TOPIC: Guiding Principles for Auction Queue List?

Daniel White wrote:

Matthew Hayward 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.

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

I've restored my text you quoted to its original context.

Perhaps we're in violent agreement?

Let's make this simple:

• Suppose you and the people you mention above set up a queue of auctions in order according to the guidelines you've advocated for.
• Then one of the people on the list starts an auction under the guidelines you've advocated for.
• Then suppose one hour later another auctioneer who is not part of your queue, but is aware of it - and disagrees that those policies benefit buyers, true dungeon, or the community, begins a similar auction.

Under those circumstances, according to your judgement, would the second auctioneer be acting in a way that is:

• Discourteous to the other auctioneer?
• Inconsiderate to the other auctioneer?
• Sandbagging the other auctioneer in a way that might cause them to get burned?

?

For me, I see nothing at all wrong with starting a second auction in those circumstances.

Until such time as someone puts forward convincing evidence that multiple concurrent auctions are bad for buyers, True Dungeon, or the community, I would reject any effort to censure, impute ill motive, imply or claim the second auctioneer is causing negative effects (such as preventing others from running auctions, or that they are not behaving in a nice, considerate, courteous fashion).

To maybe turn down the heat a bit, let me also say:

1. I respect the motives of the people who formed this proposal, as it seemed to be looking for a way to communicate or coordinate better.

2. I think it would be cool for this group to go ahead with a slightly modified idea, just say something like:

'We're Midas' Guild of Auctioneers, here are our policies, here are why we think they are good for you the buyer, and here is how to join the guild if you think you'd like to be an auctioneer who follows our policies."

Then auctioneers could opt into this system, and buyers could make up their own mind if the want to support auctions run under this set of policies or not.

The difference here is that it avoids the implication that these are rules that ought to be followed by all auctioneers (at least if they are nice, considerate people), which I believe would eliminate the pushback this proposal has received so far.

3. It makes me sad to think people have been sitting on the sidelines waiting to run an auction out of a fear that jumping in would make them a jerk or something. I would just say it would never occur to me to think negatively of an auctioneer or token offering based on it's concurrency with other offers - and I know I'm not alone in that.

I will say that I have definitely waited on the sidelines to start an auction, of of both
1. Fear of being perceived as a jerk for not waiting
2. Fear of both auctions failing due to their concurrent nature.

While there is no evidence that #2 would happen, I do believe this thread has shown that many consider #1 a real possibility.
I will also say that I, and others, consider #2 a real possibility. So much so that I received a request to delay my auction from someone, and in the interests of #1, I did so.

Whether #2 is a real possibility or not, if it is correct, both auctions failing would be bad for both buyers and TD. Buyers in that they don't get their tokens, TD in that they aren't sold. I suppose there is only 1 way to find out.

Matthew Hayward wrote: To maybe turn down the heat a bit, let me also say:

1. I respect the motives of the people who formed this proposal, as it seemed to be looking for a way to communicate or coordinate better.

2. I think it would be cool for this group to go ahead with a slightly modified idea, just say something like:

'We're Midas' Guild of Auctioneers, here are our policies, here are why we think they are good for you the buyer, and here is how to join the guild if you think you'd like to be an auctioneer who follows our policies."

Then auctioneers could opt into this system, and buyers could make up their own mind if the want to support auctions run under this set of policies or not.

The difference here is that it avoids the implication that these are rules that ought to be followed by all auctioneers (at least if they are nice, considerate people), which I believe would eliminate the pushback this proposal has received so far.

3. It makes me sad to think people have been sitting on the sidelines waiting to run an auction out of a fear that jumping in would make them a jerk or something. I would just say it would never occur to me to think negatively of an auctioneer or token offering based on it's concurrency with other offers - and I know I'm not alone in that.

Even that would concern me. Just the existence of some sort of guild of people doing auctions might make people reluctant to do auctions outside of that guild, or result in people in the guild having negative reactions to anyone outside of the guild running an auction.

I do think that the motivations of those proposing this idea were good. I just think placing restrictions on who can run auctions and when they can do it is unnecessary and would have negative unintended consequences.

Matthew Hayward wrote: In the last 90 days alone these following auctions have run concurrently, and without public controversy or complaint:

~September 15th - September 19th truedungeon.com/forum?view=topic&catid=584&id=251827#384918
~September 15th - September 16th truedungeon.com/forum?view=topic&catid=584&id=251801&start=0
~September 17th - September 21st truedungeon.com/forum?view=topic&catid=584&id=251843&start=0
~September 21st - September 28th truedungeon.com/forum?view=topic&catid=584&id=251865
(It's a little hard for me to get exact dates due to the forums way of aging threads with notices like "One month and 3 weeks ago").

I definitely get that the way TD forums formats their dates can be a challenge, but the above four auctions did not overlap. The first ended before the second (mine) began. Mine ran Sept 12-15, and the third started a day or two later.

I recognize that I've only been on the forums for about two years, but I have long been under the impression that etiquette was such that only one auction ran at a time. This made sense to me for reasons others have cited, so I didn't question it. I always reach out to anyone currently running an auction to ask if they'd be comfortable with me running one after, in part because many times I have been told others contacted them first which I heeded. Last year this led to me not running a successful auction in the Fall, which was unfortunate as I was quite excited to try one.

I feel like what Dan is trying to do is enable those that both tend toward the 'one auction at a time' philosophy and the desire to not accidentally prevent others from doing the same an easier way to communicate with current and hopeful auctioneers.

Obviously opinions differ (what a novelty for the forums!), but hopefully all realize we all want what's best for True Dungeon and the community.

Wade Schwendemann (Dr. Uid) wrote: I will say that I have definitely waited on the sidelines to start an auction, of of both
1. Fear of being perceived as a jerk for not waiting
2. Fear of both auctions failing due to their concurrent nature.

While there is no evidence that #2 would happen, I do believe this thread has shown that many consider #1 a real possibility.
I will also say that I, and others, consider #2 a real possibility. So much so that I received a request to delay my auction from someone, and in the interests of #1, I did so.

Whether #2 is a real possibility or not, if it is correct, both auctions failing would be bad for both buyers and TD. Buyers in that they don't get their tokens, TD in that they aren't sold. I suppose there is only 1 way to find out.

Fear leads us astray, we make decisions that are untrue to our own beliefs. Fear not, and everything will be okay.

Just don’t set it up to end the same day the same way.

All I know is that if we start running multiple concurrent auctions, I'm going to be super annoyed when I "win" my auction, and save five whole dollars on the item, and then it turns out that four or five other people back out of their sales because they were bidding on the same thing in two different auctions, so my "win" turns into another unfunded where I receive nothing.

I am not purchasing anything when there are clearly competing auctions. The whole concept of "competing" means the same customers being pulled into both. And most buyers, if bidding on the same token in two separate auctions, are not doing it because they intend to purchase two copies. They're doing it because they intend to back out of the sale for whichever one went for the higher price.

You always have the option of buying from Trent or Kirk or one of the other stores when they have 2021 inventory.

There is a risk of failure to fund with any of these group purchases regardless of the format. That's exactly why auctioneers and sellers don't take any payment until the purchase is guaranteed to be made.

If you want 100% sure thing, there are Token stores.

It would also be perfectly reasonable to bid on the same item in two places. For example, I bid on a Wish ring in Auction A. I am outbid. I then go bid on a Wish Ring in Auction B. Nothing wrong with that at all.

The problem you describe would only happen if someone won the same item in two places, and I would hope that that isn't much of a risk. I've double-bid like that before on eBay, knowing full well that I might be on the hook to buy two of something. Once, I did win both. I paid for both. It was on me.

Ultimately, if you don't trust the auction or the store, you have every right not to buy from there.

I can say this. If an auction ends someone retracts their bid, I would have a very hard time ever accepting a bid from that person again.

Retracting a bid before an auction goes final (within reason) doesn't bother me so much.

Everyone's tolerance is likely to vary.

i read just enough (and no where near all, or even a quarter) of this thread. lets be honest. you can not make rules/guidelines to force folks to play nice... or someone's perception of nice and fair.

i didn't realize that we had an issue on the forums that was so bad, we needed to even have this type of discussion. i am speaking from a position of ignorance of the issue though.

all of this said, does the auctions i do factor into this conversation?

smakdown wrote: all of this said, does the auctions i do factor into this conversation?

Nope.