Kanachan's post re: in-game and proxy bidding

[Sumira]

I'll handle the easier topic first. For proxy bids to be considered official, they need to come from a sackholder. However, like Sah has posted already in that thread, we do ok with the honor system. Kuponutz sometimes posts for Littlenanaki, it is understandable considering their relationship. I can see close friends also proxy bidding for people that supposedly can't get on the forums in time or whatever. As long as we don't have problems with members not upholding a bid that was proxied for them, we can continue with this system.


As far as the open lot issue, I think I clarified the opening part to Kanachan's issue. However, this isn't the first time this topic has come up. I have been approached in the past by a few members, some that are still here and some are gone, that they think that no matter what tier someone is in, if they want the item, they need to bid on it.

My goal with the bidding system was to keep it as simple as possible. That is why I assumed people would be ok with assumed minimum bids. That is, if someone is going to pay minimum they don't need to post and we would just go through each tier during the run.

As far as open bidding for open lot during the run while the item is in the pool, it just isn't fair. There isn't enough time to truly raise bids, or whatever. We need to keep bidding prior to the run.

I think the ambiguity here is that there are minimum bids for open lot. The way I see it though, is that if there ARE people interested in an item when it is in the open lot tier and no one has bid prior to the run, all interested parties can roll for the item for minimum points. We just don't have the time to raise bids during the run.

[Cleophie]

We've never done raised bidding for open lot pieces during a run, as far as I know.

Today's situation was that WAR hands dropped and I was the only open lot bidder, so I passed them to what I understood to be the next tier, which was people who willing to lot for minimum open lot bid, which several did. It was strictly for minimum bid, and I don't think there was any mention of any type of raised bids.

[sahearniitth]

Alot of times SH have to make on the spot calls that members may not agree with. I dont really see a problem with what you did based on previous policies we have used.

However in the future there are a few things I think we need to do. One (that I will add in when I am done rewriting rules) is an explicit statement of tiers and the subtiers we normally go through in a bidding process. While this makes it look unnecessairlly complex, it seems to come up time and again and I think this will atleast straighten things out. Here is an example of what I mean



Under this chart the call you made is exactlly the same I would have made if I was at the run.

As far as the actual issue goes, a few members have complained about the relot tier and while I was stronglly for keeping it below openlot I do see the reasoning behind their complaints. The main issue is that members want to know why (if they are willing to spend their points) they cant relot against someone who may or may not wind up levelling the job to 75. While there are arguments on both side of the fence (namelly given the nature of openlot someone with the job at 75 might be lotting anyway) it does make a certain kind of sense to encourage anything that will get members to expend their points so we might want to reconsider (via polling) the placement.

The other issue is the whole non bidding thing. While I dunno about making it required for members to post bids (given that some of them dont have interent access) I really dont know what is most fair here since I do see some of the arguments. Maybe we could make it so you are required to bid for open lot and see how that works out for a few months before expanding it to sublot and mainlot bids?

[Aceris]

Ya know back in the day when the bidding system first took off and what not I understood why there was a "infered" minimum bid when people don't bid in their own tiers. However, as time went on I began to wonder how lazy some people must be to place a bid. For the record I never really bought the "I ain't got internet access" bullshit excuse. How the hell do you show up to dynamis if you ain't got internet access? If you can't spend 5-10 mins of your life a week to go on a forum and place a bid I don't feel they should have first choice when an AF actually do drop.

Proxy bids I don't have any issues with. Until someone doesn't honor their bid then we should start worrying about what to do with that.

Granted the AF2 storage thing came out AFTER SE decided to give people AF2+1 capabilities so I understand why some members are complaining about it. HOWEVER, being that those same members didn't/wouldn't have had the space saved anyway if AF2 storage never came about I don't really see the need to cater to them whining. If they felt that upgrading that AF2 was worth the extra bidding points and dynamis currency I feel that losing 4 invent space is/should be the least of their concerns. If space is THAT much of a concern for such individual they should have no problems spending the required amount of points when things are at the OPENLOT stage to gain the item and then put it up for storage. Imo relot is good just where we put it.

[Deathrattle]

meah i think openlot and relot should change places, for the simple reason relot is set to a min of sublot points bid, openlot is not.....

[Cleophie]

I strongly disagree, I don't see why saving someone who already has HQ some inventory spaces should have priority over anyone who wants to spend points. If you don't have inventory space, don't lot the -1s.

And, uh, open lot is set to a minimum of sublot bids too.

[Sumira]

I would prefer someone get the item for the first time before someone gets the item for the second time. Storage is an issue, but not a huge one considering the Mog Locker.

[Deathrattle]

well we'll just have to agree to disagree, as seeing some person with a job under lvl 60 lotting AF2, who may never finish said job, is kinda defeating the point of openlot...

openlot was put inplace to be a last lotting tier before freelot, to let anyone spend points on any job, not just the 3 jobs you could lay claim to lotting rights... by letting openlot be infront of relot we are breaking job based tier priority we have kepted inplace since bidding began....
no one would say a sub60 job should lot over a sub70 or mainlot am i right? this is the same situation is it not... are we now letting people with lower lotting rights bid over someone with higher lotting rights, i think we are... Someone mainlotting 1 job for their entire time in RB is now being told some other member who is not even able to bring said job to dynamis can lot over you for something you would like. this is the reason tiering lots was but inplace...

[Cleophie]

Similarly, you could be lotting for relot over someone with the job at 75 that can use it right now, like what happened with our relot Assassin's Armlets. I'd rather take the chance that a piece MIGHT get wasted on someone who won't level the job rather than KNOW it'll be wasted sitting in storage.

It's not breaking the "lotting rights order", because that order is something we define. As for the idea that it's wrong that an open lot person should have priority over main lot, that's just plain scare tactics. They do NOT have priority over main lot, because when you're relotting something, it's a different tier. You've already gotten the item once on main lot, and the -1 piece on main lot. Giving priority on the exact same piece again is just greedy, and serves no purpose besides to save inventory space for someone who didn't think things through before they upgraded.

[Sumira]

I think both of those arguments that Deathrattle and Cleophie last posted are very well written and are very convincing. It is a weird position to be in. I guess I believe more often than not, the openlot tier would be used by people with many highlevel jobs and a lot less by people with super under-leveled jobs. In which case, I still feel that someone getting the item for the first time is more fair than someone getting the item for the second time. Although it makes me wonder why the open-lot and the re-lot isn't the same tier and just make them bid against each other...Hmm.

[sahearniitth]

What DR said is the same argument people have been posing to me for a while. I personally pushed for the placement of lots as it is atm for the reasons Cleo mentioned. Honestlly from what I have been seeing I do tend to agree with what Sumiras final suggestion is which is that we should jsut combine the two tiers. If someone wants to pay points out of their ass for a inv space then let them.

In the end tho, idc either way. I also dont recommend actually making changes without polling the membership since changes in lotting tiers is big enough to warrant member input.

[Deathrattle]

making openlot and relot the same tier would work i think, and maybe pull more points out of the membership than having them seperate, cause i'm all for draining dkp off since we're getting to the point where most people have a nice serplus

[Circan]

The actual positive effects people have on the linkshell after gaining AF2 pieces of armor had from "Open lot" or "relot" are already dubious. It's not mainlot, or sublot 70 or sublot 60. The only real difference is that one group has had it before. In most cases, neither group is any more likely to use the item to benefit Rustybuckets.

So, I'd say that combining the lots doesn't really change anything.
Also, if someone wants the item, the basis of bidding, is to secure it in a competitive situation. They voted for it.

[Cleophie]

I agree that combining the tiers would be a great solution.

[Cleophie]

Bump, let's make an announcement on this during and/or after the Qufim run on Wednesday. If we're officially combining open lot and relot, people need to know, because they're still bidding on a "relot" tier currently.