User Posts

Buying a module carries much less responsibility than selling a module.

There are scam possibilities from both sides. I am dealing with lot's of requests to delete unjustified downvotes which is annoying because I don't want to interfere in private conversations so if someone comes up with a better, easy to implement idea I am all ears.

-- modulargrid

I've been thinking about a system to replace the current up/downvote options with and I think I have a pretty solid idea here. Besides being more reliable, I think this system will also reduce the amount of requests to remove negative feedback.

Whenever a user has bought or sold a module and decides to up/downvote to the other, the user on the receiving end is sent an automated request to return feedback to the user that initiated it. The catch is however, that only after both parties have submitted their feedback, the score is shown. Neither user can change their feedback after placing it.

This approach eliminates any worries about receiving retaliatory downvote simply because a user is dissatisfied with another user. At the same time, if a transaction didn't happen or if a user is being unreasonable, a user can decide to not leave feedback and thus not getting any in return either.

An optional one-time opportunity, in the form of a single non-editable comment, could be given to any user receiving the downvote as a way of explaining themselves. This comment would be shown as a comment on the users profile, for example when hovering over the username of someone who left the feedback. In any case, comments can not be replied to or edited after placing them. If a solution has been agreed upon by both users, there will be an opportunity to change the negative feedback into a neutral feedback and with that also removing the comment from the users profile. In no way however, will negative feedback be allowed to turn into a positive feedback unless submitted by mistake.

Since there are several aspects to this system, implementation can be as simple and straight forward, or as elaborate and complicated as desired. Simply withholding information about the type of feedback left by one user to another creates a far more reliable system than is currently in place and completely eliminates any fear of retaliatory feedback.

I know this system is not entirely fool-proof, but it would be very difficult to pull that off without enforcing transaction verification.

The current feedback score for users can be held in the form of a legacy score in order to smoothen the transition to a new system.

The thumbs up/down feature could really use a rework.

Currently, the incentive for a user to leave a thumbs down on the profile of a user they had a negative experience with, is practically zero. Why? Because the other user retaliating with a thumbs down on your own profile is practically guaranteed, and you can't do anything about it.

The current system inaccurately represents the actual reliability of a user. Not only because of the above, but also because there is no way to distinguish whether a user has only ever bought modules, or has also sold modules. Buying a module carries much less responsibility than selling a module.

I have yet to come up with a concept that would work better as MG transactions are based on mutual trust between users, rather than having MG be the middleman, which would not be a solution either for various reasons. Perhaps we can come up with some ideas as a community.

(On a side note, are these suggestions ever being read or considered? I have posted several suggestions and have yet to see anything come from it, be that a reply or implementation of some sort.)

I would like to see an option to get a public link for a private rack, along with a menu showing currently active links and the ability to revoke access for each link. Possibly with a few options to generate links set to expire in 1 day, 3 days, 7 days, 30 days or simply a custom timeframe. Similar to how Discord invites work.

Currently, I either share my rack with the rest of the world, or with nobody but myself. I do want to others to see my rack, but only those that I want to show it to. When I sell or trade a module with someone, they generally get to see my address in one way or another. This is fine, but I do not like the idea of someone I don't know being able to see what kind of equipment I own, unless I specifically choose so.

I know screenshots are a thing, but those are quite limited compared to the full MG experience.

Does it come with a belt attachment for on the go?

I would like to see a feature for manufacturers (or perhaps users) to "give weight, or rating" to each function of a module that is present on a specific module. Essentially, what I'm asking for, is a way to be able to filter modules on their main purpose. The purpose they are/were being marketed for.

Currently, if I am looking for a module that mainly functions as a VCA, or any function for that matter, I will get flooded with modules that have a VCA, but have about 10 different functions and just happen to also work as a VCA. It is not their main function, and is often far from the results I was looking for.

For example. Any given module could have a primary, secondary and tertiary function listed. These are factored in for the search results. Any other functions can also be tagged for, but only show when the page of a given module is loaded, not within the search results.

Perhaps there is a way to make the search function a bit more user friendly this way.