Good point. As a carrier owner that purchased over 4500 LTDs, I suspect my success was due to where I was parked in the system plus my FC name rather than players finding me on Inara.
Inara and FC incorrect price spam
- Thread starter jacozilla
- Start date
so ignore a complete side of the player to player economy many of us has wanted for years? Not done.
you conveniently ignored why many players choose to sell to player carriers vs stations :
1. rather sell to nearby carrier vs fly lot further back to a station
2. not able to fly to distant station because geared ship for local area mining and selling once FC enabled this game choice
3. selling to carriers promotes and feeds player to player economy which some prefer vs all NPC
problem with one liners and saying done is the little details ignored to fit the tweet limit.
That's life. Either deal with the price spamming inherent to FCs, or slap a scoop on your mining ship. No other way, sorry. When you can afford your own fleet carrier you'll be able to hoard as many LTDs as you want.
I have zero issues with FCs spamming sales or buy offers - none at all. More choice is good.
i do have issue with players, FCs involved or not, that contaminate relied on tools with clearly false offers.
honest trade spam good, lies bad. that’s life. Either deal with it or be so contrarian you’ll argue for fake data simply for sake of it.
I wonder if it would be worth updating this thread or creating a new (sticky?) thread listing the id's of known false advertising carriers? For instance, INARA currently shows the best LTD sale price at carrier *****Rs of Dromi. It's > 2.2 million. I'll go sell the 465 LTDs in my T9 hold there when I get off work if it's legit. But I'll throw a fit and rage-quit if I get there and it's not. And nobody wants that.
The only option available to you is not selling to FCs.
actually the possible options are
1. Ignore all FCs and dont sell to them
2. live with mix of good and false scammers
3. bring attention to false players and drive them out
I choose option C
I'm gonna start spamming false values. I hope it makes you angry.
I hope it makes you angry and all childishly queasy inside when no adult takes your bait, stays calm, and just punishes your behavior by exercising option C above.
thank you for self identifying yourself as one of the trolls / scammers bringing disrepute to tools most players are glad exists, are free to use, and supported selflessly by the 3rd party people who maintain them despite proud self identified children peeing in the pool.
Ask real nicely and I might reconsider
Ask real nicely and I might reconsider
why? When you’ve helpfully self identified yourself as a troll scammer, it’s no longer an ‘alleged’ case. I’m sure there are no forum rules for posting or sticky thread for list of false scammers and FCs to avoid.
as more players like you keep doing what you admitted, I’m sure either a new tool or sticky will be made to weed you out. I will happily nominate you with your confession here. Just keep being you, all the niceness I need.
I specifically said I was going to start doing it, not that I am already doing it. I don't even sell anything on my carrier. Apologize for your transgression and I won't do it. You have to ask real nice, tho. Do it.
Welcome to offshore banking. 
As Robby mentioned, there are no 100% measures how to prevent such behavior. The fleet carriers owners can change their market offer, prices or docking access any second and updates to 3rd party tools will be always behind. We can only try our best to mitigate excessively dynamic changes and provide as reliable data as possible.
How it currently works on Inara - the market data are updated via EDDN (same as EDDB, EDSM, etc.) from the various tools. On top of that, Inara is doing daily sync of fleet carriers owned by Inara users having their accounts linked (this also apply to manual import requests). With all of that, the carrier properties like docking accesses are updated from the journals and such carrier synces. And even on top of that, the carrier locations are updated by EDDN, journal imports and carrier sync. So, those are sources to get as much actual data as possible on the various fleet carrier aspects at the moment.
On the outputs on Inara - no fleet carrier prices are listed if the data are older than 8 hours (I think it's 8 hours, not sure now, but it's something like that). The prices that are older than 48 hours are completely removed. Only carriers having docking access set to "All" (are marked with blue "A" in the lists) or unknown are listed. In other words - the listed commodities shouldn't be older than a few hours and possibly are being on accessible carriers or those which may (or may not) be dockable. As mentioned, the problem is that any of the property (availability, price, access, location) may change very fast. If the limits will be set too tight, it may provide no data at all. If it will be too benevolent, it will be even greater mess.
I am aware the situation is not perfect, although Inara is trying to provide somehow reliable data. But I have a few ideas how to make it better. For a start I will start to make carrier synces more frequently (twice a day), I will probably filter out carriers with unknown states sooner and maybe I will establish some mechanics where Inara users will mark their carrier like "I am a stable market, feel free to trade here!" and if it won't prove to be right, they will get some penalty in the listings (that's just a rough working idea for now, it has some flaws). I believe such steps may make the listings more useful to everybody.
How it currently works on Inara - the market data are updated via EDDN (same as EDDB, EDSM, etc.) from the various tools. On top of that, Inara is doing daily sync of fleet carriers owned by Inara users having their accounts linked (this also apply to manual import requests). With all of that, the carrier properties like docking accesses are updated from the journals and such carrier synces. And even on top of that, the carrier locations are updated by EDDN, journal imports and carrier sync. So, those are sources to get as much actual data as possible on the various fleet carrier aspects at the moment.
On the outputs on Inara - no fleet carrier prices are listed if the data are older than 8 hours (I think it's 8 hours, not sure now, but it's something like that). The prices that are older than 48 hours are completely removed. Only carriers having docking access set to "All" (are marked with blue "A" in the lists) or unknown are listed. In other words - the listed commodities shouldn't be older than a few hours and possibly are being on accessible carriers or those which may (or may not) be dockable. As mentioned, the problem is that any of the property (availability, price, access, location) may change very fast. If the limits will be set too tight, it may provide no data at all. If it will be too benevolent, it will be even greater mess.
I am aware the situation is not perfect, although Inara is trying to provide somehow reliable data. But I have a few ideas how to make it better. For a start I will start to make carrier synces more frequently (twice a day), I will probably filter out carriers with unknown states sooner and maybe I will establish some mechanics where Inara users will mark their carrier like "I am a stable market, feel free to trade here!" and if it won't prove to be right, they will get some penalty in the listings (that's just a rough working idea for now, it has some flaws). I believe such steps may make the listings more useful to everybody.
As Robby mentioned, there are no 100% measures how to prevent such behavior. The fleet carriers owners can change their market offer, prices or docking access any second and updates to 3rd party tools will be always behind. We can only try our best to mitigate excessively dynamic changes and provide as reliable data as possible.
How it currently works on Inara - the market data are updated via EDDN (same as EDDB, EDSM, etc.) from the various tools. On top of that, Inara is doing daily sync of fleet carriers owned by Inara users having their accounts linked (this also apply to manual import requests). With all of that, the carrier properties like docking accesses are updated from the journals and such carrier synces. And even on top of that, the carrier locations are updated by EDDN, journal imports and carrier sync. So, those are sources to get as much actual data as possible on the various fleet carrier aspects at the moment.
On the outputs on Inara - no fleet carrier prices are listed if the data are older than 8 hours (I think it's 8 hours, not sure now, but it's something like that). The prices that are older than 48 hours are completely removed. Only carriers having docking access set to "All" (are marked with blue "A" in the lists) or unknown are listed. In other words - the listed commodities shouldn't be older than a few hours and possibly are being on accessible carriers or those which may (or may not) be dockable. As mentioned, the problem is that any of the property (availability, price, access, location) may change very fast. If the limits will be set too tight, it may provide no data at all. If it will be too benevolent, it will be even greater mess.
I am aware the situation is not perfect, although Inara is trying to provide somehow reliable data. But I have a few ideas how to make it better. For a start I will start to make carrier synces more frequently (twice a day), I will probably filter out carriers with unknown states sooner and maybe I will establish some mechanics where Inara users will mark their carrier like "I am a stable market, feel free to trade here!" and if it won't prove to be right, they will get some penalty in the listings (that's just a rough working idea for now, it has some flaws). I believe such steps may make the listings more useful to everybody.
Thank you! I think a rating system is a great idea to explore.