Amurphcs wrote:Using this system, My concern would become more with the cost of product as well. People tend to ship things in their own way, and don't always use a "user friendly" system. The system I speak of would be:

Card ---> optional perfect fit ---> sleeve ---> hard cover ---> Team bag ---> Bubble mailer/PWE

The cost to ship 1 card in this way would be an additional approx $1.2 or so, depending on how much bulk you buy. Would these supplies be issued by deckbox?
I think that the cost would be marginal for trades that exceed $100, especially if you don't include insurance as the cost pretty much makes up the difference.
It would be nice if you could just use the shipping methods over again, but many times people use tape etc, which would limit the ability to use them again. Also, if a shipping method is suspect, you would want to re-package the items so there would be no problems on the next stage.

No idea how this would end up. However, if I were piloting such a service, I'd make it clear I'm not responsible for anything other than the escrow verification process. In home purchases, escrow doesn't get held accountable for anything other than verification that the title is clear. For a card escrow service, I'd make it clear that I open the package, verify the cards are in there and that they look like the ones in the pictures, and then put them right back in the packaging it was sent in (sleeves, if any, envelope) (and that in turn into a new envelope that will have the actual postage) and ship it off once I received both trades.

That might not be what users would want, though. Maybe Deckbox traders WANT to hold Deckbox accountable for such things. So, no idea what such a service would end up as.

I oppose any restrictions that make it harder for new people to get into the site. I have never had terrible experiences with this site, but I think that people need to realize that there is some risk trading with strangers online. You can't eliminate that...

Why not have the individual users set profile parameters so the person on the other end can see what will and will not be accepted? Right now, this sort of thing is all laid out (when it is laid out at all) in profiles.

I get the bit about new-to-new trades, mind you, as that can be an issue for all kinds of reasons.

I would also suggest that idle time prior to an email address change, or perhaps any email address change, might put some measure of restriction onto the account until a means of verifying that the original owner still controls the account.

Nothing will be 100%, however.

renoan wrote:

Amurphcs wrote:Using this system, My concern would become more with the cost of product as well. People tend to ship things in their own way, and don't always use a "user friendly" system. The system I speak of would be:

Card ---> optional perfect fit ---> sleeve ---> hard cover ---> Team bag ---> Bubble mailer/PWE

The cost to ship 1 card in this way would be an additional approx $1.2 or so, depending on how much bulk you buy. Would these supplies be issued by deckbox?
I think that the cost would be marginal for trades that exceed $100, especially if you don't include insurance as the cost pretty much makes up the difference.
It would be nice if you could just use the shipping methods over again, but many times people use tape etc, which would limit the ability to use them again. Also, if a shipping method is suspect, you would want to re-package the items so there would be no problems on the next stage.

No idea how this would end up. However, if I were piloting such a service, I'd make it clear I'm not responsible for anything other than the escrow verification process. In home purchases, escrow doesn't get held accountable for anything other than verification that the title is clear. For a card escrow service, I'd make it clear that I open the package, verify the cards are in there and that they look like the ones in the pictures, and then put them right back in the packaging it was sent in (sleeves, if any, envelope) (and that in turn into a new envelope that will have the actual postage) and ship it off once I received both trades.

That might not be what users would want, though. Maybe Deckbox traders WANT to hold Deckbox accountable for such things. So, no idea what such a service would end up as.

What if deckbox made it a program that would state something along the lines of "trade with confidence"? Using the system you described it could be a part of the premium membership, where when a premium user trades with a premium user, the service is free? Im not sure how that would break down price-wise though.

A few questions/concerns I have:

1. What would happen if a card value shoots up and puts a user's current open trades over their monetary limit? Would that trade be automatically cancelled? Would they have to cancel some trades in order to bring themselves down into their limit?

2. Placing a limit on users could hinder the growth of userbase. For example, my 2nd trade (1st I started on the site) Included my Tropical Island. According to the new rules proposed, I couldn't even include that in a trade until Level 3, after 3 months on the site. I personally wouldn't have even bothered with deckbox and would've ended up using PucaTrade as my primary trading site. Which hurts to say, I much prefer Deckbox. Saying "you're not allowed to trade for actual value because you're new" discourages new users. "Sorry, I'm not allowed to trade my Arid Mesa here, Deckbox says I can't be trusted to trade that yet."

3. Having to essentially buy level 4 is a bit ludicrous in my mind. I've traded for thousands in cards here, have no negative feedback, have fixed all problematic trades, and put in my dues as a new trader having to send first. But since I've never been able to pay for premium and find better deals on cards elsewhere (like users trying to list $3 rares for $100 in an attempt to make it appear like the card is spiking in price), I'm not allowed to have level 4? I have to trade with restrictions? I'm currently aiming to finish a legacy deck, and I wouldn't be allowed to finish my deck here, because I need Imperial Recruiters.

4. I get the idea, of attempting to provide some form of security for users, but ultimately, it's not Deckbox's responsibility to limit users to provide some sense of security. If a trader doesn't ask for a brand new user to send first for their own safety, a basic precaution, while the scammer is scum and is a horrible person, the trader being scammed could've taken such a basic step to stop it.

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

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.

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.