. Second bump on October 11. I am trying to help out. Still, I am noticing many times my alerts are either not going through or are being ignored. There are other examples over the past few days. Or am I wrong that this user is in violation of the swap shop posting rules?

Barksdale wrote:Here is the latest example from yesterday from Commisar Wolfie. First bumped on October 8. Second bump on October 11. I am trying to help out. Still, I am noticing many times my alerts are either not going through or are being ignored. There are other examples over the past few days. Or am I wrong that this user is in violation of the swap shop posting rules?

Part of the problem could be different timezones. On my screen, he's listed as 10/7 and 10/11 (but he bumped it 12 hours earlier than the true 4 day limit). If a mod just took a quick look at the dates, they may not catch the time discrepancy.

Its quite tricky with some of the them. I am extra careful with Stateside posters because quite often they will show up on my screen as being 3 days but because of timezone vagaries, actually be 4 days. All I can say is, if you report them, they do get looked at and they do get actioned.

Unfortunately, there aren't any 'automated' Swap mod tools (for want of a better word) that flag up when someone has broken the rules - it's all done by eye and vigilance. I'm afraid we don't often have the time to sit down with a calculator and work out to the minute whether someone is early or not. I can't speak for the others but most of my modding is done in bursts of 5 or 10 mins here and there when I have time.

In reference to the example linked above, it may well be that he is technically a few hours early (I haven't taken the time to work it out - just judging on the dates) but I don't necessarily see too much of an issue. It's when people abuse that system and take advantage of good nature that it becomes and issue.

As filbert points out, if someone puts up a post Monday, and puts in a reply to it on Friday, with a few hours discrepancy... that might be let slide. It's the razor edge of the rule, though, so it's a risk to do it! But we'd rather err on the side of not locking if the user, looking at the date of their post, thought they were in the clear to post, even though it hasn't technically been four full 24 hours days.

Mod alerts on bumps is helpful- however, berating us about a few hours slack given to someone may not be so much . I'm not sure why it'd be important to anyone to have another person's post locked because of a few hours mistake!

(Final disclaimer, your post CAN be locked if it's 3.5 days... so it's a good idea if you're aware of it to wait the full 4. But, it may not be... and I don't think there needs to be any change to that, as we're already quite strict about this)

I don't care about anyone's thread being locked or not. I am, however, attempting to improve the Swap Shop experience. There is a popup that states if the post is within the 4 day limit. Thus, there is no reason to deem this a mistake of a few hours. Having said that, however, I have noticed that this does not work properly if you edit the original post prior to bumping the thread. Perhaps this is something that may be addressed at some point in the future. Or not.

My most immediate concern as a couple of incident have shown, is bad traders do multiple bad trades simultaneously.

There should be a plan to deal with that.

Barksdale wrote:I have noticed that this does not work properly if you edit the original post prior to bumping the thread. Perhaps this is something that may be addressed at some point in the future.

Yes, editing fools the pop-up into thinking you've already replied to the thread. We've let lego know about it and it's in his queue to fix, but low priority as it's apparently pretty difficult to do... and users who are savvy enough to edit their posts (not everyone knows how!) are usually able to figure out that it's in error. I've had a number of PMs about it over time, though, so hopefully it does get fixed eventually.

LunaHound wrote:My most immediate concern as a couple of incident have shown, is bad traders do multiple bad trades simultaneously.

There should be a plan to deal with that.

This is a problem inherent with people who do underhanded business anywhere on the net... it just makes too much sense to hit more than one person at once.

I'm not sure what we can do about this one, though, other than remind people to stick to the precautions listed. If you're paying someone by Paypal, you'll have a full 45 days to realize something's up and file a claim. If they're brand new or you have reason to doubt (but for whatever reason still want to trade) you can ask them to ship their half of the trade first.

The most dangerous situation is the most common- a simultaneous trade. I'll do these for low dollar amounts, but for a higher value trade I usually stick to using Paypal, or check out the other trader as thoroughly as I can first and, if they don't have many posts/reputable trades or have an unresolved transaction report, I'll ask them to ship their half first.

Doing that should help people avoid Most unscrupulous persons... but there's not one catch-all for every situation- even using Paypal the other person can try to commit fraud by sending the wrong item or the like, and hope Paypal takes their side in the claim.

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.