TOPIC: Poll: Auction Feedback - mechanics

Frankly, I find the armband more disturbing than anything and it sort of proves the point. As far as I've got about the backstory, all of you agreed to not bid on it because someone wanted to pick it up for Lesi, no? If that's the case and without competition from just a few core people what we get is a bid of 40 GP winning, then the auction is obviously not serving a wide group of people. Instead it's serving a small minority.<br /><br />IF all you want is a gold sink for the very richest among us, then you might as well pitch something to them directly. Dump the auction since it just creates more clutter. Let those few richie riches get some sort of monster sink like getting their name up on some plaque in the tavern a la orphan's fund or let them buy a 'lord/lady' title or whatever. That requires far less overhead, thought, and volunteer hours. After all, i'm not sure something really qualifies as a fun tavern activity if only a small handful of people participate. As for getting people a cool token, that's covered through combos.

"all of you" is the key part of your statement Henwy...I think maybe there were 7-10 of us talking up this "plan" as a gesture of appreciation.  Problem was many of us had already used up our one bid and we did not pool gold or have a single person set to go to make any sort of bid.  (come to think of it - I bet most of us had used up our single WIN...)<br /><br />So if 7-10 of us is monopolizing the system, sorry - it was more like the group was pooling gold to give to Heidi to bid on the item - if you want to look at it this way.  <br /><br />Also the extra bonus of broadcasting who was bidding on what - it allowed people to consider going head to head with someone OR consider moving their "one chance to bid" on something to something that was more likely to be in a reasonable range (or that person's range).  In my book that is being considerate to others...not price fixing or cabal-ish...<br /><br />Maybe I am missing your point - but I think Raven summed it up very well - it was a fun activity that hit its goals admirably.

<br />Also the extra bonus of broadcasting who was bidding on what - it allowed people to consider going head to head with someone OR consider moving their "one chance to bid" on something to something that was more likely to be in a reasonable range (or that person's range).  In my book that is being considerate to others...not price fixing or cabal-ish...<br />

<br /><br /><br />I'm going to chime in here and agree with Gary. Pre-auction discussion about bidding is a courtesy (though at times it can lead to cartel-like behavior).<br /><br />The closest personal analogy I can come up with is on eBay. Sometimes I might be thinking about bidding on an item but then I notice that a friend of mine has already placed a bid. I usually make a courtesy call to let them know that I am interested in bidding. At this time, it is also helpful to let each other know if one of us really really wants it, or if it's just a "nice if I can get it, no big deal if I don't." If one person really wants it and the other doesn't, then the other will usually back off. (Though if both of us really want it, then anything's fair game!). I mean, if you know your friend really wants something and you don't, it doesn't make sense for you to screw him over by continuously upping the bid.<br /><br />This can be especially relevant when it comes to people with varying resource levels (token-affluent vs. token-poor in True Dungeon). If someone who is token-poor really wants an artisan token and is bidding 1000 GP (all that he or she has) his/her token-affluent friend might end up bidding 10,000 GP - not because he/she really wants to, but just to get rid of gold. Certainly the guy bidding 10,000 GP has the right to do so, and if he wins, he can definitely keep the artisan token. But there's also nothing wrong with the token-affluent guy realizing that, even though he could win the auction, the artisan token has more sentimental value for someone else and thus, refrains from bidding. (A similar situation to what apparantly happened with Raven). Another thing that's happened to me before, is that I decide that I will not bid against my friend (who has already put in his max bid). However, if a third party exceeds my friend's bid, then I'll enter a bid (since I won't be bidding against my friend at that point). <br /><br />Since TD has a significant "community atmosphere," I think that coordinating bidding only helps perpetuate this. Spur of the moment bidding can generate resentment and disgruntlement amongst friends. There's nothing quite as annoying as when a "friend" snipes in on an auction when he/she knows you really wanted the item! (It would be okay if they told you beforehand that they might also bid, but when it comes out of nowhere it can be a bit disconcerting!).<br /><br />I do agree that there is a line that, when crossed, leads to exclusionary cartel-like behavior. For example, I'd be worried if we saw a group of players who realized, "well, we could all bid on these four items and they would each go for 10,000 each. But if each of us only bids for one of them, they'd go for 2,000 each, so we'll each save 8,000. Now, if the first three items each go for 2,000, like planned, and then someone outside our group starts bidding on the 4th item, then we can pool together our resources - remember, we each "saved" 8,000, in order to make sure each of us gets their item." So *this* would be kind of disturbing, when you have collaboration on bid-fixing and also the sharing of resources to exclude anyone else. But it doesn't seem like this was the sort of thing that was happening this time...

<br /> So *this* would be kind of disturbing, when you have collaboration on bid-fixing and also the sharing of resources to exclude anyone else. But it doesn't seem like this was the sort of thing that was happening this time...<br />

<br /><br />I think you really described that well, Incognito!<br />Co-ordinated bidding is one thing when it's being done to deliberately screw others over, and another when it's being done to help others.

People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the<br />conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public.<br /><br />- Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations Volume One<br /><br />Luckily, TD dosen't have its own branch of the security and exchange commission so you're probaly all safe.

"Life is like a box of chocolates"...and "Stupid is as stupid does."<br /><br />Forrest Gump.

<br />Luckily, TD dosen't have its own branch of the security and exchange commission so you're probaly all safe.<br />

<br /><br />Don't be so sure about that! We're watching you, always watching!

Hey - that is a quote from Monster's Inc.!

<br />Hey - that is a quote from Monster's Inc.!<br />

<br /><br />We had Monsters Incorporated dissolved and their CEO jailed. He was trading insider knowledge of monster inhabited closets for kick-backs in the form of halloween candy and comic books. Their assets, including quotes, were seized by the SEC, and now are ours to use as we see fit.

*in panic* Which CEO?<br /><br />Please tell me you mean Henry J. Waternoose, who is encarcerated for other crimes. And not my dear James P. Sullivan! Anything but my dear Sulley!<br />*begins to hyperventilate*

We are not at liberty to reveal the name of the felon. Suffice to say, we needed more than one set of shackles due to his many crab-like legs. He kept screaming about something about his family owning Monsters Incorporated for generations, and how he would take over the SEC too.<br /><br />Fool. Does he honestly think we wouldn't see that coming and take action to stop it?

*breathes a sigh of relief knowing her beloved blue and purple monster is safe*