Notice.

[rubyshoes]

Sorry if this has already been answered (I've been lurking around for a while but I'm still not sure,) but can we have a list of who owes us what and what we owe other people in our profile?

I don't see a problem with that.

 

 

edit: Gist you did not insult me

Edited October 2, 2012 by rubyshoes

[Thuban]

We're not asking you to fulfill IOUs, and we're not asking you to tell us the rules. We're asking you to change the rule.

The rules /did/ change isnt that sort of the problem here?

 

Could one person just list the questions that have been ignored for me, and i will gladly tackle what i can. I've answered every point i have seen that I hadnt already answered. Chances are i've missed something.

 

 

 

[High Lord November]

IOUs are not part an option of the game. The existing rule was made as we as mods/forum/dc are not responsible for IOUs being fulfilled.

 

 

Insulting isn't a valid point.

 

I don't wont to shoot down valid ideas/points - only those that I don't think will work. A thread with blacklists/listing IOUs etc will not work with the existing guidelines.

Well, we don't necessarily need a thread (and why are they not allowed/why can we not change the rule with the times? Please don't say because they are not allowed).

 

The one thing I'm a bit confused on is to what problem this is supposed to be fixing. There are also very easy ways around this (such as posting in my signature, "Please, feel free to offer IOUs on any trade I post/you would like!", etc...), and this will certainly not stop people complaining. So why are we doing this? No offense meant, but it seems a bit pointless. Mods will still have to explain/ignore complaints.

 

EDIT: Thuban, would you mind explaining this to me?

Edited October 2, 2012 by High Lord November

[Lagie]

but a little heads up would of been nice!

This is the heads up before it gets added into the Trading Guidelines, at least that's how I've understood what I've read from the mods so far.

 

 

Sorry if this has already been answered (I've been lurking around for a while but I'm still not sure,) but can we have a list of who owes us what and what we owe other people in our profile?

That should be fine, oh 'd by Ruby.

[Evilminion]

If you wish for IOUs to be part of the game only TJ could do that. IOUs are not a built in option.

Neither is DC-related roleplaying, but there's room in the forum for that.

 

And that leads me to my suggestion: perhaps it would be possible to create a seperate trade section outside of the main Dragon Cave and Site Related sets of threads, where ALL TRADES ARE AT YOUR OWN RISK and DON'T COME WHINING TO US are posted at the top of every page in big red letters? I suggest calling it The Underground Market, and if I make a trade there and get scammed, I'll just smack my own forehead and say, well, it's not like they didn't warn me...

[rubyshoes]

Well, we don't necessarily need a thread (and why are they not allowed/why can we not change the rule with the times? Please don't say because they are not allowed).

 

The one thing I'm a bit confused on is to what problem this is supposed to be fixing. There are also very easy ways around this (such as posting in my signature, "Please, feel free to offer IOUs on any trade I post/you would like!", etc...), and this will certainly not stop people complaining. So why are we doing this? No offense meant, but it seems a bit pointless. Mods will still have to explain/ignore complaints.

Allowing IOUs in posts was seen as the forum/DC supporting IOUs which we do not. For me that is the main reason for the change.

[rayden54]

If you wish for IOUs to be part of the game only TJ could do that. IOUs are not a built in option.

 

The rules /did/ change isnt that sort of the problem here?

 

Could one person just list the questions that have been ignored for me, and i will gladly tackle what i can. I've answered every point i have seen that I hadnt already answered. Chances are i've missed something.

You don't seem to understand what I'm saying. I'm asking you to let us offer IOUs/accept IOUs on the forums and for you to stay out of it.

 

--

 

I'm obviously asking for them to change the rule BACK. I want IOUs to be available on the forums in some manner.

[angelicdragonpuppy]

If you wish for IOUs to be part of the game only TJ could do that. IOUs are not a built in option.

Since they're not a built-in option, why are mods so keen on regulating them?

 

Again, if it's made clear that IOUs are unofficial, there is no reason to prevent people from doing them. As others have said a lot of the reason this seems to be being done is because people think the mods can help them with IOUs gone bad (suggesting they think IOUs are an official thing). Address the problem of people not understanding IOUs*, don't address the non-existant problem of IOUs occurring.

 

*Although I honesly think you've done as much on this front as you can already. The one-way transfer warning is pretty straight-forward. If TJ's worried about some type of legal action against him for unfulfilled IOUs (which is the only reason, weird though it might be, that I can see for him being so against them on the forums), then add in a message about IOUs to the one-way transfers.

 

"This is a ONE WAY TRANSFER. Users recieving this transfer are not obligated to give you anything in return. Promises of future payments in return for this transfer are not an official feature of the site and cannot be enforced by staff members. Accept promises of future payment at your own risk."

 

^ Anyone who still PMs a mod complaining about a bad IOU after that's added has the right to be ignored. Heck, they might even warrant a warning. And if you want to go even more nuts on it, add that in in giant glaring red font to all the trade threads. But don'ttt regulate IOUs to death, please.

Edited October 2, 2012 by angelicdragonpuppy

[demonicvampiregirl]

So say like a person I know has a holly reserved for me a year or two after this if I don't manage to get one in the mean time and we did this through PMs that is still acceptable right?

 

I have Gift IOUs as well cuz my metalics and tinsels are being a pain.

Quoting myself so I don't have to type it all out again. Can I get a answer for this?

 

I don't do trades a lot and prefer gifting than anything.

 

 

"This is a ONE WAY TRANSFER. Users recieving this transfer are not obligated to give you anything in return. Promises of future payments in return for this transfer are not an official feature of the site and cannot be enforced by staff members. Accept promises of future payment at your own risk."

 

^ Anyone who still PMs a mod complaining about a bad IOU after that's added has the right to be ignored. Heck, they might even warrant a warning.

 

I agree with this. After reading all these posts it does seem like this is the mods way to just stop getting PMs over IOU's not being fulfilled. If they can't read the text saying it's not an official part of the game and it's at their own risk they should be quoted that and then it be done with.

 

This is going to severely hurt and affect all the Holiday IOUs. There are not enough Hollies to go around as is.

Edited October 2, 2012 by demonicvampiregirl

[beacker1160]

As I have no experince and have NEVER done a single IOU before, there is not much I can say, but I see both sides of the argument, and I'm leaning towards supporting IOUs.

 

My POV is to allow IOUs at your own risk, but you are NOT allowed to PM a mod if your trading partner backstabs/neglects your trade. You take an IOU under your own risk. It's not the mods' fault that you did it. By doing an IOU, you assume all responsibility and you understand that there is NOTHING that can be done if the IOU is backstabbed or neglected.

 

There should be maybe a rule against whining, backstabbed users PMing mods with pleas for help. Maybe they get warned or even banned if they keep doing it. And mods can add a section like a disclaimer in the trading rules where they officially state that they cannot be responsible and cannot help users who have been harmed by neglected and backstabbed IOUs.

 

In this way, you can have IOUs, but people who choose to participate assume all liability and responsibility, and mods cannot help those who get backstabbed or have their trades ignored and neglected.

 

But I don't know much about IOUs, and I have certainly not done one before, so this is just my logic. Feel free to comment. It's my opinion, which probably isn't worth much due to me having no firsthand experience...but, still, please consider.

[IvyJaclyn]

May we continue to keep an IOU list in our profiles, since what I've read still allows IOUs, just not in trading threads (meaning they can be arranged via pm or another means of communication)? Breeding lists are still accepted (as on the eg thread) correct?

[dragonstar]

I'm just confused on how we are going to trade holidays - Valentines/Christmas - if we already have the limit. I would love to get something else for a 2nd gen Snow Angel I would breed, but if I have only 24 hours/30 minutes (Timeframes confuse me) to find something such as another 2nd gen holiday or a bunch of eggs, I might not have any luck and then my egg will be autoabandoned.

 

The chances of someone having something the matches the value of a 2nd gen Holly around the time of Christmas is also really slim. A CB Gold doesn't really come around that often, especially for someone like me who has never caught one and has only seen a handful.

[rubyshoes]

Allowing IOUs in posts was seen as the forum/DC supporting IOUs which we do not. For me that is the main reason for the change.

Quoting myself as basically the same question was posed after this answer.

 

[Tiger_Rider]

Since they're not a built-in option, why are mods so keen on regulating them?

 

Again, if it's made clear that IOUs are unofficial, there is no reason to prevent people from doing them. As others have said a lot of the reason this seems to be being done is because people think the mods can help them with IOUs gone bad (suggesting they think IOUs are an official thing). Address the problem of people not understanding IOUs*, don't address the non-existant problem of IOUs occurring.

 

*Although I honesly think you've done as much on this front as you can already. The one-way transfer warning is pretty straight-forward. If TJ's worried about some type of legal action against him for unfulfilled IOUs (which is the only reason, weird though it might be, that I can see for him being so against them on the forums), then add in a message about IOUs to the one-way transfers.

 

"This is a ONE WAY TRANSFER. Users recieving this transfer are not obligated to give you anything in return. Promises of future payments in return for this transfer are not an official feature of the site and cannot be enforced by staff members. Accept promises of future payment at your own risk."

 

^ Anyone who still PMs a mod complaining about a bad IOU after that's added has the right to be ignored. Heck, they might even warrant a warning.

I like this idea. If IOU's were never official, then why should they be banned from trading threads? Do what ^^^ that says, or put a large message at the top of the threads or the rules saying Do not pm mods about IOU's that have not been honored. We can do nothing about this, your pm's will be deleted. Accept IOU's at your own risk.

Edited October 2, 2012 by Tiger_Rider

[rubyshoes]

Quoting myself so I don't have to type it all out again. Can I get a answer for this?

 

I don't do trades a lot and prefer gifting than anything.

Gifts are gifts and not really IOUs.

[High Lord November]

Allowing IOUs in posts was seen as the forum/DC supporting IOUs which we do not. For me that is the main reason for the change.

That doesn't make much sense to me. Allowing something doesn't mean you "support" it, nor does it mean you don't "support it". It's very obvious that IOUs are run by the players/people, and not the site itself.

There are plenty of disclaimers, also. Has complaining really grown to be that huge of a problem that DC doesn't want to be associated with it?

[rubyshoes]

May we continue to keep an IOU list in our profiles, since what I've read still allows IOUs, just not in trading threads (meaning they can be arranged via pm or another means of communication)? Breeding lists are still accepted (as on the eg thread) correct?

Yes. I believe that is fine.

[Banuk]

So...what the heck am I supposed to do if I don't know any off-site place to contact anyone?

 

And don't say the IRC. The IRC doesn't work on this computer, never has, and I'm sick of hearing, "Well, such-and-such was said on the IRC a long time ago!" and "Go to the IRC if you want to do such-and-such."

 

 

Here I was excited about breeding my Holly this Christmas, hoping I could set up an IOU to get something I've wanted for quite some time. But, nope, can't do that now, have to hope someone will have what I'm looking for during a tiny timespan during a period of the game that is very busy for most people.

 

 

I was never fond of IOUs, but I liked that they were an option in case I ever needed them, like in the case of holiday breedings. Now I'm just disappointed.

[demonicvampiregirl]

Gifts are gifts and not really IOUs.

Alright was just concerned because I don't normally accept anything for when people ask me to breed them anything. Thank you.

[rubyshoes]

That doesn't make much sense to me. Allowing something doesn't mean you "support" it, nor does it mean you don't "support it". It's very obvious that IOUs are run by the players/people, and not the site itself.

There are plenty of disclaimers, also. Has complaining really grown to be that huge of a problem that DC doesn't want to be associated with it?

I'm sorry but that isn't the way it is seen. If we(i.e the forum) allow something we are seen as supporting it.

[demonicvampiregirl]

I'm sorry but that isn't the way it is seen. If we(i.e the forum) allow something we are seen as supporting it.

It's two players that are doing it not the whole community. It's just two people's agreement not the site itself. I don't see how anyone could associate it with the whole site when it's an agreement between just two players.

[Snowytoshi]

IOUs are not part an option of the game. The existing rule was made as we as mods/forum/dc are not responsible for IOUs being fulfilled.

 

 

Insulting isn't a valid point.

 

I don't wont to shoot down valid ideas/points - only those that I don't think will work. A thread with blacklists/listing IOUs etc will not work with the existing guidelines.

All I have seen is some very thoughtful posts describing people's emotions. I did post a while back and mine was never answered. There have been many valid points raised, but it seems the mods are content to watch. If all our points are useless, then I'd suggest locking the thread. I'm sorry that this is coming off as so rude, but that is how I see things.

[rayden54]

I'm sorry but that isn't the way it is seen. If we(i.e the forum) allow something we are seen as supporting it.

There are warnings that specifically say the person receiving a one-way trade is under no obligation to send anything back in return.

 

It's VERY clear that you aren't involved.

[Lady Artemis]

I have a question that sparked off of derranged's post.

What if we posted in the trade topic the following:

 

Have

 

A very special egg (Please PM me for details)

 

Want:

 

Please PM me, we can discuss the trade there.

 

Then we wouldn't exactly be stating that we have an egg that doesn't exist at that particular point and time, but we'd still be able to trade for it... right? Or what if we just put a photo of said egg in our sig so that the post looked like:

 

Have

 

A very special egg (See sig)

 

Want:

 

Please PM me, we can discuss the trade there.

[Starscream]

Essentially what we are doing is covering our backsides. If we ban it out right on forums as we did in irc. Mods should no longer be bothered to make it right when it goes south. I proposed a solution for safe IOU but it was turned down. I am not about to argue with a directive that comes in from above my noggin.

 

Unfortunately a few bad apples spoiled the basket.

 

As for me, I am a chat mod who, in-spite of being somewhat scary at times, I desire to protect the user base from people who I know are generally inconsiderate.

 

I have personally seen people using "bait" to get stuff they want, with the full knowledge that they cannot possibly full fill trades of the IOU nature within a reasonable amount of time. Example may be offering more holly IOU's than they could possibly fulfil in the next Christmas season.

 

IOU's of metallics, particularly golds are dubious at best. In three years I managed to breed two maybe three G2 Golds.

 

So for example, offering a G2 holly (lets say we have it here) for a G2 gold IOU. Chances are that Gold will be one mean sucker to get out of the pair. Possible that the owe-ee of the IOU may vanish for whatever reason, quit, get bored, life, death, kumquats... And the person who gave the holly away may feel slighted and upset or even impatient for the pending egg.

 

From the day IOU's were ceased in irc a small addition was added to the one way gift teleport link page.

 

In order for other people to claim the dragons contained in this transfer, have them visit the below link. Anyone with this link will be able to claim your dragons with no further confirmation from you. Any user who claims these dragons is under no obligation to give you anything in return; this is a one-way transfer.

 

Clearly this was perhaps not read, problems occurred, forum mods decided enough was enough.

 

My idea for an IOU system....

I personally wanted to see something not dissimilar to the thuwed gifting system where a user can predefine a pair and send a link to a user so that when the pair is bred and result in the desired offspring it is sent to the user who is waiting for the IOU or gift.

 

What I had also wanted to see was only the receiver of the IOU could cancel the trade if they wanted to. However that idea was, it would not have stopped someone from using bait and just not breeding the IOU pair. However if they did and got the egg, it would be sent.

 

I have seen a lot of things going south, a lot of scams, drama, whining, crying, rage quits, eggplants in irc as a result of trades etc. Even though I was initially opposed to teleport, I realised it would better protect my chat users from slime-balls. Even though it affected my method of play, if it would protect the users from unnecessary heartbreak and disappointment, it was worth it.

 

Although most of us knew it was at your own risk and would be honourable to the end, there were enough who would prey upon the good will of others to get what they wanted. Some got hurt and upset by it.

 

The system was abused. And it got taken away from all of us. :/

 

Or something like that.