Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

GEN-14: Revise the Bidding System #166

Closed
2 tasks done
KarahanS opened this issue Oct 13, 2022 · 7 comments
Closed
2 tasks done

GEN-14: Revise the Bidding System #166

KarahanS opened this issue Oct 13, 2022 · 7 comments
Assignees
Labels
Documentation Improvements or additions to documentation Effort: Low This issue can be easily handled Priority: Medium This issue should be handled, if there isn't any high priority issue Requirements Issue is related to requirements elicitation Status: Review Needed A review is needed for this issue

Comments

@KarahanS
Copy link
Contributor

KarahanS commented Oct 13, 2022

What's up?

Within the scope of #162, we are expected to revise the Bidding System subtitle under the System Requirements and develop possible improvements.

To Do

  • Revise the Bidding System related System Requirements.
  • Share your ideas with other team members in the next meeting on 16.10.22 @18.00.

Deadline

16.10.22 @18.00

Additional Information

No response

Reviewers

@kostanya

@KarahanS KarahanS added Documentation Improvements or additions to documentation Effort: Low This issue can be easily handled Priority: Medium This issue should be handled, if there isn't any high priority issue Status: In Progress The issue is being handled. Requirements Issue is related to requirements elicitation labels Oct 13, 2022
@BElifb
Copy link
Contributor

BElifb commented Oct 16, 2022

  • Reqirements are unclear about whether a bidder can see the offer amount of the other bids.
  • Related to the issue above, we currently do not require a new bid to exceed current maximum bid. It could be wise to add this requirement. (1.2.4.10)
  • I also don't think that it is absolutely necessary to provide the bidder with the ability to specify duration for the bid. (1.2.4.10, 1.2.4.11)
  • Changes postphoned until other assignees revisions.

@KarahanS
Copy link
Contributor Author

  • I think there should be a price attached to the art item on sale, which is the highest price given. It must be visible by other registered users. Should it be visible to guest users as well? Btw, I don't think a bidder should be able to see all bids. It's enough to see the highest one.
  • Agreed.
  • Agreed. I think we should just discard it. Seller already determines a period of time for his art item to be on sale. No need to adjust another timer for the bids. (Although, I don't think that would be something hard to implement.)

Additionally,

  • On 1.2.4.16, we mentioned about sorting according to the price while listing the art items. Which price is this? The highest price? Should we able to list the art items that are not saled yet, or art items that were never put on sale in the first place? This article seems very vague to me.
  • 1.2.4.18, Do we refer to normal chat here? Additionally, we can convert the sections related to chat to should. I can't really estimate the difficulty of implementing a chat system.

@BElifb
Copy link
Contributor

BElifb commented Oct 16, 2022

  • 1.2.4.16 Refers to sellers being able to see (& sort) the previous bids on a specific art item that is (or was) on sale. Since we did not have bids exceeding max current bid requirement before sorting according to price and date could have given different results. But it won't matter now. Updating 1.2.4.16 accordingly.
  • Judging by the reference to 1.1.4 I think private messages refers to regular private messages (aka chat) that we have. The chat part in this article is already written with should.

@BElifb
Copy link
Contributor

BElifb commented Oct 19, 2022

  • Updated the bidding system in accordance with the last general meeting's decisions.
  • Some of the items about notifications might be repeats of the notification section, should we remove them ?
  • Could you please review the updated version @KarahanS @mumcusena

@BElifb BElifb added Status: Review Needed A review is needed for this issue and removed Status: In Progress The issue is being handled. labels Oct 19, 2022
@KarahanS
Copy link
Contributor Author

  • Can a bidder bid a smaller amount of money than the current highest bid on an art item? According to here, he can:

Registered users shall have the option to bid (make an offer) on art items, via specifying amount, provided that the item is open for sale and that the amount matches or exceeds the minimum price set by the seller.
What did we talk about this?

  • In addition, what was our decision as to the visibility of the highest bid on the art item? I feel like we determined that the highest price must be visible to the bidders and they are allowed to bid more than the current maximum. We talked a lot about this stuff and it became a little bit of "çorba". My suggestion is to take note of these questions somewhere (maybe in Question & Agenda section) and talk about them later. Or we can talk about them again.
  • Waiting for a response, not closing the issue for now.

@BElifb
Copy link
Contributor

BElifb commented Oct 21, 2022

  • Can a bidder bid a smaller amount of money than the current highest bid on an art item? According to here, he can:

Registered users shall have the option to bid (make an offer) on art items, via specifying amount, provided that the item is open for sale and that the amount matches or exceeds the minimum price set by the seller.
What did we talk about this?

  • As far as I remember the last decision was that bidders had the option to bid smaller amounts than the current max. This was related to the fact that max bid amount was not visible. That's why I didn't change that part.
  • In addition, what was our decision as to the visibility of the highest bid on the art item? I feel like we determined that the highest price must be visible to the bidders and they are allowed to bid more than the current maximum. We talked a lot about this stuff and it became a little bit of "çorba". My suggestion is to take note of these questions somewhere (maybe in Question & Agenda section) and talk about them later. Or we can talk about them again.
  • Waiting for a response, not closing the issue for now.
  • I am having to agree with the "çorba" comment. Again I remembered that we decided not to show the max bid and hence the ability to bid below it. I think discussing this further won't get us anywhere as I believe there are no original points left to be made. So we should make an executive decision and say that it stays as is?

@KarahanS
Copy link
Contributor Author

Probably I'm mistaken. We can leave it as it is. Closing the issue.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Documentation Improvements or additions to documentation Effort: Low This issue can be easily handled Priority: Medium This issue should be handled, if there isn't any high priority issue Requirements Issue is related to requirements elicitation Status: Review Needed A review is needed for this issue
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants