- This topic has 86 replies, 18 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
there are a lot of artists and stores that are watching these sites for their products to be shared and ppl are losing their store accounts and so other accounts it's not to hard to figure out who is sharing stuff when they are the only person that has bought said item or items and it goes into the wind and it don't matter if u wait a week or year some times your the only person that could has purchased said item , items.
Some fillers won't share with people who offer less than 500 points.
Some fillers won't share with people who they feel slighted them in earlier transactions.
Some fillers share with people who are sharers themselves.There are more reasons for limited/selective (wouldn't call it private) sharing I'm sure. Most of the actual private sharing on this site is done via PM's between members who have formed into their own groups.
The only way that I can see purchases being a problem is if the sellers actually implement DRM of some sort and tag the files downloaded from the stores. Banning a user from the stores is obviously not taken without good proof, and "this user bought my item a week before it went up on sharing sites" isn't close to being good evidence, unless you do something like buy their entire catalog and leak it right away.
In any case, it appears that you are free to continue using the forums the old way, if that ends up being problematic for you for any reason. From the responses in this thread however, it appears that most people will prefer the requests system and most of the request bounty will end up in the requests system instead.
Rank:
I understand what you are saying. For the larger sites (Render/RendO/Daz) most of their sales take place in the first couple of weeks an item is for sale, then things taper off drastically.
Its the smaller sites, that are more niche, with smaller sellers where this really runs a risk. If you buy something from a like a Booth.pm seller that makes toilet brush props, and post it on the blog the next day, you might be running a pretty big risk.
Whether or not the new system increases or decreases the amount of items that are posted remains to be seen. What we know is, it will make the requesting and bounty fulfilling functions of the site a lot cleaner which, in and of itself, is a huge win.
Currently, the posting of assets to the blog is a weak link, because, there is not much incentive for the asset filler. If I am doing private fulfill, that is, trading points for assets within a bounty thread, that is where most of my point generation comes from, and I really only need to upload it to ONE place to satisfy the requesters. MOST folks offer between 500-1000 points per asset... so fulfilling within thread might net you 10K+ points. At 25 points per download, you'd need 400 people to download from the blog to get you the same amount.
That's why I was proposing that somebody posting to the blog could get 200-500 points PER hosting site they linked it to. That way, a asset filler could make an additional bit extra posting to 4-5 different hosting sites.
@queensknight It sounds like a pretty great system you are building! One question, will each user be able to see all of their own outstanding "requests"? Right now, in the forum threads most users have multiple open outstanding requests that have never been filled. If people wanted to go and "close" them all it would be a nightmare to hunt each of them down and do that. The ability to quickly see a list of all outstanding request and put a checkbox next to each to select the ones to rescind, that feature or something similar would be great!
Well, that was interesting. I just tried replying with an explanation of how the requests list will be managed, and my post got flagged by Wordfence as being a security risk:
A potentially unsafe operation has been detected in your request to this site
Your access to this service has been limited. (HTTP response code 403)If you think you have been blocked in error, contact the owner of this site for assistance.
Block Technical Data
Block Reason: A potentially unsafe operation has been detected in your request to this siteApparently I got too "technical" and Wordfence is configured on this site to block anything too detailed. Irony is alive and well it seems 🙂 I suppose I'll have to start talking about things in vague metaphors...
@gts6, the short answer is yes, there are three ways to browse/search the requests:
(a) A main list that shows all of the requests and their status, total points, number of Requestors, etc. Any requests you have active offers on show up in a different colour.
(b) A "My Requests" list that shows only the requests that you have offers on, and lets you see the points you offered, and how many more days it has left before the offer expires. You can edit or cancel a request, or edit/extend the expiry of an offer here.
(c) A "My Fills" list that shows only the fills you've made, along with their status, so Fillers can track the status of their fills. You can also edit the download links for a fill here, in case you need to change them for any reason. If you change a download link, the new link is automatically PMed to all of the Requestors as an update.
There, let's see if that was vague enough to get past the Technical Block filter 🙂
@ulysses, the "selective filling" issue is one that has been raised a fair bit here, and not usually in a favourable context. The new system eliminates that by ensuring that any Requestor who can meet the minimum requirements for an offer will receive the fill, so the Filler can't play favourites or be vindictive.
As a Filler myself, I have certainly run into my share of "problem Requestors" here, but by and large they get on my blacklist in the first place by reneging on their points offers. With an escrow system in place that can't happen, so I don't need to worry about deadbeats anymore.
More generally, I think the kinds of abuses that get people on one another's blacklists can be prevented in large part by closing some of the loopholes in the mechanisms that let people get away with things.
For one thing, the request system can enforce minimum point offers, so if the consensus is that 500 points is going to be the minimum offer going forward, there won't be any more "insultingly low" offers to offend Fillers.
@itsmenotyou, I get that, certainly, and as others have pointed out it's mainly a concern with lower-volume vendors and/or obscure items. But it is a valid concern, and I can see some people being hesitant to risk getting banned by a vendor in the event a link can be made between a sale and the appearance of the item in the wild.
If we were to offer the option of not auto-posting to the blog, though, there would likely have to be some sort of penalty for choosing that option, to discourage people from using it all the time for everything. Maybe it should cost 50% of the total points the Filler receives, if they want to keep it private?
There are some special cases where not posting the item to the blog is prudent and makes sense, and I'm coming around to the view that it should be an option, but I don't think anyone here really wants to see it used as a first resort; it should be used in exceptional cases that warrant that level of paranoia.
Totally agree mate. It would be good to have admin formalise that etiquette in writing. We would need to define "small, private, niche sites" or alternatively those that aren't.
@ethiopia, I'm not a Moderator or Admin here, so that sort of policy-setting is above my pay grade 😉 I'm just writing code that implements those policies.
There's a difference between "etiquette" and "policy", however. It's one thing to recommend that people observe certain courtesies, and another to dictate that these are enforceable rules that must be complied with.
The problem with courtesy is of course that the folks who respect courtesy need no reminders about it, and those who don't respect courtesy will disregard the advice anyway (Or, "dicks will be dicks") 🙂
@queensknight It all sounds great so far. One more thing though, supposing someone else posts a share directly to the blog, bypassing everyones request in the new system. There will prob need to be a way to auto close the request in your system, because you just know some prick will download it from the blog and then fill it and collect the points for filling it. It would prob have to be manually closed because a main blog uploader could spell it in any way and not be an exact match as it is in your system.
@ethiopia @frank22 @gts6 I'm pretty sure when this new system gets deployable, we will need to "reinvent" a bunch of rules and make new guides. (I would like to redo them anyway sometime 😀 They are not very up-to-date) and +1 for the etiquette, a lot of people are not a "dick", just don't know what to do or how.
@queensknight this RMS sounds pretty darn good 🤟@gts6, yes, that's bound to happen--it already happens with the existing system.
That's a task for a Moderator to handle, though, like you said. Moderators have the power to cancel a request at any time, even after the request is filled. Specifically:
(a) If the request has not been filled yet, a Moderator can simply cancel it, which effectively cancels all of the Requestors' offers and returns the escrowed points to their accounts;
(b) If the request has been filled, a 24-hour timer begins, and during this time any of the Requestors can use the [REPORT] link to bring the situation to the awareness of a Moderator, who has the power to cancel the request. Even a single [REPORT] puts the transaction on hold indefinitely until a Moderator resolves the situation;
(c) If a Moderator notices the situation and decides to be proactive, no [REPORT] is necessary; Moderators have the ability to cancel requests at their own discretion, even if no Requestors complain.
I think like some have said here that if your going to make ppl share with everyone (ADD TO BLOG filling all requests) then everybody should have to share stuff , stop the daily free pts and the only way u would get pts is by sharing stuff , and there would be no exceptions to that rule It only seems fare IMO .
I should also add that any re-upping of stuff that has already been on the site should only be done by the admin this way ppl have to actually BUY and share stuff to get pts.NO pts for contests , maybe get some free products from the site, this way no one is getting pts for nothing. (how do we know that contests are not rigged) - just saying
no pts for starting topics as well.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
