The Trade Rules Review Thread (READ THE RULES)

[Celozon]

How are mine?

Your look ok, but they would be a lot easier and quicker to read if you would cut down on the words and make it simpler. Of the first one, instead of this;

"1. My WL (both Items & Pets) is for my personal reference.
Either I do not own the pets/items or I have them on my WL to make it easier to find them in trading groups. There is no need to send me WL only trades, but of course you can and I am more inclined to accept trades with them."

It could simply be this;
"1. You do not have to offer wishlist pets
I use my wishlist for persona reference. There is no need to send me WL only trades, but of course you can and I am more inclined to accept trades with them."

Or even better just keep the words in bold and kick out the extra. People are more likely to sit down and read trade rules if they see that the rules are really short.

The rest of it looked up...until I started scrolling down. Then kept scrolling. And scrolling. ono Ok. Too many pictures. These are trading rules, not 'this is where I dump everything I don't know where to put elsewhere' Clickables go in signatures, and it looks tacky to basically ask people to click things for you while trading. Neither the pet image or zodiac signs are necessary in any way, and they just take up space. If you didn't have any other images, I'd say keep the pet, but you already have the 'wanted pet' and 'wanted items' images, those are the only ones that should be in there. And these would probably look better if put on either side of the screen using the BBcode for left and right aligning. Your trading rules would look a lot shorter and neater that way, and people would be more likely to stop and read trading rules if they see it would take less than a minute to read.

[&& echo;]

Your rules are easy to read, and easy to follow. They get directly to the point, and they aren't cluttered. ^^
The only changes I would make would be these:
1. Put a space between the first words and the ">>". It somehow distracts from the rules themselves.

2. I would possibly put a "please" somewhere in them, but obviously that isn't completely necessary. ^^
-

Anything that is really "bad" about mine? I am a little unsure about how they appear...

[nope.]

Very simple and easy to read.

[Cats,Love&Chocolate]

Your rules are pretty good, but I would remove rules 1 and 6. For rule 6, I don't really think it is important for trading, and for rule 1, it is basically the same message as rule 2. I would also remove two images of the yellow toxic and replace the images of your hoard pets (except the bacon one) with a picture of the newborn and ask for "all outcomes". As it's still February, nearly everyone who has the pets can recognize the blanket. (I would, however, replace the adult pictures around, maybe, late March or early April.) Other than that, though, your rules are quite straightforward! ^_^

Could someone please review mine? Thank you! ^_^

[Celozon]

Could someone please review mine? Thank you! ^_^

The trading rules themselves look good, but I think if you want it to look more noticeable and eye-pleasing, you should probably try something like taking out the first two lines, and replacing them with 'Trading rules' or something in slightly arger font, then having the little warning is slightly smaller font under it, would make it look more like a warning and thus seem more legit X3) but on the whole I would suggest centering the font and perhaps including a picture, you trade rules very much blend into most any other trade rules I've seen. Try to make them look a bit different, and people will notice (and perhaps be more likely to read them)

Mine? Is the image too much/too long? And is it understandable? I don't normally include stuff like that(though mostly for my own use, I keep forgetting which wishlist pets are for my collection X3) so its a bit out of my normal zone and I want to make sure its ok.

[rabbithaver]

your rules are very understandable, and the image is just fine c: the only thing i would fix is ">If you are COPPA'd do not leave on side blank", and that's only because it says 'on' instead of 'one'. ouo

[Nadine]

your rules are very understandable, and the image is just fine c: the only thing i would fix is ">If you are COPPA'd do not leave on side blank", and that's only because it says 'on' instead of 'one'. ouo

Very nice and to the point C:

How are mine? C:

[&& echo;]

@ Nadine;
Your rules are a bit mashed together.
Try spacing them more, like this:

~xxxxxxxxxxx

~xxxxxxxxxxx

Instead of:

~xxxxxxxxx
~xxxxxxxxx

Also, maybe try cutting down on the words a little bit? The bit on codewords is kind of unnecessary, so I would personally remove that. The bottom part of them is a bit cluttered, but could be easily fixed. ^.^
-

How are mine? And any opinions on their appearance? owo

[natzilla_x]

@ Nadine;
Your rules are a bit mashed together.
Try spacing them more, like this:

~xxxxxxxxxxx

~xxxxxxxxxxx

Instead of:

~xxxxxxxxx
~xxxxxxxxx

Also, maybe try cutting down on the words a little bit? The bit on codewords is kind of unnecessary, so I would personally remove that. The bottom part of them is a bit cluttered, but could be easily fixed. ^.^
-

How are mine? And any opinions on their appearance? owo

Yours are like a dream to read. Simple to the point and also very pretty =]
My only thing would be that maybe the font for the actual rules shouldbe a little darker, its perfectly readable but doesnt stand out straight away? Instead your eyes get diverted to the dog.

[Celozon]

@natzilla: Well they are short, simple, and to the point, but I think the red color is unnecessary, and you might try centering and/or putting spaces between each line. But really, as long as only trade groups are unlocked, the rules rules is somewhat redundant. Its usually a given that anything that doesn't say 'trade' or any group that is lock is not for trade unless mentioned otherwise. Oh and you forgot the period at the end of the third rule.

Mine? I tried lengthening them a bit and I'm not sure if its too much and I should just go simplify them again. Do they make sense?