This thread is more or less created for a wider scope of discussion around this addon, since its complexity slowly reaches its point where it could spark a user-to-user discussion next to simply putting down likes/dislikes in the comment section.
It wasn't a decision on a whim, because the next announcement would (at least I hope so) spark a discussion, and as said, comments/improvements/constructive criticism is welcome.
I'm planning a major overhaul of this AddOn, especially in the way how rules are organized and viewed. The goal is to have a more "event-centered" view on the rules, which should help easing up the clutter.
Confused? Here it comes...
The rule list would be broken into sections which are displayed separately (or selectable via the dropdown list), with a heading like
On picking up, put these items into the junk
Put into bank
Pull from bank
Put into guild bank
Pull from guild bank
On opening a shop or a fence, sell
On opening a fence, launder
On opening the crafing station, deconstruct
Under the section "Put into bank" there would be a list like
NO junked item
NO worthless item
Any intricate item
Any weapon with quality from fine to legendary
And under the section "Deconstruct" there would be a list like
NO junked item
Any intricate item
Note that these rules wouldn't exclude each other. In this example, intricate items would either be put into the bank or deconstructed, depending on which one you visit first.
Inside a single list, however, rules will be matched top down. So if you for example say
NO intricate weapon
NO ornate weapon
The list would match any weapon except intricate and ornate ones.
On adding a rule to a section (like you want to add a rule for "ornate item" to the "selling" section, there will be a button named "exclusive" or such, so that when set, it will add a negative statement (here: "NO ornate item") to all the other sections. So that you don't accidentally deconstruct your ornate items if you happen to visit the crafting station first.
Another idea would be to allow for cross-references. For example, in the "Put into bank" list, state something like "Everything which would be deconstructed", and on the "For Sale" list something like "Nothing which would be deconstructed". That would ease up on the necessity of repeating rules in different lists, but care should be taken to avoid any cycles (like the selling list referencing to deconstruction, the deconstruction back to selling and so on)
I hope the changes would hopefully break down the list a bit (the individual sections should be a bit shorter, despite maybe having to add negative statements) and make things a bit easier to view, especially since the introduction of concurrent rules, "/im dryrun" definitely doesn't quite cut it.
If I happen to introduce the changes, your current rule lists will be automatically converted to the new format, hopefully retaining all the semantics the old rulesets have. So no fears about having to recreate all the rule sets again....
Independent of that I opt to introduce a "minimum hit count" (opposed to "maximum execution count") which would make a rule fire only when it has been matched x times or more. For example, if there's an entry "Any food (min. 3)" in the list "Put into bank", it would put the third, fourth, fifth and so on stack of a food item into the bank, skipping over the first two. While "maximum execution count" may serve to keep a limited amount of stacks in the inventory or the bank, this extension would make things much easier.
I think that splitting the rules up into sections like that is a good idea - would make it very easy to see what's going to happen to your stuff. Regarding the two options you've described, I think that exclusive rules will be a nice time saver and cross-referencing is a definite "nice to have" that'll help some users.