News

Posted on: Thu Jun 22, 2017 12:37pm

I can't possibly reference and cross reference all pet lineage/parent owners it's insane at this point and exhausting, hence the unbreedable potion. I love having them but even unintentionally circumventing the rules to try and enjoy a game I can only participate about 50% on still isn't worth getting banned over.

Posted on: Thu Jun 22, 2017 12:58pm

This post is about rules being upheld in general, with some explanation regarding "first refusal" as it is commonly written not having an expiry date because some users were under the impression it did. This is about protecting people who wrote the rule exactly as we have explained it, about setting out that "rules cannot be circumvented without explicit permission" for all aspects of design, pet, and species rules - which is exactly as it has always been, if not officially stated as such.

If you want the rule to mean something else, then write it to say what you mean. If you want to write in your rule that you want first refusal but if you don't reply within X amount of time they are free to sell as they please - then please do so! That is completely uphold-able, and I'm sure a rule change that people will allow when contacted about amending it. If you have it as a courtesy but don't intend to take it to staff if the rule is broken, then you can keep it as it is and continue to behave in that manner - we only pursue broken rules when the user comes to us and opens it as a user issue. If it doesn't bother you, then it's no bother to us. Again, user-made rules are only pursued by staff where the user reports they have been breeched.

Posted on: Thu Jun 22, 2017 1:09pm

Wait, if this is just an "in general" thing, then how did this get brought to staff in the first place regarding species for banned/abandoned users?

Posted on: Thu Jun 22, 2017 1:22pm

To be honest, people have taken this news post to mean a lot of things. What it truly means is that a rule is upheld exactly as it is written, until and unless such a time as the rule maker waives the rule, either in general or in individual circumstances.

If you put a time limit, the rule has a time limit. If you do not then it is considered to have no time limit. If you state in the event of being banned all rules are void, all rules are voided. If you do not, then your rules still apply.

This is exactly as it has always been. Absolutely nothing has changed other than staff stating it officially, rather than upholding it as an acknowledged and used, but unwritten, rule.

Posted on: Thu Jun 22, 2017 2:34pm

Why not apply a 'six months inactive' rule or something to users for situations such as 'offer first', with verification needing to go through a mod or something. I don't mean like, six months inactivity, I mean six months of waiting after initially offering.
One month is pretty unreasonable. There's a lot of things that can happen to cause people to disappear for a month. I'm online a lot and sometimes I get caught up in things that make me disappear for a while. I've been hospitalized sometimes and let some aspects of my internet activity go while I'm ill or recovering, often.
Six months is less reasonable. If someone is permanently banned, is done with the site, or has otherwise moved on, they are never going to accept that offer first because they will never return to do so. If they had applied it as a rule for strict pets, then it should have been 'keep edits in your lair', "no selling", or even straight up "will buy offspring for price of coin". If it's an 'offer me first', after six months, you've given them an offer. That's a chance given, for six months, to be offered the pet first.
I think, as it is now, most people that have that rule often apply it casually as a 'this would be nice' thing. I know when I apply it to my pets, that's how it's intended. I don't mind if someone doesn't offer me first. It's not my pet. The only ones I mind, I don't offer out of lair breeding.
I don't know. I just feel like this should be an opt-in sort of thing, with rules, rather than opt-out. I don't think most people play a game they enjoy with the thought in their mind of quitting it or something unexpected in their life preventing them to play it in the future or getting banned, and those are the big things I see roadblocking users.
I guess this doesn't affect me anyways, as I've only sold one offspring of my pets ever (and I kind of regretted it, oops), but I can sympathize with the people it does effect.

Posted on: Thu Jun 22, 2017 2:46pm

Personally I feel that this is preferable to staff imposing any timer on user made rules that they were not able to consent to, and would be unable to amend their rules to oppose. By continuing to uphold "permanent" as the default that allows users to create and offer leniencies that other users are likely to accept.

If a user rejects a leniency (such as "if I don't reply in 3 months you can resell without my permission") then it only affects that user, and not the person who created the rules. However if the site were to enforce "if you don't reply in 3 months then users can resell without your permission" and someone did not agree to that, they may not be able to change the rule to discount the timer because the users may not agree to it, and thereby we would have taken their right to choose their rules from them.

Posted on: Thu Jun 22, 2017 3:10pm

This is not okay. Wow.

Maybe I just don't get it but it seems kinda unfair :/

Posted on: Thu Jun 22, 2017 4:18pm

I am a little confused. Aywas has a way to handle this, at least for future agreements...and if they so choose, also for past agreements. Generally, in real life, as opposed to virtual life, the "offer first/right of first refusal", whether in real estate or other instances, means the person must "offer". Often the agreement has a deadline when that expires, but where it doesn't, then after a reasonable amount of time, silence or failure to respond is interpreted by the courts to be deemed to waive their right of first refusal. Why can the court's do this? Because, at least in Louisiana (which of course has no bearing on this site, but it is an example of how this situation is handled in real life), there is a statute that provides that when a contract (binding agreement) between two parties leads to two different interpretations on how something is handled down the road, then too bad for the person who wrote down the language...it goes in favor of the person who did not have the power of writing the deal. This does not mean they can act unreasonable, rather what the court feels a reasonable person should expect.

Posted on: Thu Jun 22, 2017 4:31pm

I made a simple edit to my breeding thread and this really doesn't affect me much personally as of yet, but...

I'm more worried about the people who were under a different impression in the past (due to certain people having experiences outside of the norm without knowing so, as well as a lack of any clear and concise rule stating this until this point) and are now literally stuck with some pets potentially forever, from breedings they may very well have not done had they known the risk beforehand. Due to the fact that real money has been spent on some of these breedings (and at the least, game currency they've worked hard to earn) I feel like this might be a bit more fair to at least make this a rule going forward (as in applicable to all babies born after this newspost, now that we're all very aware and the rule has been clearly and visibly defined) and handle past cases as they arise? That way you're catering more to both sides instead of just one? Just an idea!

Posted on: Thu Jun 22, 2017 4:31pm

Honestly I was pretty hesitant before this about breeding outside of my lair, and have done so maybe? 10 times or less. Now I think I probably will not do so at all, cause rules were already super complicated before, and this just makes it even more so. I really just don't have time to do a bunch of research on years worth of pets that I have bought either. My lair was open to free breedings without any rules for a long while, but I recently decided to close my lair to breedings in order to get some stuff sorted, now it looks like that will be permanent cause I just don't want to worry about some random grey area I don't understand getting me in trouble. Bummer.