Topic: Request for Comment: Trading restrictions&User levels to promote trust

I am revisiting an issue that was previously proposed and discussed: having a system where newer users are limited in some way in trading, to avoid fraud. This would encourage people to build up their reputation with the site and with other users on the website as a way to prove themselves trustworthy. It would also get rid of many users trying to scam and cheat users and members of the community.

This is not a new concept, ebay has a stars system, and Tcgplayer has seller level system, etc. I am opening this topic as an avenue for discussion and collecting feedback. The following is my current draft idea, and it is subject to change before being implemented.


Users have a Trader Level, that ranges from 1 to 4 which indicates trustworthyness.

Level 1 users are brand new. They can only trade with users with Level 2  and higher, and they must send first in a trade. They can also only have 50$ worth of cards in open trades at one time.

They reach level 2 after trading 200$ worth of cards and have been trading for at least a month on deckbox.

Level 2 traders can trade with anyone, but must send first when trading with Level 3 and higher. They can have 100$ worth of cards in trades at one time.

They reach level 3 after trading 500$ worth of cards and have been trading for at least 3 months on deckbox.

Level 3 traders can have 250$ worth of cards in trades at one time.

Level 4 traders have no restrictions.

All traders receive an extra level if we have an active credit card on file from them, from an active premium subscription (functionality for this is upcoming hopefully this week), or if they have sent or received a payment on deckbox in the last month via an active and verified paypal account. This can be either for premium membership, bought or sold cards.


This also means that you can only be level 4 if you have used a valid and active payment mechanism, that we know of. This would prevent account transfers and sales, and provide us with avenues for action in case of scamming.


I think this system would promote a more fair and friendly trading environment, would reward longevity on the website, and clean and friendly trade histories.

As always, I look forward to reading your feedback, and thank you in advance for your help in shaping this feature.


Later Edit A lot of feedback seems to indicate that restricting the value that new users trade is not a good idea, and I agree. I will try to re-formulate the proposal to allow for that.

Last edited by sebi (2016-03-15 10:34:13)

Re: Request for Comment: Trading restrictions&User levels to promote trust

Sounds great! Maybe I missed it, but how do you go from level 3 to level 4? Is the same kind of system under consideration for selling/buying?

Profile | Cards for Sale

Re: Request for Comment: Trading restrictions&User levels to promote trust

d72B wrote:

Sounds great! Maybe I missed it, but how do you go from level 3 to level 4? Is the same kind of system under consideration for selling/buying?

Not 100% sure yet, still thinking if there should be some additional account age requirement. It might also be possible to just have it Automatically become level 4 if you got to level 3 AND you have a payment mechanism on file, as explained.

Re: Request for Comment: Trading restrictions&User levels to promote trust

For selling & buying no, at least not to begin with. There fraud is not so much of an issue since Paypal is also always involved.

Re: Request for Comment: Trading restrictions&User levels to promote trust

This all sounds really fair. My question in can I still ask a user with say only 15 trades (this should make them Level 3 if all trades were bigger and they met the time requirement) to still send first even though we are both level 3 but I have 85 more trades? Or since we are both level 3 we are required to simul-send?

Re: Request for Comment: Trading restrictions&User levels to promote trust

I think this is a good idea.
Once achieved a higher level, there should not be a rule on 'sending first', since in some countries its more affordable to use registered mail / tracking. This should be negotiable between the traders, in my opinion. When choosing this option traders may ship 'second' hence providing tracking. It might be a good thing to provide a text box to add a tracking number for both traders + admin to review?

Re: Request for Comment: Trading restrictions&User levels to promote trust

As detailed in the OP, this is a terrible idea, at least for me. If I want to trade with a new user, I'm *unable* to do something worth more than $50 with them? Or if they trade with someone else, they can't trade with me? Allegedly for my own protection??? Under this rule, this would ban probably 25% of the trades I do.

I could see these restrictions making sense for newer users trading with eachother. But for experienced users trading with newer users who will be sending first, this would be unacceptably restrictive.

I hope this is an "obvious" error. I think most messy situations arise when new users trade with eachother, not when new users trade with more-experienced users. The latter circumstance does not need any additional protections, especially those that make viable trades impossible.

If I were doing this, I would just implement a 2-level system. You get 2 level 2 when you have 20 feedback. Level 1 users can't have more than $100 in active trades with eachother. That's it. Don't tell me I can't make a trade with a $100 trade with a user with 0 feedback where he sends first, please.

Also, I'll offer one additional perspective on why this is a horrible proposal, trying to represent a view that will probably not be very vocal in this discussion: That of the new user. Let's say I'm a casual player trying to build modern Jund. I want LotVs and I can't get them on PucaTrade, so I come to Deckbox. Under the new system, it would be *impossible* to get these cards until I've signed up for a month and trade $200? Why bother?

Last edited by 9700377 (2016-03-14 19:47:15)

Re: Request for Comment: Trading restrictions&User levels to promote trust

9700377 wrote:

As detailed in the OP, this is a terrible idea, at least for me. If I want to trade with a new user, I'm *unable* to do something worth more than $50 with them? Allegedly for my own protection??? Under this rule, this would ban probably 25% of the trades I do.

I could see these restrictions making sense for newer users trading with each other. But for experienced users trading with newer users who will be sending first, this would be unacceptably restrictive.

I hope this is an "obvious" error. I think most messy situations arise when new users trade with each other, not when new users trade with more-experienced users. The latter circumstance does not need any additional protections, especially those that make viable trades impossible.

The proposed rule is to cut down on a potential scammers. Messy situations happen all the time and are not limited to new users. Hell I have had only one issue myself with trading and it was with a user that had more trades then I did. Are there suggestions to improve on the rule? Increase the limits? Or are you opposed to the whole thing in general?

Though the amount of times I see profiles that are potential scammers is kinda high. I am willing to sacrifice some trades to make sure I am protected from a scammer.

Last edited by valdor (2016-03-14 19:25:40)

Re: Request for Comment: Trading restrictions&User levels to promote trust

valdor wrote:

The proposed rule is to cut down on a potential scammers. Messy situations happen all the time and are not limited to new users. Hell I have had only one issue myself with trading and it was with a user that had more trades then I did.

Though the amount of times I see profiles that are potential scammers is kinda high. I am willing to sacrifice some trades to make sure I am protected from a scammer.

I am absolutely unwilling to sacrifice 25% of my trades for the "benefit" of being subjected to paternalistic restrictions. Your point that messy situations arise regardless of experience only motivates against this system. When I ask a new trader to send first, the risk of my being scammed is very low. I have never been scammed under this situation, and if I felt like the risk was high enough than I would just not trade with newer users.

That is, I already have incentives to protect myself here. I've chosen what risks to take. Telling me that I'm incorrect and need additional protections at the cost of 25% of my trades? I'm sorry, but fuck that. Restrictions on the abilities of new users to trade with me are in fact restrictions on me as well. And I don't want these restrictions. I don't gain anything by having them. I mean, maybe we can have a Rank 5 for people who are adults who feel like they know what they're doing or something, at least?

Last edited by 9700377 (2016-03-14 19:50:07)

Re: Request for Comment: Trading restrictions&User levels to promote trust

i like this

Re: Request for Comment: Trading restrictions&User levels to promote trust

dawsonjay wrote:

i like this

Do you? You have an active trade worth over $50 with a user with one feedback. Do you regret agreeing to it? Do you feel like you should not be able to make these trades in the future?

Re: Request for Comment: Trading restrictions&User levels to promote trust

Maybe you have a point.  As long as the new person sends first, I could care less.  I don't really see the need to limit the $ amount though.

How about a simple 'The person with less feedback always sends first' rule?

Last edited by dawsonjay (2016-03-14 20:06:22)

Re: Request for Comment: Trading restrictions&User levels to promote trust

I have had problems on about a dozen deckbox trades.  Out of 750.  However the only three trades that I lost cards in were to three established users (with 50+ feedback, that I'd traded with several times in the past) that disappeared shortly after making multiple big trades.  The other trades were with newer traders where I simply requested that they sent first.  They never did, so I canceled those trades and moved on.

So yeah.  I guess I don't see how this would really help much. 

[goes back to work]

Re: Request for Comment: Trading restrictions&User levels to promote trust

Good points all around, thanks for the discussion. I can see why established users would want new users to not be restricted as long as they send first.

I'd like to incorporate that in the rules, while keeping restrictions for "new user" to "new user" interactions (which are the most problematic), while keeping the whole thing understandable.

Thinking about this, and will post updates. Keep the conversation going though, lots of good points.

Re: Request for Comment: Trading restrictions&User levels to promote trust

9700377 wrote:

I am absolutely unwilling to sacrifice 25% of my trades for the "benefit" of being subjected to paternalistic restrictions. Your point that messy situations arise regardless of experience only motivates against this system. When I ask a new trader to send first, the risk of my being scammed is very low. I have never been scammed under this situation, and if I felt like the risk was high enough than I would just not trade with newer users.

Agree to the sentiment, let's keep the tone friendly though smile. I appreciate the fact that established users are able to care for their interests, but many newer users give up on online trading because of bad experiences with people who get to 15 positive score and then scam 10 people.

I want to get rid of them and provide as safe an environment as possible to all newcomers smile (while also providing proper tools to non-newcomers too)

Re: Request for Comment: Trading restrictions&User levels to promote trust

The biggest issue I have is that people like myself who only trade on deckbox, not buy or sell, will never be able to get to level 4. I bought a card using the site one time, but for the most part if I'm spending money then I'm just going to do it using tcgplayer. However, I have hundreds of completed trades over a couple of years with 100% positive feedback - why should that exclude me from this "level 4" just because I don't have a credit card on file? Maybe I just don't want to put in my card info. That doesn't mean I'm a less reliable trader. Either change the criteria or scrap the idea, please.

Profile  |  Tradelist  |  Wishlist

Re: Request for Comment: Trading restrictions&User levels to promote trust

El_Panda_Rojo wrote:

The biggest issue I have is that people like myself who only trade on deckbox, not buy or sell, will never be able to get to level 4. I bought a card using the site one time, but for the most part if I'm spending money then I'm just going to do it using tcgplayer. However, I have hundreds of completed trades over a couple of years with 100% positive feedback - why should that exclude me from this "level 4" just because I don't have a credit card on file? Maybe I just don't want to put in my card info. That doesn't mean I'm a less reliable trader. Either change the criteria or scrap the idea, please.

So you consider the community a useful tool for you but you would not even consider supporting it by becoming a premium member, thus you wish that the idea be scrapped smile

Re: Request for Comment: Trading restrictions&User levels to promote trust

sebi wrote:

So you consider the community a useful tool for you but you would not even consider supporting it by becoming a premium member, thus you wish that the idea be scrapped smile

I've chosen not to become a premium member because I don't feel the need to utilize the premium features, not because I don't support the site or feel it isn't a useful tool. I do my part in other ways, like getting my friends to sign up and start trading here. And I suggested scrapping the idea entirely only if you were opposed to the notion of changing the criteria of the "level scale." What, am I not allowed to give input just because I don't put money towards the site?

Profile  |  Tradelist  |  Wishlist

Re: Request for Comment: Trading restrictions&User levels to promote trust

sebi wrote:
El_Panda_Rojo wrote:

The biggest issue I have is that people like myself who only trade on deckbox, not buy or sell, will never be able to get to level 4. I bought a card using the site one time, but for the most part if I'm spending money then I'm just going to do it using tcgplayer. However, I have hundreds of completed trades over a couple of years with 100% positive feedback - why should that exclude me from this "level 4" just because I don't have a credit card on file? Maybe I just don't want to put in my card info. That doesn't mean I'm a less reliable trader. Either change the criteria or scrap the idea, please.

So you consider the community a useful tool for you but you would not even consider supporting it by becoming a premium member, thus you wish that the idea be scrapped smile

Ill be honest sebi, that is kinda unfair to say. I love deckbox but I dont pay for premium. Instead I support deckbox by telling everyone I know about it and convincing people to try and join. I promote the site where I can. So saying that you can only support by paying money seems unfair to those that dont have credit/debit cards or are extremely tight on money that even $5/months is too much.

Re: Request for Comment: Trading restrictions&User levels to promote trust

El_Panda_Rojo wrote:

I've chosen not to become a premium member because I don't feel the need to utilize the premium features, not because I don't support the site or feel it isn't a useful tool. I do my part in other ways, like getting my friends to sign up and start trading here. And I suggested scrapping the idea entirely only if you were opposed to the notion of changing the criteria of the "level scale." What, am I not allowed to give input just because I don't put money towards the site?

Nope, feedback is always appreciated. Just pointing out how "Either change the criteria or scrap the idea, please." sounds.

Re: Request for Comment: Trading restrictions&User levels to promote trust

valdor wrote:

Ill be honest sebi, that is kinda unfair to say. I love deckbox but I dont pay for premium. Instead I support deckbox by telling everyone I know about it and convincing people to try and join. I promote the site where I can. So saying that you can only support by paying money seems unfair to those that dont have credit/debit cards or are extremely tight on money that even $5/months is too much.

Sure, this is why ANY kind of payment information is accepted, you do not have to be premium. Which means you can buy or sell, or whichever way you prefer.

Having zero verification on our users is a very bad position to be in, because there is nothing we can do against scammers when they do not even have to show a credit card or paypal account to trade cards worth thousands of dollars.

Re: Request for Comment: Trading restrictions&User levels to promote trust

sebi wrote:

Nope, feedback is always appreciated. Just pointing out how "Either change the criteria or scrap the idea, please." sounds.

Fair enough. All I meant by that is that I don't have any particular feelings about implementing trading restrictions/levels as long as the criteria are adjusted so a credit card isn't required. However if those changes aren't made to the level criteria, then I would feel actively opposed to implementing trading restrictions rather than not having any feelings for either side.

Profile  |  Tradelist  |  Wishlist

Re: Request for Comment: Trading restrictions&User levels to promote trust

sebi wrote:
valdor wrote:

Ill be honest sebi, that is kinda unfair to say. I love deckbox but I dont pay for premium. Instead I support deckbox by telling everyone I know about it and convincing people to try and join. I promote the site where I can. So saying that you can only support by paying money seems unfair to those that dont have credit/debit cards or are extremely tight on money that even $5/months is too much.

Sure, this is why ANY kind of payment information is accepted, you do not have to be premium. Which means you can buy or sell, or whichever way you prefer.

Having zero verification on our users is a very bad position to be in, because there is nothing we can do against scammers when they do not even have to show a credit card or paypal account to trade cards worth thousands of dollars.

That is fair. I did not consider the buying/selling bit so I can concede to that.

Re: Request for Comment: Trading restrictions&User levels to promote trust

At first I was a bit concerned that this might affect me as I'm brand new. But the restrictions don't seem overly restricting to begin with.  I only have 2 trades proposed right now, and I plan on sending first, and they are all under the $ limit that is being suggested.  So it basically is following how I intend to use the site as a new user.   Seems like a perfectly reasonable set of restrictions on the lower end.  big_smile

The only part of this that seems off is the restriction that level 4 people wont be able to trade with level 1.  Why does that even make a difference when it's just that they have account information on file?  Seems odd/off.

Are you going to allow people to link paypal/CC information even though they have not purchased something to increase their trade limit right away?  At the moment I don't really see any options for this, other that purchasing premium.

Last edited by Sleaker (2016-03-14 21:17:42)

Re: Request for Comment: Trading restrictions&User levels to promote trust

One thing I would suggest, and I have no idea how often the issue arises based on this, but I would recommend implementing Multi-Factor Authentication.  On a site where hundreds/thousands of dollars of transactions are being made by individuals I'd imagine there are a decent amount of people attempting to hack into long-term accounts to send out bait trades and then just turn off the account after.

Also, this doesn't address the issue of someone creating multiple accounts, "trading" with themselves to reach the aforementioned goals, then doing the same thing.  Without some sort of account verification there is no good way to implement this.  Also, with one-time CC's they could just set up a verified account, cancel the pseudo-card and then you have no way to trace them, which is why Paypal is so important on other sites because the buyer is verified.