blocklist for trade office

[queen-vicious]

I agree with your detailed explanation Larili.
I cant see any real benefit to the OP's suggestion, Just ignore the trades you don't like

[Sharpielein]

Simple solution:
Make "ignore" consistent across the board.
That is, all technical communications either inbound from player B to A or outgoing from A to B are cancelled, so there's pretty much no data transfer with a blocked player.

Not a mail-ignore, chat-ignore, market-ignore.

[Sharpielein]

I agree with your detailed explanation Larili.
I cant see any real benefit to the OP's suggestion, Just ignore the trades you don't like

The problem is that we don't want certain players to buy OUR trades.
For example:

Tim blocked Loot-O-Longwait, because they took 7 hours to complete a lootspot and never responded, then got verbally abusive when asked to refund.
Tim sells another lootspot.
Loot-O-Longwait buys the LS from Tim again.
Tim does NOT want Loot-O-Longwait on a LS.

[queen-vicious]

I know there can be problems with lootspotters, there are hosts and spotters i won't deal with for the same reason but there are very easy ways around it.
For example get your buyers to whisper their interest before you put up your fish.(how it used to be done)
I cant see how anyone buying anything other than a lootspot could cause an issue and as BB doesn't even support LS I can't see trade being changed for them.

Sorry but i think restricting trade is still a -1 idea

[Dorotheus]

Lootspots are just one of the situations. Another one is where you put a trade up and skip a zero or two on the price by mistake but because they have you blocked your unable to contact them to let them know you made a mistake. Or you try and put a trade up for somebody in particular maybe a new player and somebody else buys it, again because they have you blocked your unable to contact them and explain the situation.

[helsinki]

I know there can be problems with lootspotters, there are hosts and spotters i won't deal with for the same reason but there are very easy ways around it.
For example get your buyers to whisper their interest before you put up your fish.(how it used to be done)
I cant see how anyone buying anything other than a lootspot could cause an issue and as BB doesn't even support LS I can't see trade being changed for them.

Sorry but i think restricting trade is still a -1 idea

You still need to make the trade.

And I know that many feel that you can keep the money even if you have advertised the lootspot on trade chat and put an offer in TO if you have the magic word "whisper" when chatting in trade chat because it hasn't been listed under scam or lootspot etiquett as a bad way.

Another way would be to list those 1-500 names in each trade that you are not offering to those persons.

I of course disagree. The suggested way is the easy way, all the other ideas are just things that fill supports email box.

+1

[Ozzymandeus]

I never liked 'fish on TO' for precisely the same reasons as this:

It could be about loot spot trading. If you have sold ls to players who then log off for 1 hour and come back and want money back, because you have finish adventure. I can understand why you want to avoid selling ls to the same player another time.

However, this...

For example get your buyers to whisper their interest before you put up your fish.(how it used to be done)

...doesn't work!

Here's a general scenario that happened to me more times than I can count:

1. I advertise on trade (wts 'adventure' ls rtf 'price' w/m).
2. Interested buyer duly whispers as requested.
3. I put fish trade up on TO for 'price'.
4. Player who hasn't whispered opens TO and buys fish intended for player who whispered.
5. Player who whispered complains they cannot find trade or that it failed.

I then have to explain to player that bought fish that I asked for whisper first and the trade was intended for someone who followed my instructions, arrange a refund, put up second trade for actual buyer and it's just a complete mess because some 'quickfire johnny' just assumes that 'fish on TO' is the only way things are done now.

I could also mention that one time I got a bunch of grief from one player because they couldn't be bothered to whisper first, who wouldn't shut up about it until I pointed out that the effort he had spent whining in the trade tab could have been used to whisper "me please" a dozen times over.... oh... wait.. I just did!

In the end, I just gave up because one lonely fish doesn't stand a chance against a flippin' tidal wave!

[NicciNZ]

Simple solution:
Make "ignore" consistent across the board.
That is, all technical communications either inbound from player B to A or outgoing from A to B are cancelled, so there's pretty much no data transfer with a blocked player.

Not a mail-ignore, chat-ignore, market-ignore.

this is what we need ignore to be ignore total...

[TheVictorious]

-1 for this suggestion,

-1 not fair if you cant see trades to set your own prices

-1 Restricting the free market, slippery slope!!

Whilst the tool itself may be in the control of the individual player, the individual player can be influenced to block others by other players `experiences'. What `control' is in place within this idea, for instance stopping one guild `banning' trade with players from another guild ?
The trade office is for all players to have access to all other players, we already have access to a restricted trade environment through friends list and guild and asking for one fish trades.
I think the balance we currently have is sufficient for a game and community such as this. I control the price of what I sell and can choose to buy from those selling at the price I wish to buy, and from whom I buy from. I'm not one for building walls and burning bridges, so I stand by my -1

+3

[topgearfan]

Another way would be to list those 1-500 names in each trade that you are not offering to those persons.

Falls under name and shame? Official answer please.