I'm gonna ask this since I kinda feel like it's gonna lead to "cheating the trust system" and that's a bad thing. Also this is such an awesome community so I don't really wanna do that (or get me or someone else in trouble for the matter of fact). So my question is (for example):
-I post an offer that is WTB for an item that costs 1 Ist and I say I offer an Ist for it
-Someone else posts offer that is WTS and offers that same item and LF 1 Ist
We contact each other and complete a deal. Do we just delete one of the offers and exchange trust on whichever is left or do we close both with double trust exchange or do we close both but exchange trust only on one of them, what is the most correct/fair solution here? In case of doing it on only 1 offer, I guess it would be then also the best to "finalize" WTS offer since you can put the actual positive number instead of (in this particular case) -1 Ist for that item?
7
replies
833 views
Description
I'm gonna ask this since I kinda feel like it's gonna lead to "cheating the trust system" and that's a bad thing. Also this is such an awesome community so I don't really wanna do that (or get me or someone else in trouble for the matter of fact). So my question is (for example):
-I post an offer that is WTB for an item that costs 1 Ist and I say I offer an Ist for it
-Someone else posts offer that is WTS and offers that same item and LF 1 Ist
We contact each other and complete a deal. Do we just delete one of the offers and exchange trust on whichever is left or do we close both with double trust exchange or do we close both but exchange trust only on one of them, what is the most correct/fair solution here? In case of doing it on only 1 offer, I guess it would be then also the best to "finalize" WTS offer since you can put the actual positive number instead of (in this particular case) -1 Ist for that item?
-I post an offer that is WTB for an item that costs 1 Ist and I say I offer an Ist for it
-Someone else posts offer that is WTS and offers that same item and LF 1 Ist
We contact each other and complete a deal. Do we just delete one of the offers and exchange trust on whichever is left or do we close both with double trust exchange or do we close both but exchange trust only on one of them, what is the most correct/fair solution here? In case of doing it on only 1 offer, I guess it would be then also the best to "finalize" WTS offer since you can put the actual positive number instead of (in this particular case) -1 Ist for that item?
Can be used to make Runewords:
Answered•Go to post
Very rarely do you get an overlap in comments to the point where both you and the seller have commented in each other's posts. As a result, since only one of them has the comments, only one will allow you to exchange trust. Most commonly, whomever has the other topic that wasn't commented in would still close that one out but since the other side never commented it, trust isn't (can't be) exchanged there.
Theoretically, you could 'game the system' by commenting in that trade post-hoc and effectively doubling trust but since that's intentional post-hoc activity, you could say that's true for any and all trades as you could just create the reverse-topic afterwards and do the same. It shouldn't be something to actively go out of your way to do. And if you keep doing it, us mods will eventually have a word with you.
At the same time, if you actually ended up in that 1 in 5 million (random numbers pulled out my arse) situation where you did both comment in each other's trades before realizing and acting on it..it is 1 trust and very likely the only time you'll find yourself in that situation..and many of us have a "trust reflex" for correctly closed posts..so I don't think anyone would really mind if both are closed out as normal and trusted for.
More realistically, as with anyone here who trades long-term/in higher volume, you'll actually end up hundreds+ of trust short anyways, just from folks who don't use the trust system, persistent trades that aren't closed after each sale and so on. So getting 1 on the positive side doesn't change much all in all.
And as Xigua noted, trust (lovely as it is) isn't a guarantee for anyone or anything. It is merely a rough indicator. E.g. I look at 700 trust differently than I look at 5 trust but I don't see a difference between 60 trust and 70 trust.
This seems about right.Knappogue wrote: 11 months ago This scenario has happened to me only a couple of times. What has ended up happening everytime though is only one of us ends up commenting on one post. Either the WTB, or the WTS. You can only give trust on trades that have comments (offers) made. Then the uncommented-on post just gets deleted.
I have never had a scenario where I commented on one WTB post, and that same person comments on my inverse WTS post.
Very rarely do you get an overlap in comments to the point where both you and the seller have commented in each other's posts. As a result, since only one of them has the comments, only one will allow you to exchange trust. Most commonly, whomever has the other topic that wasn't commented in would still close that one out but since the other side never commented it, trust isn't (can't be) exchanged there.
Theoretically, you could 'game the system' by commenting in that trade post-hoc and effectively doubling trust but since that's intentional post-hoc activity, you could say that's true for any and all trades as you could just create the reverse-topic afterwards and do the same. It shouldn't be something to actively go out of your way to do. And if you keep doing it, us mods will eventually have a word with you.
At the same time, if you actually ended up in that 1 in 5 million (random numbers pulled out my arse) situation where you did both comment in each other's trades before realizing and acting on it..it is 1 trust and very likely the only time you'll find yourself in that situation..and many of us have a "trust reflex" for correctly closed posts..so I don't think anyone would really mind if both are closed out as normal and trusted for.
More realistically, as with anyone here who trades long-term/in higher volume, you'll actually end up hundreds+ of trust short anyways, just from folks who don't use the trust system, persistent trades that aren't closed after each sale and so on. So getting 1 on the positive side doesn't change much all in all.
And as Xigua noted, trust (lovely as it is) isn't a guarantee for anyone or anything. It is merely a rough indicator. E.g. I look at 700 trust differently than I look at 5 trust but I don't see a difference between 60 trust and 70 trust.
Someone much smarter than me already said once: "The real value of something doesn't reflect in a number of how much a seller can ask for it, but on how much a buyer is willing to pay."
I think what you said in your last sentence works best. I'd delete your WTB, and post in his WTS. Just get the trust from that one WTS post.
This scenario has happened to me only a couple of times. What has ended up happening everytime though is only one of us ends up commenting on one post. Either the WTB, or the WTS. You can only give trust on trades that have comments (offers) made. Then the uncommented-on post just gets deleted.
I have never had a scenario where I commented on one WTB post, and that same person comments on my inverse WTS post.
I have never had a scenario where I commented on one WTB post, and that same person comments on my inverse WTS post.
You are overrating the value of the trust system. It gives you a good indication but in the end you trade item for item in-game. No one is dropping anything or prepaying or something.
I'll do just that then guys, thank you!
Someone much smarter than me already said once: "The real value of something doesn't reflect in a number of how much a seller can ask for it, but on how much a buyer is willing to pay."
This seems about right.Knappogue wrote: 11 months ago This scenario has happened to me only a couple of times. What has ended up happening everytime though is only one of us ends up commenting on one post. Either the WTB, or the WTS. You can only give trust on trades that have comments (offers) made. Then the uncommented-on post just gets deleted.
I have never had a scenario where I commented on one WTB post, and that same person comments on my inverse WTS post.
Very rarely do you get an overlap in comments to the point where both you and the seller have commented in each other's posts. As a result, since only one of them has the comments, only one will allow you to exchange trust. Most commonly, whomever has the other topic that wasn't commented in would still close that one out but since the other side never commented it, trust isn't (can't be) exchanged there.
Theoretically, you could 'game the system' by commenting in that trade post-hoc and effectively doubling trust but since that's intentional post-hoc activity, you could say that's true for any and all trades as you could just create the reverse-topic afterwards and do the same. It shouldn't be something to actively go out of your way to do. And if you keep doing it, us mods will eventually have a word with you.
At the same time, if you actually ended up in that 1 in 5 million (random numbers pulled out my arse) situation where you did both comment in each other's trades before realizing and acting on it..it is 1 trust and very likely the only time you'll find yourself in that situation..and many of us have a "trust reflex" for correctly closed posts..so I don't think anyone would really mind if both are closed out as normal and trusted for.
More realistically, as with anyone here who trades long-term/in higher volume, you'll actually end up hundreds+ of trust short anyways, just from folks who don't use the trust system, persistent trades that aren't closed after each sale and so on. So getting 1 on the positive side doesn't change much all in all.
And as Xigua noted, trust (lovely as it is) isn't a guarantee for anyone or anything. It is merely a rough indicator. E.g. I look at 700 trust differently than I look at 5 trust but I don't see a difference between 60 trust and 70 trust.
Thanks Schnorki for clearing everything up!
Someone much smarter than me already said once: "The real value of something doesn't reflect in a number of how much a seller can ask for it, but on how much a buyer is willing to pay."
I always create additional posts to give +trust to the person. I think this is more fair. Especially for new traders on this forum if they do not already have sufficient reputation.Schnorki wrote: 11 months ago More realistically, as with anyone here who trades long-term/in higher volume, you'll actually end up hundreds+ of trust short anyways, just from folks who don't use the trust system, persistent trades that aren't closed after each sale and so on.
Anyway, the trust system is simply auxiliary and does not guarantee anything. Therefore, I recommend that all players, if possible, make a transaction through the trading window. And also remove unfamiliar people from your friendlist after the trade is completed.
Good day to you partner!
I'm Saul Goodman and I can already tell that I'll be your best friend in this forsaken camp.
I'm Saul Goodman and I can already tell that I'll be your best friend in this forsaken camp.
Similar pages
Advertisment
Hide ads
Greetings stranger!
You don't appear to be logged in...
Florian_G
Google Feedfetcher
melty
mhlg
rsinfNo matches
TheDoo
367