You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Deckbox Forum » Posts by jassi007
Looking to swap 2 foil stormbreath dragon and 1 foil elspeth, sun's champion for non-foil + value. Also have several other good cards, 2 thassa, 2 master of waves, 3 tidebinder mage, nightveil specter, ashiok, chandra, pyromaster and more.
Mainly looking for 3x purphoros.
WordOfCommander wrote:You're right that the TCG mid is below $90. But I love having these in the two EDH decks they are in. So you have to make me want to trade them away.
I'm not trying to gouge anyone--just making it clear that I hold these dear and trade them accordingly.
90$ and they aren't mint? I could understand you over valuing them, but you are playing with them, which already doesn't fetch you the mid IMO. Had they been mint, you'd have an argument.
He wasn't arguing, you are. Again. He told people what he values them at. If you don't like it, don't take him up on it. It is not iron law that we trade by tcg-mid man. Get off people's shit.
Thanks for all the suggestions guys. I want to make this deck come to life in the near future.
Next time though I guess I won't post deck questions here. Apparently it was frowned upon since this is a "trading sub group".
This is the forum you were looking for, http://deckbox.org/forum/viewforum.php?id=29
I am not a developer or an admin, however.
To me the advantage provided by the tool was the main reason to visit the site. I can't imagine what kind of performance issues would have been bad enough to take down one of the most popular features.
Not trying to be a jerk. I really don't understand how slower performance impacts the way the site works. I never saw anyone complain that it ran slowly or caused any issues.
You don't understand because you aren't a developer or an admin. If you were, you may understand. Funny how that works. It isn't like they took down a useful feature because they don't want people using their site, right? There was a problem, it had to be turned off, it'll come back in some form or another later when they fix it.
@morph
I wasn't aware I was asking for trades. Nowhere in my post dies it say I want to trade these cards. This was just a thread to get ideas for a deck.
He is confused, as was I, because this is a trade sub forum.
If I'm not mistaken, you were suspended at one point for abusive language. By your logic, you should be banned.
If there is a contentious topic morph will be there. Moth, flame, etc.
When Wizards actually invalidates codes by requiring LGS's to enter them to some site, then it'll stop.
timesnewspartan wrote:It doesn't matter if they get the cards or not. The codes are to be used for ONE card each. Sure, a lot of us probably went to 4 different stores with it but nobody tried bringing other people into by TAKING THEIR CARDS for a code that's already been used.
Is this common knowledge that codes can be reused? Were other trades going on on deckbox involving these codes? Please let us know at support@deckbox.org . We are probably going to gather more information and contact Wizards regarding this.
Sent you an email Sebi
Sebi asked for feedback, without discussing particulars of the BTR that prompted this discussion. I think the site could add some helpful "fake cards exist. Here is the info Wizards has on counterfeit cards and how to detect them. Be aware." with the links to Wizards site and leave it at that. If / when a card is suspected of being fake, the default action should be to unwind the trade. If the alleged fake card sender is disagreeable to this, that is a strong point against them. Otherwise, undo the trade and the mods will just have to keep that person in mind.
I think it would be handy to program it in the feedback to make it possible to let you guys have the information.
Depending on the stats you get from the feedback about fake cards you can decide what could be the next step.
I'm pretty sure that if a user is on Deckbox with trading fake cards in mind the majority of his trades of higher priced cards will be fake and flagged and you will see this in the stats then.
I am sure that if a user really was not aware of the fake card it will be just a one time occurrence in the stats, at least this is what i think.
I would suggest that implementing the feature to report it in the feedback about the trade but not yet flagging will provide the development team after let's say 6 or 12 months with the information on how large this portion is on the website and if there is a need for programming it further.
If you see the scenario as I described above I would suggest to set the flag after several bad trades per trade amount (e.g. : 3 fake cards reported in 5 trades with cards higher then $50).Regards,
YouryDW
Given Sebi's request for feedback, I'm saying this is the first time they've really had an issue with this. If so, is it really worth their development time to program some report as fake function when they can just get the data from the BTR?
I think honestly the whole thing is being a bit overblown. Most of the time cards that are worth faking are traded, it is discovered either beforehand or after and fixed. This is probably the rare case where it got to the point of having to involve a mod.
jassi007 wrote:PhyrexianLibrarian wrote:In that situation, I would send back the fake card and the trade is undone. We're both out postage, but in my eyes that's no different than if I received any other card that wasn't as described (condition, language, set, etc.). In a sense, a card being "real" is just another property of the card itself.
If the sender says "nope it's real and you're stuck with it now", I'd take my case to the BTR forum along with my evidence.
Lets say as a recipient my concern was that this card would be passed along to another less vigilant member of the community and so I open a BTR because I don't think they should get the card back just to send it to another person? If I just give them the card back, then someone else will get a fake card! So I as the recipient open the BTR because the card is fake! How should the deckbox team handle that?
The problem is that you're implicitly assuming that the seller knows the card is fake and is trying to scam people. What if the person doesn't know it's a fake? Or worse, what if the card is real but the receiver doesn't know how to properly judge older cards? I received a Karakas in a trade that I was convinced was fake until people told me that the printing pattern I saw on the card was actually a sign that the card was real, not vice versa.
I think opening a BTR or forum post to alert people of a potential fake is totally justified. If the mods see a post about John Smith trading a fake mox, and then a month later see a second post about the same John Smith and the same fake mox, then it's suddenly a lot more clear that some action can be taken.
Ok, so when they open a BTR, what do you expect the outcome to be? The fake is sent back, and if the other party receives cards they send them back as well right?
What happens if the other party no longer has some or all of the cards? The deckbox team shouldn't be community police, I agree, but they have to have some idea of what they're going to do or say when people bring up a situation.
My thought is put a few easy resources in their trade rules (like a link to Wizards page on couterfeit cards) and leave it at that. If someone wants to open a BTR for fake ok obviously they can post, but what should the general expected outcome be? Like if I ship cards and you don't get them, the general expected outcome is I either send again, or we undo the trade. We don't want the mod to decide if the card is fake, so we are going to trust the recipient and let them unwind the trade right? The sender of the fake card is going to have issue with that unless they didn't receive cards yet.
jassi007 wrote:PhyrexianLibrarian wrote:I don't think this is an issue that Deckbox needs to have an official policy for. Certainly, sending a fake card doesn't count as fulfilling part of a trade, and the rules already cover that. I think the burden of fake vs. real proof has to be on whoever is in physical possession of the card when the issue is raised. If the receiver thinks he got a fake card, he should present that evidence as part of the inevitable BTR, and "I know a guy who knows a lot about fakes and he says it's fake" should not count as proof.
You might think so, but what happens when two parties open up a dispute for the issue of how to handle a fake card? So lets say I was sent a fake card, and I say based on x, y, and z it looks fake. The sender responds with "nope its real send it back if you want and we'll undo the trade" Then what?
In that situation, I would send back the fake card and the trade is undone. We're both out postage, but in my eyes that's no different than if I received any other card that wasn't as described (condition, language, set, etc.). In a sense, a card being "real" is just another property of the card itself.
If the sender says "nope it's real and you're stuck with it now", I'd take my case to the BTR forum along with my evidence.
Lets say as a recipient my concern was that this card would be passed along to another less vigilant member of the community and so I open a BTR because I don't think they should get the card back just to send it to another person? If I just give them the card back, then someone else will get a fake card! So I as the recipient open the BTR because the card is fake! How should the deckbox team handle that?
I don't think this is an issue that Deckbox needs to have an official policy for. Certainly, sending a fake card doesn't count as fulfilling part of a trade, and the rules already cover that. I think the burden of fake vs. real proof has to be on whoever is in physical possession of the card when the issue is raised. If the receiver thinks he got a fake card, he should present that evidence as part of the inevitable BTR, and "I know a guy who knows a lot about fakes and he says it's fake" should not count as proof.
You might think so, but what happens when two parties open up a dispute for the issue of how to handle a fake card? So lets say I was sent a fake card, and I say based on x, y, and z it looks fake. The sender responds with "nope its real send it back if you want and we'll undo the trade" Then what?
There's a huge profit to be made by faking the expensive cards so I'm sure some people will try it but I don't think its the majority of people.
When it does happen, and someone opens a BTR because of it you just need to stick to the rules and mediate. Whatever the resolution is it needs to be amicable between the traders. But, as a moderator how do you decide to allow someone to leave negative feedback if someone cry's "Fake!"? You can't examine the card and you can't take sides.
It should be "Buyer beware" right? You can't hold peoples hands as moderators. That's not your job.
I think you guys need to have some sort of disclaimer more than anything. When you're talking about $100s-$1000s, worth of cards your opening yourself up to some serious business. What's other websites policies on these things? How does ebay handle it if, someone is selling a fake antique? It's basically a type of fraud right? Does the fact we trade through mail add extra weight to the issue?
Now that I've typed it all out like that, I honestly think you guys should contact a lawyer to get some help.
Checking ebay for policy isn't a bad idea. This may be common sense, but ebay holds the "seller" of an item liable to its authenticity. http://pages.ebay.com/help/policies/aut … imers.html
The main problem with that, is policy can easily become an unwind trade button. Dark Confidant spike $15 in a value last week? Obviously the one card you got was fake, unwind the trade. On the other hand, the person sending the card should be confident that it is real. Having it authenticated would be good, but I'm not sure it should be mandatory. That can be a problem in and of itself. I think the recipient could request such a thing, and if the sender doesn't or can't comply, the recipient makes the final decision.
It is tricky, but someone could in theory try to send out fake cards only to claim they didn't know they were fake, allowing them to get away with trying to scam someone with no reprocusions.
There should atleast be marked as such, or atleast be able to give them negative feedback on the trade.
the problem is ultimately who is the final arbiter? Unless you bend it, smudge it or tear it you can't tell for SURE. Otherwise it is a judgement. If I trade someone a piece of power, real or fake, knowingly or not, when someone accuses me I'm going to do two things. 1. deny it. 2. refuse any test that could damage the card. Logically if it is real I deny its fake, if its fake I'm not going to admit it. If it is fake but i truly believe it isn't, I'm going to deny it. 2. If it is a real card and you ask to bend my card, put water on it, or rip it up, duh I'm going to say no. If it is fake, I know that you are trying to test for that, so I'm going to say no.
If you mark someone as sending fakes, or maybe sending fakes, or leave them a neg, then you might as well ban their account. Who is going to trade with them? Doing this without proof positive seems to be asking for a world of shit. Someone upset you? Accuse their cards of being fake! It is not a great idea.
Education and vigilance are the only defenses against fake cards.
On a personal note, I don't know if I could buy or trade for power without seeing the card first or it being a reputable source. it is one of those times paying Star City a premium for a card is probably worthwhile.
We've been involved in some discussions referring to users sending (with or without their knowledge) fake cards. (I'm talking here about valuable cards, power 9, etc).
Prompted by this I thought we should have a section in our rules referring to this possible issue.
One option would be to state that senders of cards worth more than a considerable sum (let's say 150$) are responsible to ask their local magic store if the card is indeed genuine before sending it in a trade. Should a valuable card be proven to be fake by the receiver, the trade would be undone, and the sender would receive a "flag" or "mark" saying that he has been distributing fake cards.
How does that sound, what do you guys think about this rule? (Obviously this would not apply to trades in the past, just ones from now on).
I don't think that is a great idea. I would imagine that would cause issues for some people who may not really have an LGS or one that is quite a ways away. Also I would think a lot of stores aren't going to want to be the local ID shop, who would want the liability? I mean if someone offered to sell them cards they'll look them over carefully of course, but just going into a store and saying "is this fake?" I feel that there are a lot of stores that won't be willing to be the judge of that kind of thing.
I think a better use of this sites resources would be if someone has or is willing to make a good primer on fake cards, how different era's of cards are different from each other (old alpha-unlim vs. modern printed cards feel diff.) and so forth. The light trick, the blue line, etc. The best defense is knowledge. What if someone's local card store just won't make a judgement for fear of liability? The deckbox team does a hell of a job to set up a safe environment, but at the end of the day, it is Buyer Beware.
This looks like a good starting resource from the Mothership. https://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/ … eature/209
Customer Service info about counterfeit cards from Wizards. http://wizards.custhelp.com/app/answers … feit-cards
found this video linked to on mtgsalvation and was one of the top search results in google. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpse1P3V8PE He demonstrates the common tests.
Question. I saw here that people are able to create shipping label for their stuff through paypal with DC at the nominal price of 1.69, I'm having trouble finding that, do you need a merchant account?
Thanks for any thoughts you all have.
Nope. Here you go. https://www.paypal.com/us/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_ship-now
I don't think that is the message per say. Although with a $50 trade it starts to get to the value that they probably should have, but I understand not paying $1.69 for every trade + penny sleeves + top loaders + bubble mailers.
Delivery confirmation is the answer to most of the issues people post about in this forum. In the case of this trade, both parties could quickly and easily see if said package ever left it's origin or if it just sat there with the status, "Electronic Shipping Info Received" which means a shipping label was created, but nothing was ever mailed. DC would also show if the package was weirdly routed to Alaska and then disappeared, which gives you solid proof to file a complaint with the USPS for a lost package. As it stands, these guys have to say, "derp, I mailed an envelope from this place a couple weeks ago, did you lose it?"
Also, the whole $1.69 + sleeve/top-loader + bubble mailer... that's what we call the cost of doing business. If you can't afford it, you probably shouldn't be trading on the Internet. I find it funny that people will double sleeve a card and put their own playmat over a store mat, but when it comes time to mail a card... here you go USPS, take this $50 card in a regular envelope, add it to the 440,000,000 other pieces of mail you received today and we'll all just hope everything goes as planned.
As someone who is all about DC and proper packaging material, I wouldn't mind if those items were added as check boxes when creating a new trade. I look through someone's stuff, pick out $27 in cards, check the boxes for DC/bubble mailer and it adds another $3 bringing my total to $30. If I receive the cards and they're in a standard envelope and/or a DC was never provided... boom, negative feedback.
I'm not disagreeing that delivery conf. makes these problems go away. However Will you spend $3 to trade for $1 in cards? I'm saying that there is a place it makes sense to use tracking and sometimes it does not. It depends on the value of the trade. I should have made that more clear. These two well they've learned that if you can't/won't afford to be out $60 in cards you should have spent the $3. I do agree.
So, just because I'm having a bit of a tough time following along, was there no Delivery Confirmation on the one set of cards so now this is a big, "he said, she said" argument over whether or not they were actually sent? If so... USE DELIVERY CONFIRMATION!
I don't think that is the message per say. Although with a $50 trade it starts to get to the value that they probably should have, but I understand not paying $1.69 for every trade + penny sleeves + top loaders + bubble mailers. It depends on the trade and the parties involved. The real lesson I think is trading through mail has issues that no amount of feedback and rules can overcome. Sometimes mail gets lost, and sometimes people can be less than honest. If you don't know how you will handle that up front, don't trade by mail. You can go read the tradelog they both posted. After midnight sends a message saying it has been two weeks and I haven't gotten the card, the first thing joe says is I don't have another Liliana. That statement alone tells me he had no plan on what he would do if he sent a high value trade and it got lost in the mail. One of them may not be truthful, nobody can prove who, so it doesn't matter.
They just learned a $50 lesson about using delivery confirmation. Site trade rules state senders are responsible for cards arriving. Since neither party says the have cards and neither can prove otherwise, you go to the rule for resolution. They can't return each others cards, so they can purchase and resend replacements, or pay compensation. Now since like most people they traded equal values, they are both out about $50-60 so they both write it off as even. We all just hope one of them wasn't lying and kept $50 worth of cards.
is there a wow group to join? I want to be able to offer trades to people that might want wow cards (I don't play anymore), but I have some decent cards.
I don't think people use deckbox much for wow because there are a lot of issues, the mods don't spend time on it because of little to no usage, so less people use it. (issues like some cards aren't in the database)
jassi007 wrote:AmarusCameron wrote:I think you are forgetting the part where Midnight threatened JoeCat. Not cool.
Also, I think a post on here asking for help (if you don't know what the BTR forum is) is not an issue.
I didn't miss it. It was stupid on his part to say it, but he is frustrated about being out $50 in a trade. I can understand that. Everyone who thinks he is really going to drive 6 hours to yell at a guy about a magic card raise their hands. I think posting one side of a story and letting the other person be tried in the court of public opinion is a problem. Let the mods sort this out. Look at the feedbacks. Joe has 12 trades and 2 neutrals, midnight has 88 and no neutral or negative. Which trader is the one that other people have had problems with and which one hasn't had one dissatisfied trade partner until now?
Take a look at the previous conversation on this page and you will see that other trades that midnight is a part of have similar situations. Pay attention before you start making assuming judgements just based on # of trades
I did see that. Then I looked at his trades. There are a lot of them pending, but almost none of them are marked as shipped by either party. Nobody else he has traded with has opened a BTR or left him anything other than a positive feedback. There is one other trade that midnight received the cards, but the other party didn't yet. Midnight sent on 7/18 so its only been 5 days. I don't see any comments on any trades, so I don't get what people are saying about his trades indicating he is a scammer. In all seirousness, what am I missing? It looks like there are a lot of proposed but not accepted trades. That happens to me when I go on a trading spree, then they all get marked as confirmed, then complete etc. Does having a bunch of pending trades just automatically mean you are scamming?
Curious if it is just me, but the way the star that indicates card condition works needs a little improvement. It is a gradient. The thing is Good (LP) doesn't look significantly different from NM. I was thinking instead of gradients, it would probably be better for the star to just be different colors. Gold/silver/bronze or green through red or something like that. At a glance you may miss that someone has marked their cards in a less than nm condition, and the only safe bet is to mouse over the star to see exactly what they rated it.
I recently had a bad trading experience on this website, and it made me start thinking about these questions. I thought I would share my thoughts and inquiries. Thanks!
My experience, in its very nature, is anecdotal. In that experience, I have noticed that my worst trade experiences (deckbox or motl) seem to come from traders with a large number of refs (usually over 100). I rarely have a problem with a trader with low refs, and if I do, it is usually minor and there is no trouble resolving it. As traders, do we become more arrogant and pay less attention to what we are mailing out the more we do it? Do we become uncaring impersonal machines? What are your thoughts?
Perhaps a better rating system would help us identify and curb unacceptable trading behaviour:
Card Condition: Unacceptable, Acceptable, As Expected, Better than Expected
Communication: Poor, Acceptable, Good, Extraordinary
Shipping: Slow, Acceptable, As Expected, Prompt
In the end, what I received was: Not what was agreed, Acceptable, What was Agreed, Better than what was agreedRegards,
Jesse
Anecdotal evidence. When ebay started putting in a more detailed feedback system where you rated 1-5 stars in 4 categories is when I started leaving less feedback/just marking all 5's or 1's. I'm not sure people really will take the time to be more detailed. It is a good idea but I think in practice it wouldn't really get the desired results.
Also I think they should consider changing the card condition marker. The star that has gradients is honestly really hard to tell if they mark it from mint to played at a glance. Go try it. You really have to mouse over it to get the pop up to read it. I think it should go like Gold, silver, bronze or something. It needs to change colors not just gradients so at a glance it is obvious if they marked it as mint, sp, played, etc.
I think you are forgetting the part where Midnight threatened JoeCat. Not cool.
Also, I think a post on here asking for help (if you don't know what the BTR forum is) is not an issue.
I didn't miss it. It was stupid on his part to say it, but he is frustrated about being out $50 in a trade. I can understand that. Everyone who thinks he is really going to drive 6 hours to yell at a guy about a magic card raise their hands. I think posting one side of a story and letting the other person be tried in the court of public opinion is a problem. Let the mods sort this out. Look at the feedbacks. Joe has 12 trades and 2 neutrals, midnight has 88 and no neutral or negative. Which trader is the one that other people have had problems with and which one hasn't had one dissatisfied trade partner until now?
These should stay in the BTR forum imo. This is just he said she said and being tried in the court of public opinion. Both sides sent without delivery conf. and both are claiming to not receive anything. Both could be telling the truth or lying, and neither can prove it. Even better is the other party is the one who asked about the status of the cards first. Midnight didn't claim to not have the cards in response to Joe asking him about it, midnight asked first, then Joe claimed he hasn't received either.
My crystal ball predicts the mods will point out the rule that reminds them to use delivery conf. and since both parties claim to have received nothing and can't prove otherwise that the trade is going to be written off.
Deckbox Forum » Posts by jassi007