TOPIC: Guiding Principles for Auction Queue List?

Daniel White wrote:
My hope is that people like Ral and Derg don't get sandbagged by some third party because they're being courteous to me or Azzy, even without a formal queue. If folks start behaving that way because of their "freedom to run an auction whenever," that'd be a real shame. I don't really want to see people get burned because they're being courteous and considerate.

It's worth mentioning that the "third party" could be someone who has been running auctions or a store for years and would perhaps rightly feel that they have as much right as any of us to run their auction. And for what it's worth, other people are currently making auction plans that are not specifically mentioned.

No one who is suggesting or supporting some kind of public auction planning or queue is doing so with any ill-will. I think we all are trying to share, while keeping the conversation about it transparent.

Thanks Dan, for starting the conversation. Wherever it ends up, I think it's good that it was discussed.

I like concurrent auctions as a bidder because it's very interesting to watch and I feel like I have a chance to score even better deals.

Dergidan wrote:

Daniel White wrote:
My hope is that people like Ral and Derg don't get sandbagged by some third party because they're being courteous to me or Azzy, even without a formal queue. If folks start behaving that way because of their "freedom to run an auction whenever," that'd be a real shame. I don't really want to see people get burned because they're being courteous and considerate.

It's worth mentioning that the "third party" could be someone who has been running auctions or a store for years and would perhaps rightly feel that they have as much right as any of us to run their auction. And for what it's worth, other people are currently making auction plans that are not specifically mentioned.

No one who is suggesting or supporting some kind of public auction planning or queue is doing so with any ill-will. I think we all are trying to share, while keeping the conversation about it transparent.

Thanks Dan, for starting the conversation. Wherever it ends up, I think it's good that it was discussed.

I think the core assumption of this entire debate is that having concurrent auctions running at the same time is a bad thing. I personally don't think that it is. Even if it results in one or more auctions not going to funding, it gives more people the opportunity to run auctions and more options for buyers to have. Maybe before having a debate on rules to prevent having multiple auctions running at the same time, a better debate should be whether having multiple auctions running concurrently is a problem at all.

Mike Steele wrote: I think the core assumption of this entire debate is that having concurrent auctions running at the same time is a bad thing. I personally don't think that it is.

Maybe you're right, and maybe we should try it. Were there successful concurrent auctions last year? I'd be willing to run concurrent with someone else if we aren't both doing bags, but other than that I'm open. That of course depends on having another willing to share the stage so-to-speak.

Does anyone know how many successful Onyx auctions there were last year?

I've been thinking of trying a super-condensed, non onyx auction, so I'd be happy to run one concurrently with you as an experiment. If it doesn't work it's not a huge deal to me...I think it'd be fun to do, but I don't have anything really riding on its success.

I like the idea of the queue list and maybe separate out the different formats of the auctions. I ran a super-condensed non-onyx auction last year successfully and looking forward to doing it again this year but I'm always waiting until others have finished to not step on toes (we are all a family here). So would like to add my name to the queue idea and coordinate with everyone in that group to help each other out.

Daniel White wrote: My hope is that people like Ral and Derg don't get sandbagged by some third party because they're being courteous to me or Azzy, even without a formal queue. If folks start behaving that way because of their "freedom to run an auction whenever," that'd be a real shame. I don't really want to see people get burned because they're being courteous and considerate.

Whereas I think it would be "a shame" if a group of forumites, absent any convincing argument or evidence that a set of proposed norms around auctions would benefit buyers, True Dungeon, or the community, began to characterize other forumites who happen to disagree with them as being discourteous, inconsiderate sandbaggers who are "burning" other people.

Especially if there had been several years of unproblematic auctions without these norms.

If you want to run an auction: do it.

If you want to be assured your auction will be the only one running: sorry, that's not up to you.

If you have convinced yourself it would be bad to run an auction while another one is going concurrently: ask yourself why you think this is so - and ask yourself if you have ever heard a buyer, or other interested party, complain in the past about concurrent auctions.

It seems like we're settling back on the status quo system which seems to basically boil down to Wheaton's Law.

Based on the conversation so far, I'll chat with Azzy, Raly, and Kermitking about when I'll start my listing. I mention them specifically because we have already had some conversations about overlapping or not with each other. I don't plan to run another auction during preorders if my first is successfully funded, and I may or may not go fixed-price. I need to do some math. For what it's worth.

I really think the whole point of this thread was some of us trying to be considerate of others. Maybe it wasn't necessary. It's probably better for bidders to have competition, unless that competition causes multiple failed auctions instead of subsequent successful ones.

I'm not suggesting that those who have a different opinion are somehow "bad" or wrong, just that the intent here was not to limit anyone but rather to be nice to each other. Again, maybe it isn't necessary.

Dergidan wrote: It seems like we're settling back on the status quo system which seems to basically boil down to Wheaton's Law.

Based on the conversation so far, I'll chat with Azzy, Raly, and Kermitking about when I'll start my listing. I don't plan to run another during preorders if my first is successfully funded, and I may or may not go fixed-price. I need to do some math.

I have an alternative proposal:

Why don't Azzy, Raly, Kermitking, and yourself all start and auction today - and see what happens?

You might be pleasantly surprised.

And, if it goes badly, you'll have generated some decent evidence for your hypothesis that concurrent auctions are bad.

Matthew Hayward wrote: Whereas I think it would be "a shame" if a group of forumites, absent any convincing argument or evidence that a set of proposed norms around auctions would benefit buyers, True Dungeon, or the community, began to characterize other forumites who happen to disagree with them as being discourteous, inconsiderate sandbaggers who are "burning" other people.

Please be nice. I did not say those things about you or other people who disagree with me. I have been very polite and don't feel I deserve what you said.

Thanks,

Dan

Matthew Hayward wrote: Especially if there had been several years of unproblematic auctions without these norms.

Not everyone would characterize last year's auctions, of which you ran the lion's share (and ran very well, I'd say), as "unproblematic." No dispute that you're an excellent auctioneer, but it does kind of shut out other folks when one person is running so many of the auctions. I do appreciate, though, that you've stepped back a bit this year and given other folks a chance to step up. Thanks for doing that.

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Dergidan wrote: It seems like we're settling back on the status quo system which seems to basically boil down to Wheaton's Law.

Based on the conversation so far, I'll chat with Azzy, Raly, and Kermitking about when I'll start my listing. I don't plan to run another during preorders if my first is successfully funded, and I may or may not go fixed-price. I need to do some math.

I have an alternative proposal:

Why don't Azzy, Raly, Kermitking, and yourself all start and auction today - and see what happens?

You might be pleasantly surprised.

And, if it goes badly, you'll have generated some decent evidence for your hypothesis that concurrent auctions are bad.

That may well be what some of us decide to do.

I'm not implying anyone is wrong on any side of this conversation.

This started out with good intentions and is quickly starting to suck the fun out of the whole process. Maybe it's best to just list when I'm ready and let the market work itself out. I chose to reach out to others in order to generate and maintain good will between us, that is all. I'm sure Dan's initial post had the same intention.