Why not add a Player Recruitment / Services tab to Party Finder?

[Cabalabob]

I wish FC recruitment had its own thing separate from the PF honestly. Like a recruitment board in the grand companies where people can go and use the filters to find a FC that’s recruiting that meets their criteria. FC’s already have profile pages and applications, but you can only view them by finding a FC member. Would be nice to have its own dedicated recruitment area.

As for the idea of a services tab, could still be nice for people looking for a crafter or gatherer, but for people, say, selling runs, how would they list their service in the services tab? If you’re selling, as an example, o9s clears, you’d set your run as o9s, so it would go to the high tier section. Unless they specifically had a services option in the PF like the duty complete, loot, etc. Type tags and made one for services that specifically moved your duty to the services tab.

[Paladinleeds]

I wish FC recruitment had its own thing separate from the PF honestly. Like a recruitment board in the grand companies where people can go and use the filters to find a FC that’s recruiting that meets their criteria. FC’s already have profile pages and applications, but you can only view them by finding a FC member. Would be nice to have its own dedicated recruitment area.

As for the idea of a services tab, could still be nice for people looking for a crafter or gatherer, but for people, say, selling runs, how would they list their service in the services tab? If you’re selling, as an example, o9s clears, you’d set your run as o9s, so it would go to the high tier section. Unless they specifically had a services option in the PF like the duty complete, loot, etc. Type tags and made one for services that specifically moved your duty to the services tab.

From my understanding, it would be done akin to the idea of the tags for loot rules, and min ilvl/undersized party. See attached images.

My understanding would be that these could then be added with other options for like "Service type", which would display in the box. Perhaps services of "Buying good", "LF FC/LS", "LFM FC/LS", "LF Static", "Selling runs", etc.

Is it not an offense now since you're misusing the system?

I'd say the situation could be debated. If it was added as its own rule (or added as an example for an existing rule), it would take all ambiguity out of it.