Topic: Token&promo imports, fixes and a "Request for Feedback" :)

There have been multiple issues lately (non-public, via support ticket) about buyers buying spiked cards, and sellers cancelling orders, and various such issues. Since the marketplace here is very low volume, there are basically mostly users that sell cards, not professional stores. The difference between these is also remarked upon in feedback from users, such as these older posts:

https://deckbox.org/forum/viewtopic.php … 95#p122495
https://deckbox.org/forum/viewtopic.php?id=31267

I have been thinking lately that perhaps it is a good idea to acknowledge this distinction and finally provide an option for seller to not "auto-accept" orders. This would mean orders to them would behave like a trade. A buyer would open one, and then propose it, discuss it, and when the seller also accepts, payment could be made. Like a normal trade.

What do you guys think, would you (if you are a seller) be interested in having that option on, or as a buyer, would such an option be problematic / annoying to you? (As sleepingwolf mentions in his older feedback post, the current system is also annoying since sellers are forced to cancel and refund orders)


Unrelated, fixes deployed today:
* imported missing Commander Legends tokens & double-faced tokens
* imported missing Zendikar Rising Commander double-faced tokens
* fixed the Shapeshifter token in Double Masters getting bunched up with the shapeshifter creature (this always happens)
* imported 9 missing 2019/2020 Japanese magazine media insert promos (to Media Inserts edition)
* fixed mythic rarity edition symbol for Commander Legends
* imported 10 missing double masters double-faced tokens
* removed 5 extended art cards from Zendikar Rising Prerelease, that do not exist in reality
* fixed sort order for warhammer invasion "by edition" to use collectors_number as secondary criteria

Last edited by sebi (2020-11-20 07:10:51)

Re: Token&promo imports, fixes and a "Request for Feedback" :)

Looking back at the referenced post, it seems like the buyer does make some fair points. However, there is a difference between other goods that someone might purchase from Amazon or Best Buy and Magic cards, which fluctuate in value, sometimes wildly. When it comes to people who don't have the cards, having to cancel the order and then issue a refund (you do lose $0.30 from Paypal for having to do it), along with the fact that a person might not be a return buyer seems like a pretty fair "punishment".

I think that it would be pretty problematic to go through and set up another step for people to place an order for review and then have to check again to actually complete it. I'm not sure how often people run into issues where a seller does not have the cards.

From my experience, the bigger problem appears to be people who come to the site looking to buy spiked cards and then leave negative feedbacks when this happens. I've had around 140 orders placed, and 50 of them were people looking to buy spiked cards (resulting in 12 negative feedbacks).

It seems to make sense to have two different feedback scores, with one for trading and one for selling. That would make negative feedbacks for sellers who don't have the cards to be more impactful, and would incentivize sellers to be more accurate with their listings. I also strongly believe that people shouldn't be able to leave negative feedback for someone who cancels on a spiked card, since that does seem to put sellers in a bad situation (though I'll acknowledge that I'm a seller so I do have a bias)

http://deckbox.org/sets/204167 My trades

Re: Token&promo imports, fixes and a "Request for Feedback" :)

I'm not a buyer or seller on here. I have read in some user profiles serving the right to cancel and order because of spikes. It's also possible inventory is not 100% correct, and a card is already gone, or now a different grade and there inventory was not updated. I think most users would well come that change. It would solve problems, before they become problems.

Last edited by The_Dark (2020-11-19 17:34:41)

Re: Token&promo imports, fixes and a "Request for Feedback" :)

Having this as a feature would make me much more likely to sell cards here.

My local card shop does a version of this where they have stopped pricing their cards directly and they just look up TCG pricing for each card as you check out.

Re: Token&promo imports, fixes and a "Request for Feedback" :)

There was also this thorough discussion of the topic for anyone who wants to review it — good points made by both sides.

My thoughts on this change:

  • Usefulness — I see no reason not to add the feature; more options are a good thing. Those who it'll help will be very happy; those who don't want/like it can ignore it.


    Personally, I would find it annoying and would avoid buying from sellers with that feature turned on. When I'm buying cards, I want it to be a quick, smooth transaction that I can depend on to be completed. That's my goal with buying. I don't want to wait hours or even days before hearing back on a proposed sale.


  • Implementation — I think for it to be implemented correctly, there needs to be a couple things in place:

    1. There needs to be clear indication on both the sellers' profiles as well as in card listings which sellers have this option turned on and which don't. I don't want to have to wait until I'm checking out to finally find out it's going to be a delayed transaction.

    2. Additionally, there should be a filter for this setting, allowing those like me who want to avoid such sellers to not even waste our time looking at their listings, while also allowing those who prefer such sellers to shop exclusively from them.

    3. Finally, the current system (auto-processing sales) should be the default setting for new sellers; this new system should be optional.


  • Negative Feedback — First off, I agree with @AlmightySenator: Feedback for trades and for sales should be separate, since they measure completely different experiences. However, how would feedback for this new feature be grouped? Is it more like a sale or more like a trade?


    As to seller feedback: For sellers not using this feature, all negative feedback due to canceled sales, regardless of reason, is 100% warranted. As a buyer, it doesn't matter to me if the platform makes it difficult for you to stay on top of prices, or if you have a full-time job and this is hobby-selling, or if you sell on multiple platforms and have a hard time keeping your inventory up-to-date on all platforms. From a buyer's perspective, we see a certain quantity of cards at a certain price, so we should be able to buy that quantity at that price. If I get told I can't actually buy the card for X reason, that's the very essence of a negative experience. I want to be warned away from sellers who have a history of canceling orders.


  • Alternative — Something else to consider, either instead of or even in addition to the proposed feature, would be giving sellers a form to fill out their seller's terms, which would be displayed during checkout and would have to be agreed to before finalising. Currently they just put their terms on their profile, which not everyone will know to go look at. It's also not officially binding in any way as it now stands. But being presented during checkout, their terms would actually be known to exist (the buyer can't claim ignorance) and would be a binding part of the transaction (much like terms detailed in an eBay listing). These terms could then be taken into account during any disputes.

Last edited by meldon44 (2020-11-20 07:27:00)

Re: Token&promo imports, fixes and a "Request for Feedback" :)

Addendum to Implementation — 4) There needs to be an auto-generated seller rating for sellers using this option that shows their average response time (perhaps over multiple timeframes, like last 12 months, last 30 days, last week). Might not be a bad thing to implement for trades as well, but I think it's paramount for sales.

At first, I was going to say buyers should be able to leave negative feedback after X days of no response, but I can see how that could lead to unfair situations. Then I realized the main goal of this rating is to a) incentivize sellers to stay on top of their sales and manage them professionally and b) warn buyers away from sellers who don't. This can be accomplished through an automated website metric — you would query the sales database (for a specified seller in a specified date range), compare the date on which a sale is proposed and the date on which the seller accepts/rejects/responds, and average that data over the number of transactions during the queried time period. This would provide an objective and fair assessment of that seller's performance.

As I said, one of my main reasons for not wanting a "delayed sale" feature as a buyer is I don't want to be left in limbo for an indeterminate amount of time, waiting on the seller to respond. I'd rather pay a little extra and buy from someone where the transaction is processed quickly. However, if I can see on Deckbox that a given seller has an average response time of, say, 3 hours during the last week, I might decide that's an acceptable timeframe.

Last edited by meldon44 (2020-11-20 07:32:00)

Re: Token&promo imports, fixes and a "Request for Feedback" :)

AlmightySenator wrote:

From my experience, the bigger problem appears to be people who come to the site looking to buy spiked cards and then leave negative feedbacks when this happens. I've had around 140 orders placed, and 50 of them were people looking to buy spiked cards (resulting in 12 negative feedbacks).

I dont usually comment on stuff like this but this whole thing of sellers whining about people buying spiked cards is stupid. WHY is this the "bigger problem"? Who cares what there actual intent is for buying it. It doesnt affect you if they flip them or keep them for a deck. Your not the spiked card police! Are some of them buying 100 copies to flip? Sure. But who cares! Thats no different then people rummaging through pawn shops and garage sells and finding stuff of value to flip. No one rages on them. And I bet some of them are just freaking out because a card theyve been wanting to get for there deck or collection is going up so they panic buy at the lowest price they can find so they have it in there colection. Nothing shady going on there.

If someone happens to buy a card before you notice its gone up, good for them, they got a good deal, your loss. If you happen to catch a spike in time and adjust your price before anyone can buy you out, good for you, youll get yourself more money. Why should people be punished for finding good deals? If I go into a pawn shop would it be cool for them to refuse to sell me something because when I bring it to the checkout isle they look it up and find out its worth more now? Now THATS shady.

If Card Kingdom is the Walmart of the mtg world then you sellers are the garage sells. All of you admit you dont have the time or resources or manpower to keep up on card prices...cause your not Walmart. Your a one man/woman garage sell operation so when a buyer gives you $5 for a card that ends up being worth $20 now, just be happy you got your $5 garage sell price. You wouldnt have listed it in your garage sell for $5 if you werent happy for that price when you first listed it. If you want the benefits of being Walmart and getting best prices then you have to manage your inventory like Walmart with round the clock stocking and pricing updates.

And dont say mtg is different because prices swing up and down more than stuff at Walmart. Think of it like a black friday sell. If an employee at Walmart forgets to take down a sell sign and price for an item, to bad, they have to honor that price even though it just "spiked" back to its original price. You have to honor your prices to or you shouldnt be sellers. Get over your entitled attitudes. Your not entitled to more money just because a card spiked. Your entitled to the money someone paid you for a price you offered. Your problem if you didnt raise that price in time.

Also thank you sebi for all the hard work you do. Sorry you have to deal with so much whining on here.

Re: Token&promo imports, fixes and a "Request for Feedback" :)

As a buyer (and trader) I pretty much agree with MagicallyAddicted on that one.

That being said, adding the possibility for seller to disable "auto-accept" would be good for everyone.
I am not sure that I would buy often from a seller who always cancel sales for "spike" reasons.
But at least, that would prevent all the whining and the resulting discussions on out-of-date inventories and price.

If it does not represent that much to implement, you should probably do it. And this should remain optional, with the default option being "auto-accept".

My two cents...

Re: Token&promo imports, fixes and a "Request for Feedback" :)

Morgoth666 wrote:

...

Cool username, dude! I love the Silmarillion and history of Middle Earth.  big_smile


Sorry everyone.... Proceed.  wink

Last edited by meldon44 (2020-11-19 21:20:57)

Re: Token&promo imports, fixes and a "Request for Feedback" :)

I said this in the other other recent post about this topic already (https://deckbox.org/forum/viewtopic.php?id=31267). I would recommend checking this post, but I will reiterate a few things here.

First, sellers needs to be responsible for their own inventory. This includes if they have it in stock and the price they sell it at. There should be no reason the hold up a sale ever because the seller should have the item in stock and at a price they want to sell it at already. The main issue is in regards to price spikes. This is honestly irrelevant. If I put a card up for sale for $20 that is the price I am willing to sell it for. Just because the price spikes on TCG Player doesn't change the fact that I was happy with selling it for $20 at the time. While I understand there can be a lot of frustration around "lost revenue" it is my responsibility to keep and eye on prices and change accordingly. You are punishing the buyer for the sins of the seller which is not the situation you want if you are selling and not what you want if you are collecting a portion of the sale.

It is a social contract that is agreed upon when a seller states a price and a buyer accept the price. At least in this country if a seller (or any service for that matter) would advertise a price and they refuse to honor that price is actually ILLEGAL. If you are a contractor and you agree to do some renovations on a house for $20,000 and then at a later date you decided that you won't finish the renovations unless the homeowner agrees for another $10,000, you will be sued and lose. If a big box store advertises a refrigerator for sale for $750 and you go to the store and find out it is actually $2000, that big box store is legally liable to sell it to you for the advertised price (It is also the reason why rain checks exist. If a business offers something for sale and they run out of stock on it they still have to honor the price they have advertised). If you agree to paint the chicken coop for a hot meal and you take the meal and not paint the chicken coop you are liable for damage for not fulfilling your end of this social contract. No paper necessary.

Remember the spike you are seeing is because of spikes on other websites. Deckbox is not tied to those websites and thus shouldn't be beholden to their prices. For instance if a seller has a card that no one wanted for years on TCG and all of a sudden a nice combo is discovered and the prices spikes, undoubtedly that card would have been swallowed up in the buying that lead to the price spike. So you could have a seller here and a seller on TCG both have a card for $1 when they go to work at 8 am and when they get home each party gets a notification that there is a sale. TCG person now ships of his card like a good seller would. Deckbox person now goes to TCGplayer sees the price is now $10 and cancels the sale. This is poor behavior. If the TCG person would try to do the same thing and just relist the card for $10 they will get complains and I would guarantee they would get booted off TCGplayer because their bad behavior is now effecting the perception of the business.

And the biggest thing for which you might be most interested in. If you give people the ability to put up a card for a price and they pause the sale so the seller can check TCGplayer for their current price that means I have no reason to buy form deckbox ever. Lets look at this scenario:

I see a card I like and want to play with and I got to TCG player and see it is a $6 card. So I come over to deckbox and see someone selling it for $5. I am happy because I am getting a $1 discount on this card and I will happily buy from deckbox. Now lets say there is a pause in the buying process and the seller doesn't respond in 2 days and in that time the card becomes the center of some large combo and the price spikes to $10. Now the seller comes on and sees the price on TCG is $10 and cancels the sale because "the card has spiked." Now if I want to get this card I wanted to play with I would be forced to go to TCG and buy it for $10.

Overall this scenario is not out of the realm of possibility, and what it does it A) makes me the me unhappy because the seller is flat out not honoring their side of the social contract B) forces me to buy a card after a spike that I had no knowledge of when I even started trying C) casts a poor light on the seller and the system that allows it to happen and D) creates just more room for anguish for the customer. I could have just bought the card from TCG for $6 and been happy and playing with my card. And if that is the case why am I ever going to come to deckbox since now I have proof of them not being a fair place to do business.

I would never buy from deckbox if this was a case. So you end up enabling a scenario where one hand a single person gets upset because they perceive they lost money dives business to other sites causing every seller on deckbox to potentially lose a future sales and the site in general not getting the revenue it could get. Or on the other hand you have sellers honor their commitment. And before you say it is only one person, sure it is, until it happens to the next person and the next person and eventually the entire site gets the reputation and no one shops here.

Last edited by ic0n67 (2020-11-19 23:00:18)

Re: Token&promo imports, fixes and a "Request for Feedback" :)

I personally have only purchased through this site once but it was a positive experience.

I like the idea.  At my LGS they price the cards on the sleeve but double check prices before the transaction.  It is disappointing when a card I like has spiked but then both parties are educated and can come to an agreement.  I see this as a positive improvement.  I have had many positive trading experiences on this site and adding a bit more of the trading back and forth to the purchase process would be a positive for me.   

I have been hesitant to purchase cards primarily because most sellers have notes about the right to cancel etc. and so I don't know what the price really is.   This gives the seller a chance to verify condition and edition and both parties to come to an agreement. 

Thanks for all the hard work you are putting into this site!

Re: Token&promo imports, fixes and a "Request for Feedback" :)

I don't like the auto-accept thing. 

As others have said, this is benefits the seller and is only a negative to the buyer.

Earlier this year I was in the market for some Chrome Mox for my legacy deck.  I was going to my LGS's and watching the normal sites to get some at a decent price.  When I saw that the stock was getting dangerously low, I had to pull the trigger because I was afraid of price memory and with CoVid just starting to affect things I knew that stock would not be replenished.

I basically got in at $7 more than I wanted to pay, but if I had waited 1 or 2 days I would have paid double. 

The difference between the $47 card and the $80 card is huge and I was able to buy the card at the advertised price at TCG.

Re: Token&promo imports, fixes and a "Request for Feedback" :)

Thanks for the reminder about the previous thread, ic0n67. Posted link in OP now. (https://deckbox.org/forum/viewtopic.php?id=31267)

Re: Token&promo imports, fixes and a "Request for Feedback" :)

Since the concept of the flow of propose-discuss-accept-finalize is actually closer to a trade than an order, perhaps an idea that would communicate this is a more acceptable form would be to fold this feature into trades instead of orders.

In this scenario the trades would be expanded such that:
- multiple prices will be shown for each card ("seller price", "market price", and I would like to add pricing in wishlists as well which would act like "buyer/buylist price")
- both parties can discuss as normal in a trade
- at the end of the trade, one party can "pay for the difference" in the trade, which would attach an order for the agreed upon amount

It sounds at first glance as possibly too complex and confusing especially at the beginning and for new users, but perhaps there is a nice U.I. solution to make it understandable and also flexible at the same time...

Re: Token&promo imports, fixes and a "Request for Feedback" :)

asrttyoxo wrote:

I don't like the auto-accept thing.

I presume you meant the proposal to NOT auto-accept transactions? The current system IS an "auto-accept thing". I'm not trying to be picky with your word usage; I'm just wanting to make sure I understand you correctly, since I'm citing your support below.

-------------------------------------------

It seems fairly clear that most people like the idea of the option being available, but also the ability to avoid that type of sale experience if they don't prefer it. I think my above points under "Implementation" are particularly key here. Users like me, @ic0n67, and @asrttyoxo need to see a clear indication as we're browsing available cards that a particular seller has elected to enforce "delayed sales" (or whatever they'll be called). Since none of us like that type of buying experience, we can easily see who uses it and avoid them. Less necessary but still a convenient feature would be a filter to completely remove such sellers from marketplace searches.

However, there'll be times when the lowest priced sellers all use this feature, and users like me et al. might be tempted to buy from them. A way to make that decision a lot more palatable would be that "response time" metric I described earlier. If a seller's average response time is 30 hours.... no way, I won't buy from them. But if their response time is 3 hours.... sure, I'll risk it at that price.

-------------------------------------------

RE: Spiked cards — @ic0n67 and @MagicallyAddicted hit the nail on the head when they said (paraphrase), "If you were happy to list a card for $5 yesterday, you should be happy with selling it for $5 today, even if it's worth $20 tomorrow."

I'll just leave you with this additional thought: How would you, sellers, like the reverse? Say a reprint of an older under-printed card gets announced one morning, and prices immediately begin to drop as people panic-sell their copies. But just like with spikes, you miss this memo and still have it listed on Deckbox for the old price. Now say Timmy purchases the card from you that same morning, but later that night, you get a message from him asking to cancel his order for a refund, because he just now saw that it was being reprinted and the price was dropping. Would you be happy with that buyer canceling on you? No.

A completed sale is a completed sale, and cancellations/refunds should only happen for much better reasons than "oh no, the price fluctuated since I last looked".

Re: Token&promo imports, fixes and a "Request for Feedback" :)

sebi wrote:

Since the concept of the flow of propose-discuss-accept-finalize is actually closer to a trade than an order, perhaps an idea that would communicate this is a more acceptable form would be to fold this feature into trades instead of orders.

I like this idea better than it being considered a "sale". I had actually proposed that in the older post. But I think the big question that'll be on many people's mind is this: How will this interact with seller profiles?

Obviously, a purpose of Deckbox is to be a marketplace that also makes the site some revenue. To that end, you collect a percent of the money exchanged in a buyer-seller transaction. Would these types of transactions also be subject to that fee? If so, will users be required to create a seller account in order to do ANY trading? Or would all users get to trade cards like normal, just as they do now, while the ability to add a money component into the trade proposal be restricted to users with seller accounts?


sebi wrote:

It sounds at first glance as possibly too complex and confusing especially at the beginning and for new users, but perhaps there is a nice U.I. solution to make it understandable and also flexible at the same time...

UI will be key, yes, but I don't think the concept itself is confusing. "Here's my 5 cards worth $100 based on xyz pricing, plus a $20 bill, for your 6 cards worth $120 based on that same pricing." Makes complete sense to me. Just need a very clear UI.

Re: Token&promo imports, fixes and a "Request for Feedback" :)

meldon44 wrote:

I had actually proposed that in the older post. But I think the big question that'll be on many people's mind is this: How will this interact with seller profiles?

Ah, sorry, missed it, seems I did not read all the posts attentively enough.

It would only require a seller account if you want to receive money. Whenever you stand to receive money from somewhere and you do not have an attached verified paypal account (into which the money would go), you will be prompted to create a "seller account".

Re: Token&promo imports, fixes and a "Request for Feedback" :)

sebi wrote:

Ah, sorry, missed it, seems I did not read all the posts attentively enough.

No problem. It was admittedly a wall of text (an issue I tend to have.....).


sebi wrote:

It would only require a seller account if you want to receive money. Whenever you stand to receive money from somewhere and you do not have an attached verified paypal account (into which the money would go), you will be prompted to create a "seller account".

Will users be able to propose money trades to non-sellers, and when that other user tries to move forward with the trade, they'll be prompted to create the seller account? Or will users only be able to propose money trades to already established sellers?

Re: Token&promo imports, fixes and a "Request for Feedback" :)

meldon44 wrote:

No problem. It was admittedly a wall of text (an issue I tend to have.....).

And i'm reading things diagonally hoping my brain will focus on the important bits (an issue I tend to have... big_smile).

meldon44 wrote:

Will users be able to propose money trades to non-sellers, and when that other user tries to move forward with the trade, they'll be prompted to create the seller account? Or will users only be able to propose money trades to already established sellers?

I didn't think too much about the ui&flow yet, but just as an initial idea: you'd just make a trade as you can now, and at the bottom of the card list you can add an "Extra sum to be paid <sum><currency>", that can be edited by both parties as if it were an "extra card" or something like that. If the person that is to receive that sum wants to accept the trade and does not have a seller account he will first be offered a button to go create one before he can accept (or propose).

Re: Token&promo imports, fixes and a "Request for Feedback" :)

Nothing worse than having to negotiate with a seller for the listed price. I feel it would destroy DeckBox as a sales platform if people couldn't just load up a cart and buy straight away in real time. Sometimes a lot of time is put into finding the best prices on a lot and it's a real slap in the face when the order can't be fulfilled as listed. I've got a feel for some sellers and know what to expect from some those sellers and reading profiles goes a long way but it isn't as streamlined as it could be.

Nothing worse for a casual seller or one juggling their entire stock over multiple platforms or to have someone snipe a playset of a card that just spiked 900% if the seller doesn't or can't check prices often enough; feels like theft sometimes when the only card a buyer gets from the seller and it's tops on the list of MTG GFish's Mover's and Shakers. Auto pricing is a bit of a mess because the name parsing likely omits a goodly portion of cards, doesn't account for conditions and there is some lag with getting a TCG price into DeckBox - it really takes a feel and a deep knowledge and all the new variants are making prices a tad obfuscated.

Solution
Toggle a switch for sellers and clearly indicate with an icon or a column on the marketplace / card listing page indicating what type of seller they/we are.

A) A real time seller that sells as priced tagged as is all the time every time.
OR
B) A discuss before you buy/check with me first type of seller.

You could even implement a toggle when searching for cards to filter sellers based on their seller type (A or B) to search the marketplace for buyers.

I'm a buyer, seller and trader. Lovin' the churn. In the here and now I'd fall into the A) seller slot but it would be super sweet to flip a toggle to convert to a B) seller to force a discussion like a trade workflow --- as an option when life gets busy or I'm wheeling cards at my LGS rather than have to go to full vacation mode and close up shop.

Last edited by FastTadpole (2020-11-20 10:13:32)

│ PROFILE │ Tradelist │ Wishlist │

FastTadpole's Website

Re: Token&promo imports, fixes and a "Request for Feedback" :)

BOOM wrote:

At my LGS they price the cards on the sleeve but double check prices before the transaction.  It is disappointing when a card I like has spiked but then both parties are educated and can come to an agreement.  I see this as a positive improvement.

I don't know the consumer laws in Canada, but I assume, as with most things, it is better in Canada than the US. In the US this is illegal. If there is a price marked on it they have to honor the price marked on it. They can offer it to you at a lower price to match another store/website's price, but they can't ever raise it at point of sale.

Re: Token&promo imports, fixes and a "Request for Feedback" :)

I will just say "sniping" has only happened once to me on here. It was the flagstones of trokair which i knew I already made a couple bucks on. I think there should be an option to automatically update pricing to a certain % daily without manually going in and updating our inventories. Maybe have an option to mark certain cards as being left out of the automatic pricing.

Re: Token&promo imports, fixes and a "Request for Feedback" :)

hawkdroid wrote:

I think there should be an option to automatically update pricing to a certain % daily without manually going in and updating our inventories.

A certain % of what? Deckbox's listed market prices? The main issue, if I understand correctly, is that Deckbox's prices don't update quickly enough. So anything based on them won't update either, meaning sniping will still be easy.

I do agree that some mass pricing features would probably benefit sellers regardless, and I'm not saying they shouldn't be implemented. They just won't fix the issue most sellers seem to be concerned about.

Re: Token&promo imports, fixes and a "Request for Feedback" :)

For the price issue, I am working on bringing back multiple pricing sources, cardmarket for EU folks, tcgplayer and card kingdom for USD prices.

Re: Token&promo imports, fixes and a "Request for Feedback" :)

As someone who has bought and sold on here (mostly sold) and does not much anymore, I would like the change to allowing the seller to approve the sale very much like we do with trades. I have a full time job and family and simply cannot watch the constant spikes in magic card prices. Im not a store and do not intend to be one either. I generally sell cards so I can buy others I need for decks. Thanks for considering this change, as I do think overall having it in place will lead to far less complaints.