How do I block someone on poetrade

"

grant_m wrote:

"

I_NO wrote:

Too bad XYZ can do whatever he wants, He owns the site end of story.

One person having the ability to control the PoE economies, or pick and choose who can is not a great thing.

Suppose for a minute that you, being highly active in trade, fell out of personal favour with xyz? Suppose he had a friend, or group of friends who decided that you should be blacklisted?

What then?

Even if he did what are you doing to do about it? It's a third party site they can't do a thing because it's not in there hands. It's his and his only; The only way to lose favor of XYZ is if you're a jackass in doing things in the site that obviously is shady.

Regardless of outcome it's his site and he can do whatever he pleases because he owns it.

"

grant_m wrote:

"

I_NO wrote:

"

grant_m wrote:

You'll have better results using the forum on the xyz website.

Also, blacklisting by xyz goes against the spirit of the free trade model GGG has created and should be looked into and dealt with harshly by GGG.

It's his site and GGG likely accepts that so no and it's a good thing for the community if he black list dick heads and I've seen many dickheads in poe.trade doing shady shit lol

By GGG's standards, 'shady' is an acceptable play style. The standards of GGG need to be upheld by applications such as xyz. It's favouritism akin to P2W if they are not. All users of xyz need to be treated as equal.

I would look at XYZ blacklisting as a trade extension of the in game Ingore list function. If there were a way to personalize that by user of the site (maybe a stored cookie, or place where you can paste in a text file) it would be better, but SPAM shouldn't be tolerated.

When you consider that SPAM accounts for a huge chunk of our internet costs (not sure if it is currently 25%, 50%, 75% or what), SPAM should be aggressively deterred and prosecuted under the law wherever possible.

Not being a lawyer - It doesn't look like New Zealand's Unsolicited Electronic Messages Act 2007 covers bulletin boards or web sites specifically, but under the functional purposes it could be extended by a judge to do so:

"Purposes of this Act

The purposes of this Act are to—

(a) prohibit unsolicited commercial electronic messages with a New Zealand link from being sent, in order to—

(i) promote a safer and more secure environment for the use of information and communications technologies in New Zealand; and

(ii) reduce impediments to the uptake and effective use of information and communications technologies by businesses and the wider community in New Zealand; and

(iii) reduce the costs to businesses and the wider community that arise from unsolicited commercial electronic messages; "

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2007/0007/latest/DLM405134.html

If this is the case, then GGG's TOU would cover what XYZ is doing:


Posting Policy: The following provisions (“Posting Policy”) apply to any comments you post or any statements you make in any manner on the Website (which includes for the avoidance of doubt any associated forums) or any messages you send to other users of the Materials and Services (including as part of the POE gameplay) by any manner whether facilitated or otherwise allowable by the Materials and Services (“Posts”):

(a) All Posts must represent your genuine opinion of the matter in question;

(b) Personal abuse, foul language, inappropriate subject matter, obscene, harassing, threatening, hateful, or discriminatory or defamatory remarks of any nature, as may be determined by Grinding Gear Games in its sole discretion, or Posts otherwise in contravention of any law or court order, are not permitted;

A single person with that much power is dangerous but that's assuming he would be so easily corrupted.

poetrade is so integral and mandatory to the functioning of the game that GGG should really consider an in house option.

I mean, is trading even possible with indexers and is poe even playable without trading save for a few select individuals?

"

grant_m wrote:

You'll have better results using the forum on the xyz website.

Also, blacklisting by xyz goes against the spirit of the free trade model GGG has created and should be looked into and dealt with harshly by GGG.

What are you talking about? By blacklisting users who are clearly tainting the search results with items that are not for sale, he is doing us a favor. You can choose not to use the site if you dont want. That how its a free market.

Edit: Not talking about corcern for abuse here. The only case of blacklisting on poe.trade was a guy who did not intend to sell any of the listed items and was on a personal crusade of some sort.

Edit2: But ofcourse ingame trading system would be optimal.

Grant: if XYZ decided to start coming all over Gestapo for whatever reason, banning people left and right...I guarantee you a new indexing service would come available inside a month, tops. People use his kinda specifically because he keeps a hands-off approach and lets people solve their own issues, with a handful of exceptions he personally looks into.

What you're asking for is, basically, for scammers, spammers, and other abusive people who're deliberately harming the game to be granted immunity to reprisal and the consequences of their actions. You're demanding that these people be handed explicit cart blanche to be the biggest douchenozzles they can possibly be, because it will be impossible to punish them for being toxic.

Trust me, dude - a GGG-run PoE.Trade would have people monitoring it and taking action against abuses like the one described in the original post. It would, in fact, likely be more tightly controlled than XYZ, because GGG would be paying multiple people for the task of keeping it clean, rather than one guy who can tell anyone who brings a case to him to piss off because he doesn't have to care.