Notice.

[rubyshoes]

Will the holiday IOU be banned as well?

Then how can we make sure we can get something we need before holiday?

All trading IOUs -either have or wants - in the trading threads are effected.

[spirited_soul]

I think considering that about half of the users here are adults, it's a bit high handed for the mods to tell us what risks we can and cannot take esp. since it's being hidden in this obscure thread because IOU cannot be mentioned in a thread's post....This policy is actually telling those who owe IOUs that they can renege because the mods have made IOUs illegal on the forums.

I have an IOU for a ____ running since August last year... are you really telling the other person that they don't have to pay me at all?

Edited October 1, 2012 by spirited_soul

[Lullakai]

Yeah, the whole idea that a little dotted line makes requesting an IOU go from NOPE TOTALLY NOT ALLOWED to YEP ALL COOL, BRO just seems to render the rule null and void. Users signatures then just become the second part of the trade post.

 

I think it'd just be better to have a warning at the top of trade threads that IOUs are completely up to the user's risk and that any whining to the mods if an IOU goes sour will result in a warn or something. Just because IOU dealing goes private doesn't mean it's going to stop people harrassing the mods if things go wrong, which I think was the issue in the first place?

 

I dunno. Musing aloud here.

Edited October 1, 2012 by Lullakai-Shi

[bluebell_rose]

In that case, i'm boycotting breeding my hollies this year. Why the heck should I breed if I'm only allowed an hour to 24 hour holding time to find a trade? I have nearly everything so nothing really interests me on the site. So what's the point?

Edited October 1, 2012 by bluebell_rose

[rayden54]

This is ridiculous. I will not conduct trades off the forums because there's no way to judge a players reputation out there. All you're accomplishing is making it easier for people to be scammed.

 

If you don't want IOU trades to be conducted via the OFFICIAL FORUMS, there needs to be another OFFICIAL channel through which to do it.

[Vaati]

There's no way to stop scams from IOUs.

I'm pretty sure the DC players have brains enough to read what the 1-way trade link says.

 

I have never done an IOU, nor I have succesfully received an IOU (not because I've been scammed, but because I haven't fully done any yet), but I tell you something, with this absolutely nothing will change at all.

 

I recommend that people only accept IOUs from those that are well known. Before accepting an IOU request, check the profile, look at how trusty the person is, I do believe humans can notice if a person is trustworthy or not. One has to check everything before accepting an IOU from a certain person.

 

I'm not sure if the message is clear, my english is not good, but I did as much as I could.

Edited October 1, 2012 by Vaati

[angelicdragonpuppy]

Yeah, the whole idea that a little dotted line makes requesting an IOU go from NOPE TOTALLY NOT ALLOWED to YEP ALL COOL, BRO just seems to render the rule null and void. Users signatures then just become the second part of the trade post.

 

I think'd it just be better to have a warning at the top of trade threads that IOUs are completely up to the user's risk and that any whining to the mods if an IOU goes sour will result in a warn or something. Just because IOU dealing goes private doesn't mean it's going to stop people harrassing the mods if things go wrong, which I think was the issue in the first place?

 

I dunno. Musing aloud here.

Yes yes and yes! Of course the obvious double-edged sword here is that the mods might simply tell us IOUs aren't allowed in signatures, either, in which case I will stage an even louder protest than I am currently. :/

 

@Vaati: Your message is good!

Edited October 1, 2012 by angelicdragonpuppy

[xxBurningxx]

Also: having to alter/update your signature is albeit annoying and pretty pointless. Like angelicdragonpuppy has stated, what's the difference between it being in your signature and the post?

 

Really, I feel having forcing us to meddle with your sig (especially if you already have filled it with banners or whatever, and are out of space) is incredibly annoying and is a nuisance.

 

:|

Edited October 1, 2012 by xxBurningxx

[Lagie]

I think considering that about half of the users here are adults, it's a bit high handed for the mods to tell us what risks we can and cannot take esp. since it's being hidden in this obscure thread because IOU cannot be mentioned in a thread's post....This policy is actually telling those who owe IOUs that they can renege because the mods have made IOUs illegal on the forums.

I have an IOU for a Holly running since August last year... are you really telling the other person that they don't have to pay me at all?

No, it's not doing that at all. It's saying you can no longer put an IOU request or offer in a post. I don't see that it's telling people they may now renege on IOUs already in place.

[gistofeverything]

No IOU topics.

 

There aren't any IOU topics being made, by the way. Only posts containing IOU-related material.

 

The following applies to all IOU threads:

IOU's are not an option of the game, IOU's are agreements made between members. As we (DC) are not responsible for any IOU's made, allowing a topic gives members the impression we condone the practice, which we don't. Therefore, these topics will not be allowed.

 

Nowhere do I see in these rules a ban of IOU related material in a post, therefore there shouldn't be a problem, yes?

 

Angel love, this was for you♥

[angelicdragonpuppy]

Nowhere do I see in these rules a ban of IOU related material in a post, therefore there shouldn't be a problem, yes?

 

Angel love, this was for you♥

If it was just a matter of IOU TOPICS being banned, I imagine the mods would've clarified so and thus saved themselves a heap of shrieking anger. But they haven't, thus I am assuming it's not the case.

 

Also, no need to hide my name in teeny-weeny letters. If you wish to address me, do so plainly.

Edited October 1, 2012 by angelicdragonpuppy

[gistofeverything]

Clarifications should have been made to the original topic containing the rules. Otherwise, I am not responsible for any wrongs done, as the master rulelist did not specifically ban IOU material in a post. Am I not mistaken?

[angelicdragonpuppy]

Yes. Having IOUs as a "have" or a "want" is both included.

 

 

Gifting topics aren't affected as those are gifts not IOUs (as long as it is a true gift and nothing is expected in return).

 

The above will be added to the first topic.

 

If you have IOUs as either a have or a want in your trades, please remove them.

There. ALL IOU posts, not just topics. :/

I'm not a chicken running around with its head off. I understand what's being done, and I do not like it.

Edited October 1, 2012 by angelicdragonpuppy

[Bodecia]

I think considering that about half of the users here are adults, it's a bit high handed for the mods to tell us what risks we can and cannot take esp. since it's being hidden in this obscure thread because IOU cannot be mentioned in a thread's post....This policy is actually telling those who owe IOUs that they can renege because the mods have made IOUs illegal on the forums.

I have an IOU for a Holly running since August last year... are you really telling the other person that they don't have to pay me at all?

I am sure there are people who would take this as an opportunity to do just that. However, I seriously doubt that any player concerned with being able to trade with someone long term would do such a thing.

 

The moderators are simply telling everyone, plainly, that they cannot help you in any way if you choose to conduct IOU trades, and that is why it cannot be officially sanctioned.

[CDM]

IOUs are still allowed through PMs. How hard is it to put in a trade post:

 

"Have:

 

CB Gold (or what have you)

 

Want:

 

A Holly or 2nd gen Tinsel or other GOOD offers. Please PM me"

 

See? No mention of IOUs, no pointing down to a signature, business can be conducted through PMs (which they are anyway with a trade like this, even in the old way, when IOUs were still mentioned.)

 

 

Edited October 1, 2012 by CDM

[angelicdragonpuppy]

IOUs are still allowed through PMs. How hard is it to put in a trade post:

 

"Have:

 

CB Gold (or what have you)

 

Want:

 

A Holly or 2nd gen Tinsel or other GOOD offers. Please PM me"

 

See? No mention of IOUs, no pointing down to a signature, business can be conducted through PMs (which they are anyway with a trade like this even in the old way, when IOUs were still mentioned.)

I'm assuming asking for a Holly in such a way wouldn't be allowed if it wasn't during their breeding season, since that is clearly an IOU.

[gistofeverything]

There. ALL IOU posts, not just topics. :/

I'm not a chicken running around with its head off. I understand what's being done, and I do not like it.

Then Ruby or a suitable mod needs to spell that out in the masterlist itself - otherwise, any warns that may be made related to this matter would be wrong, as we would all be following a set of outdated rules.

 

Or else a mod could just pin/sticky this and make it required reading before posting in this subforum.

[spirited_soul]

Well, then maybe this IOU matter is not too clear to me

[gistofeverything]

Well, then maybe this IOU matter is not too clear to me

I rest my case.

[angelicdragonpuppy]

Then Ruby or a suitable mod needs to spell that out in the masterlist itself - otherwise, any warns that may be made related to this matter would be wrong, as we would all be following a set of outdated rules.

 

Or else a mod could just pin/sticky this and make it required reading before posting in this subforum.

You're missing the point. Whatever the rules spell out /in letter/ now will likely be changed in a matter of a day or less to reflect what the mods have stated they are /in spirit./ I'm not going to sit around dumbly staring at my computer until they go reword the rules, I'm going to voice my complaints now about what I know they intend for the rules to be.

 

Again, I see mods lurking. Mods have posted in here a few times. If they were going to deny what everyone's accusing, it would've taken them less than a minute to do so and the arguement would be over already.

Edited October 1, 2012 by angelicdragonpuppy

[Nyda]

What if, for a trade, you're requesting x amount of hatchlings for a certain egg or whatever. (Maybe for a rare holiday or something)

 

Can you not do that if the amount is over the limit of hatchies people can have at a time?

was wondering this too, since that´s a kind of trade I´ve done several times

[Lagie]

IOU's in trading topics will no longer be allowed.

 

If you have IOUs as either a have or a want in your trades, please remove them.

_Z_'s post is pretty clear, I thought. It says that no IOUs are allowed in trading threads, so you can't put them in your posts, and then goes on to ask you to remove them if you have one up now.

[rubyshoes]

The IOU topic rule has been around for a long time. The change is that posts are now being included which is why this notice was posted.

 

The no IOUs in posts rule will be added into the guidelines later. We wanted to give everyone a chance to see the notice first before it was added to the guidelines.

[angelicdragonpuppy]

I rest my case.

Look at the post above mine.

 

Now I rest MY case.

And my arguments still stand.

 

Add into the trade threads that IOUs aren't official and mods can't help you if they go foul. Ignore or give a copy-paste response to people who still come to you for help with them. Case closed, leave everything else alone.

Edited October 1, 2012 by angelicdragonpuppy

[Varekis]

@ gist: In Z's first post, it mentions IOUs not being allowed to be listed as have/wants either so it seems like a general no-IOUs-allowed policy. Ninja'd so bad.

 

~

 

o.o

 

I'm... a little confused. So we're not allowed to say "I'm looking for IOUs" in our trade posts but we can say that we accept PMs? Isn't that pretty much the same thing but worded differently? Because regardless of how restrictive the actual trading threads are, IOUs will always be "possible" if conducted privately. If this is the case, it seems like it's just making more unnecessary work for the mods, tbh, having to comb through the threads to remove IOU content.

 

If it's not just a matter of playing with words:

 

This will certainly make it slightly harder to get eggs from specific pairings and whatnot. It's a real shame because a lot of the times I take IOUs out is because I really want what the trader is offering but my dragons are on CD or being finicky breeders (as usual) or I need a little time to unlock to breed/attempt to catch. Thank heavens I locked in a holly IOU before this fiasco. o_o

 

What sucks is that this change didn't happen because IOUs are inherently bad but the fact some people choose to exploit the system (thanks, minority) and others are too easily deceived by them.

Edited October 1, 2012 by Varekis