Also fixed some CSV import issues now, let me know if you see any other bugs with it, it's a troublesome feature smile

827

(13 replies, posted in Site Discussion)

anselan wrote:

All the silly diphthongs and accents (AEther, Juza'm) etc are removed in your texts, and also some punctuation like exclamation marks in Kill! Destroy! I have no particular love of all them, but I think that Deckbox pre-processor should have capability to accept these if the import format is correct. The card _ is not accepted: instead it's ____, which is incorrect because much was made at the time that this was the shortest card name. Curiously, the only exotic character that you do accept is the (R) character in one of the Unhinged cards.

Agreed, they are very annoying to deal with, always have been in the last 8 years smile. But it is what it is. I will try to find the time to make some more lenient parsers for csv inputs, but it is always going to be error prone and finnicky to please any kind of data.

Removed duplicate Endbringer launch promo.
Removed duplicate Westvale & Ormendahl misimport. Caused actually by this gatherer mixup (notice the text below the images is vice-versa smile )
    http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/ … eid=410049

tpw wrote:

Bug!

Some tokens appear in autocomplete, but attempting to add them to a deck corrupts the deck.

To reproduce:  Create a new deck.  Add the Human Soldier token.  You'll see a notification: "Cannot find card. Please choose one from the autocompleted dropdown".  Then click on the deck in your deck list.  You'll be redirected to the deckbox.org homepage with a notification "Server Error. Cannot display page."

Fixed, sorry about that.

Sleet wrote:

Thanks for the additions!

Is there any chance we could get additions of big box store promos, such as the Atarka, World Render that comes with packs of 3 booster packs at Walmart and places like that?

Hmm, is there an Atarka promo aside from the prerelease one? Have a link to it?

Yep, this was a long time request, for years now, and I do want to get to some kind of solution. I had various plans, including having a "tagging" system for inventories and wishlists, which helps mostly when the list you are making is a 'conceptual' subset of the cards you own, or want. (i.e. the "trade binder" is a subset of your inventory, and "cards you want because they have nice drawings" are a subset of your wishlist).

I think that would solve most of your requirements, correct?

We have a CSV export for detailed exporting, in the Tools menu.

833

(1 replies, posted in Site Discussion)

Quickest way right now would be to click the card, it opens the card page in a new tab, and you can see on the left which decks you have it in. Not direct way yet, but it's a nice idea.

834

(13 replies, posted in Site Discussion)

anselan wrote:

I fixed this by deleting the record for "Ach! Hans, Run!", which was confusing in csv, and adding it manually later myself. Then there was no problem loading the file.

I did get your email and checked the file, it was indeed a row with an extra comma in there. Where was this csv exported from?

Shadows over Innistrad is now imported, along with the Promos for Launch, Game Day, Buy-a-Box, Prerelease, and the tokens:
    http://deckbox.org/editions/392-shadows-over-innistrad

Imported late 2015 and early 2016 Judge Gift promos: Temporal Manipulation, Shardless Agent, Rishadan Port, Mana Drain, Azusa, Lost but Seeking, Command Beacon

  http://deckbox.org/editions/157-judge-gift-program

Other fixes recently deployed:
  - properly show Splinter Twin and Summer Bloom as banned in Modern
  - Commander 2015 logo in the 'Extra' column of 'Editions' was appearing as Oath
  - fixed tooltips in deck color graphs being cut off
  - fixed various small CSV import issues let me know if you see any other bugs with it, it's a troublesome feature smile

Thanks everyone for the input, I will close this for now as I feel many have given their thoughts already.

I will consider rewriting this as a second draft and taking your feedback into consideration, and re-posting it.

10153078019113616 wrote:

TL;DR Good idea in thought, Terrible execution, driving members away with absurd restrictions.

Not sure what you think is absurd about it, but there is no execution yet, this was simply submitted to ask for user opinions.

HikingStick wrote:

Personally, I believe that getting into caps and limits makes things too complicated--for the users, and for the coders/admins. Why not change the trade workflow to *require* new traders to send first? The higher-rated trader is instructed not to send until they receive the cards.

Because this does not cover cases where < 10 users trade with < 10 users, or when one user has 11 feedback and the other also has 11 feedback.

It is true that it makes things complicated but I am quite decided now that I do not want to allow large scams to be able to take place, and part of that is making guards against abuse by new users.

Of course some type of scam will always happen, and some people are just thieves regardless of the obstacles they face when stealing, but like I do feel safer in my city knowing there are laws & police & locks, I'd like to have a bit more protection and guarantees in place for the newer users.

(Also worth noting the mentioned case is not cut-and-dried yet, I will still try to contact him further, but it is a perfect example of what the proposed system tries to prevent.)

No, it does not happen too frequently, but I would like to take it from "rarely" to "almost never". If I only limit no-feedback users to no-feedback users, it will happen at 10-feedback users with 10-feedback users then.

I don't want anyone to have thousands of dollars in promised trades at once, if they do not make a commitment to provide a credit card or paypal account. It's a minimal commitment, for what I hope is a useful service (trading on deckbox).

I see a lot of users not being happy with limits, but I also do not want to have cases like the linked one happen here again. If they happen on other sites, that is their business, but something will be done to prevent it here.

mobung wrote:

With a 3-trades cap, I would be encouraged to cancel the trade in order to keep my slots open.  Sure, canceling a trade isn't a hostile action, but it still feels unpleasant when both parties are keen on said trade and will likely lead to fewer trades overall.

There's no "3 trades cap", only a value cap. You can leave the trade accepted without marking it sent, then it will not "Block" things. Only when you mark things sent = you promise cards were sent, then it counts them as "in progress".

Again, the whole point is to prevent people from saying they "sent" the cards to 15 traders, but lie about it, and dissapear with everbody's cards.

Latest case: http://deckbox.org/users/DoctorGraim/trades

I mean it would not prevent you from trading, a new user would simply need to wait for his cards to get to destination before opening new trades for other cards. For national trades this would be 2-3 workdays usually, no?

kathirene89 wrote:

Would it also limit people doing many low value trades at once ? Like 10 or so 2-15 dollar trades ?

Well, the thing is, if you only do low value trades, and you have less than 250$ in many months, do you really want to at once start doing 250$ worth of trades at the same time suddenly?

The restriction would just be for all the trades that you have open at the same time where the other person did not yet receive the cards. So for the cards you promised and are "in transit".

TheWorldHatesPaul wrote:

Some folks want restrictions, other just want warnings. I like the idea of both, reduce the restrictions as stated in your original post, but still add some (such as users under some threshold must send first, users under a certain threshold can only trade below a certain value, etc). Also include the warnings and verified users.

How low should I reduce the restrictions though? I felt 250$ traded at the same time is plenty, but it seems people do not agree...

Finally, I am all for 2-step authentication on this site!

Yep, on my list of things to look into.

rfioren wrote:

I DEFINITELY think that once a trader has an OPEN issue/complaint to resolve, that they should not be able to initiate new trades,

I am generally suspending users as soon as I see problems occur, and they become unresponsive...

It is hard to draw the line of when you want someone blocked. If just opening a dispute blocks someone, users will use that in annoying ways. If it would block both the disputer and the disputee, people would not open them because they would be blocked, and they will open a support ticket instead...

I agree with the idea of course, I was just not sure how to best put it in practice.

I also see a lot of users complaining a 3.99$ monthly membership is too much, but wanting to trade more than 250$ worth of cards AT THE SAME TIME on deckbox, while also receiving the benefit of administrator moderation, support, and everything else.

PhyrexianLibrarian wrote:

- preventing users from having too many trades in progress at once?

This was my intention with the limits, to prevent too much value being traded at once, so as to limit someone who wants to make 20 trades worth 2000$ and run away.

849

(0 replies, posted in Mox Commanders)

Forum Rules for communities:

  • The community administrators are Moderators for your community's subforum. Nevertheless, if you notice abuse, vulgarity or inappropriate content, please report it to admin@deckbox.org

  • Using English is NOT mandatory. Any language can be used in your community's forums, but please use english in the global forums (Announcements, Magic the Gathering, etc)

BOOM wrote:

I think you are a bit out of line Sebi,  I am a budget player and most of us are just here for good fun.

Sorry if I offended, did not mean to.