The (un)Official IOU Suggestion Thread

[gistofeverything]

Added the BSA suggestion to the OP.

 

Thinking of adding a poll.

[Draikinator]

Oh man my first BSA idea got sent back to the first page. o_0

I still think locking an egg slot after a certain amount of time twhere the involved dragons are not bred would be a good idea. It wouldn't lock any more than the one slot, no matter how many IOUs you had outstanding, and even if the other player went inactive, all you'd have to do to unlock the egg slot would be to breed the dragon.

[Pokemonfan13]

Oh man my first BSA idea got sent back to the first page. o_0

I still think locking an egg slot after a certain amount of time twhere the involved dragons are not bred would be a good idea. It wouldn't lock any more than the one slot, no matter how many IOUs you had outstanding, and even if the other player went inactive, all you'd have to do to unlock the egg slot would be to breed the dragon.

The easiest way to deal with someone going inactive is to have the IOU temporarily cancel after like 2 weeks or a month of inactivity. If it doesn't someone could have to breed a dragon every week that they wouldn't normally be breeding without any way to pay the IOU if it does produce.

[Draikinator]

The easiest way to deal with someone going inactive is to have the IOU temporarily cancel after like 2 weeks or a month of inactivity. If it doesn't someone could have to breed a dragon every week that they wouldn't normally be breeding without any way to pay the IOU if it does produce.

Two weeks is absolutely no time at all. Absolutely no way should it just auto cancel if a user is inactive for just two weeks- what if a family member dies and they're offline, or their internet gets canceled or finals happen- heck, I live in China and I'm like to lose connection just because for that long. If the person breeds or obtains the IOU egg and the reciever is inacitve and fails to pick up the egg it should cancel because tat's unfair, but it shouldn't auto-cancel just because they've been offline for a bit.

[Fuzzbucket]

Two weeks is absolutely no time at all. Absolutely no way should it just auto cancel if a user is inactive for just two weeks- what if a family member dies and they're offline, or their internet gets canceled or finals happen- heck, I live in China and I'm like to lose connection just because for that long. If the person breeds or obtains the IOU egg and the reciever is inacitve and fails to pick up the egg it should cancel because tat's unfair, but it shouldn't auto-cancel just because they've been offline for a bit.

Yes - I agree (I travel too much...) Two weeks is NOT long enough.

 

I suppose if you BREED the egg and it isn't picked up - and it is set up so that the recipient is aware and just - doesn't - the IOU could be deemed fulfilled... But also - people trying to FILL them should check that the recipient is around, maybe ? (I do always try and do that before I breed a promised egg...)

 

And no sooner does one make a promise of offspring from their precious rare, than the breeding dries up. (Why yes, I AM looking at you, oh !@#$%^&*! rares and such of mine. .png ) Happens with uncommons, too. Look what just happened with tinsels, not too long ago.

And with commons. See my tragic tale above....

 

Maybe you shouldn't be able to IOU a CB- not to trade it till you actually HAVE it, though ? "To be caught" CBs are one thing I WILL not take IOUs for.

[TheGrox]

I don't think we need an official IOU system as such. As far as I can see, the easiest thing to do would be allowing people to *ask* for IOUs in trades (but not offer them). Considering that's what pretty much everyone does at the moment anyway, by not-so-subtly pointing at their signature, which inevitably has a massive "I accept IOUs" sentence in it.

 

Also, if someone has like 30 CB Blacks, it's probably a good indication that either they are good at catching them, or have good enough things to trade for them, even if they can't catch them themselves.

Edited January 12, 2013 by TheGrox

[Fuzzbucket]

As soon as you are allowed to ASK, there is the issue that if the recipient doesn't GET they may appeal to a mod, and as it IS all at your own risk...

[TheGrox]

As soon as you are allowed to ASK, there is the issue that if the recipient doesn't GET they may appeal to a mod, and as it IS all at your own risk...

But then mods would just have to make it clear that IOUs are at your own risk, and they are not responsible for them going wrong. I take IOUs at my own risk, I've had them go wrong before. But I never once even thought about appealing to a mod - there's nothing they could do anyway.

 

-IOUs weren't banned because users whined when they went wrong

Edited January 12, 2013 by TheGrox

[Fuzzbucket]

But then mods would just have to make it clear that IOUs are at your own risk, and they are not responsible for them going wrong. I take IOUs at my own risk, I've had them go wrong before. But I never once even thought about appealing to a mod - there's nothing they could do anyway.

 

-IOUs weren't banned because users whined when they went wrong

Yes I know what Socky said.

 

But this thread is trying to think of ways to make it work as a part of the game - and I VERY MUCH think it CANNOT be anything where mods have to adjudicate or act in any way.

 

I like the BSA idea, myself. Not entirely sure how it could be made to work in a case where breeding is a mite slow though *looks sternly at her 3 y/o IOU for a particular egg from a CB silver...* I couldn't bear to have had that hanging over me all that time and locking a slot or anything. Because I HAVE been trying (not every week, but I have...) But I HAVE also bred her and her planned partner to others - because - well, it gets so BORING not to ! Would I not be allowed to ? That kind of thing...

Edited January 12, 2013 by fuzzbucket

[TheGrox]

I have to say, after reading through the OP (again), I think my preferred option would be the BSA idea in the final quote of the OP. I could see that working well.

[Thuban]

The comment I had made earlier in this thread is missing so I am going to try to reword it a bit clearer.

 

I do not believe IOUs are something that should have to be coded into the main site. Why? Because as they always have been, trades are between two people. Yes, people should have proof of the trades they are engaging in (save copies of the pms.. or if your arranging them in chat, of the conversation) just in case one party forgets what they agreed to but its up to you to work it out, or write it off.

 

I think that allowing people to offer the things they have in hand for ious of cb commons is perfectly fine. There are plenty of groups that rely on trading for cbs of certain breeds and its really not that hard to find people to trade with, or catch a lot of what those lineage projects are after (Im specifically thinking about the Break the Cave, and cave plumber type projects, the ones designed around blockers).

 

What I think is best here is really to design a new set of rules (between everyone, mods and users) clarifying exactly whats ok and whats not ok for ious.

 

Things in hand, should be allowed to be offered for cb blockers. The problem here is deciding whats ok to ask for. I propose we base the guidelines on Silver trophy limits, and have a user-thread that rates the breeds based on how YOU guys feel the ratios are at this time.

 

Example: at this time, mints, fogs, waterwalkers and whiptails we KNOW are blockers, therefore extremely common.

Lets say someone has a 3nd gen gold they want to trade for hatchys of those breeds. A silver scroll at most /could/ hold 18, but lets remove the egg slots from the total count: 6 eggs, 12 hatchys. Asking for 12 hatchys is still a pretty awesome trade. Asking for more than that would require negotiations in pm.

 

I specify silver trophys since they are the mid range trophy, and to provide a clear cut limit that EVERYONE would be expected to follow. If you have that, and a user maintained rarity guide, then everyone is on the same page. If we all work together then im sure we could agree that certain breeds are "ultracommon" (blockers) common (prone to blocking but not that often), uncommon, rare, and super-rare.

 

Super-commons and commons would be likely to swap places frequently as things move around in ratios.

 

Now for guidelines: If offering rares looking for other rares, you should be able to say Have this, want this but NO ASKING FOR PRIZES. At this time, they fall into ultra-rare, so unless you are offering tons of rares, you can not ask.

 

If offering rares/harder to find uncommons: you can askk for things that fall under it in rarity (have 3rd gen gold, cb blusang, 2 cb gws Want gold swap,cb stripe, or 12 cb balloon hatchys each or other offers)

 

Now: for those of you who enjoy hoarding blockers to trade for rares

Have 18 blocker hatchys Want cb metal <~~~this actually should be ok to do but you should be expecting it to be in hand. IOUS for metals and rares are risks you have to decide for yourself, however the only reason this is ok, is because you have the insane number of hatchys IN HAND.

 

Offering breedings for things that are not in their breeding windows, offering to hunt, and offering to catch should NOT be allowed. You may only offer what is IN HAND for things. I would be willing to concede that the week before breeding windows open for holidays, you should be allowed to start offering the babies.

 

No, this doesnt make it any "safer" to engage in ious, no it doesnt build it into the game. All this does is at least build a guideline for what /could/ be ok to ask for in the event we can settle on a set of guidelines

 

[Fuzzbucket]

Ouch.

 

I can't even think of trying to follow rules like that. My head hurts. And - as you have said but we all know even more so - common is in the eye of the beholder.

 

Also, and more importantly - desirability for trade is in the eye of the beholder. I well recall recently when I was urgently in need of something or other dirt common - yes, CB balloons - and I couldn't find any !!! I would cheerfully have offered an IOU on a silver to get them, at that point. I wanted that lineage to stop being STUCK.

 

For me, at that time, rarity was not an issue. Being stuck with my lineage was. And building lineages is why I usually want to trade.

[Thuban]

Ouch.

 

I can't even think of trying to follow rules like that. My head hurts.  And - as you have said but we all know even more so - common is in the eye of the beholder.

 

Obviously... any rules would be simplified, but those are me rambling. I was trying to just throw together quick examples of guidelines, but if it was something people would want to persue, eventually you guys would simplify it.

 

 

Because Im not pitching anything to be built "in game" it had to be long and rambly. TL:DR version of long rambly nonsense would be

 

 

"Set up forum based economy system, and then introduce ious that fit within that system."

 

Bonus: if we set up out own "economy" then maybe we can talk tj into upping the number of things that can be sent per teleport. I mean, if baseline of trade becomes 12 items, then upping tps to 6 would become extremely helpful

Edited January 12, 2013 by Thuban

[gistofeverything]

"Set up forum based economy system..."

How is this possible without currency?

[Fuzzbucket]

Obviously... any rules would be simplified, but those are me rambling. I was trying to just throw together quick examples of guidelines, but if it was something people would want to persue, eventually you guys would simplify it.

 

 

Because Im not pitching anything to be built "in game" it had to be long and rambly. TL:DR version of long rambly nonsense would be

 

 

"Set up forum based economy system, and then introduce ious that fit within that system."

Ah. I was afraid of that.

 

I absolutely HATE the idea of a "forum based economy system" - it smacks of ratios, which always cause - um - heated threads and rage and warns and....

 

And TJ always says (and I know we aren't supposed to say that but still) that the ratios are so working right and that there is no such thing as a rare and the rest - but people will argue about whether there is or not and then we will get "but the ratios are BROOOOKEN and need FIIIIXING" and then....

 

And as one of those who feel very strongly that it is in fact simply a matter of supply and demand and FASHION, even (everyone wants frills, NOW, but I recall all the nastiness when there were walls of them...)

 

Me no like any sort of "currency rating" thing....

 

And as YOU have said, any IOU (or indeed any trade) is between two people, who can set their own values, so... It's like you might sell your car to a friend who has always liked it for $100 less than you would put it on the open market for... Making it in any way "not OK" to ask for x, y and z for your a, b and c would - hinder rather than help, I suspect.

 

Of course I could just be prejudiced . I am after all one of those who thinks the "on the QT" way it is working right now works just fine !

 

ETA

 

How is this possible without currency?

Value would - I imagine - be set in dragons. Wild examples: One CB mint is worth two whippies; one 2nd gen silver is worth 6 albino hatchies or 8 albino eggs.

 

Which - as I say - is so variable that.... The day we have actual CURRENCY values is the day I rapidly lose interest in all but breeding for myself.

Edited January 12, 2013 by fuzzbucket

[gistofeverything]

Value is individual, while currency is set. Therefore, is impossible to have a true fiscal "economy" without cold, hard money.

 

No, bartering isn't fiscal.

Edited January 12, 2013 by gistofeverything

[Thuban]

"Set up forum based economy system..."

How is this possible without currency?

Currency is "the desired item" so your dragons ARE your currency. Long rambly post suggests you guys, as the userbase decide the values of your dragons based on percieved rarity.

 

My trade rate for example: 2-3 caveblockers = 1 common (seasonals, some bsa)

 

6-9 commons=3 uncommons = 1 rare (cb blusang, gw, stripe, bred metals)

 

3-5 rare = 1 ultra rare

dealing with my percieved "ultra rares" would be outside of the guideline I tried to suggest (based on 12). Ultra rares to me are things that are not being bred or caught easily (cb metals, tins (though those are sliding into rares again since i can breed them) new prizes, holiday pairings resulting in holiday eggs).

 

 

 

Basically if users can decide what rates things convert to (my example makes it so rares = 9 commons or up to 27 caveblockers which is outside of the guideline i used as my example, unless it becomes an acceptable "rate" of exchange, which allows it to be asked withing the range of "acceptable ious") then it provides a better guideline for what CAN be asked for in terms of ious...

 

 

its overly complicated, but its an option that /could/ open the door to other ideas. Im well aware you guys dont like complicated discussions and that it would be extremely difficult to keep everyone on track.. but it worked with the one sections (GD) rules eventually. Why not this. We want ious back.. im willing to do legwork to find a way to be able to openly resume my preferred trade style again. Numbers are easy to enforce.

Edited January 12, 2013 by Thuban

[Fuzzbucket]

Value is individual, while currency is set. Therefore, is impossible to have a true fiscal "economy" without cold, hard money.

Exactly.

 

Which is why I cannot support Thuban on this one, even though I usually see her as kind of close to the voice of god !!!

 

I suppose if those of us who want to tidy up IOUs put our personal value tables in our profiles...

 

But none of this explains how it could be SET UP in the first place. I still like the BSA thing. Anyone who doesn't like what they are offered as IOU - as with any trade - can decline.

Edited January 12, 2013 by fuzzbucket

[gistofeverything]

... if users can decide...

 

In my long time here, I have not seen many topics that have been implemented that has a clear majority of user support. It has always been about a 2:1 with come close ties in there. Since teleport, the userbase has grown by almost 80,000 people. Thinking of this, there is an entire new dynamic of desires. How can you unify all of these people while getting the input of newer players?

[RainDear]

"Set up forum based economy system..."

How is this possible without currency?

There were "economy systems" before currency. A chicken might be worth a peck of peas or a dozen tomatoes. Actually, before currency, value was more individual, kind of like the cave economy is now. For one person a CB Gold might be worth 2 2gen offspring of Alt Sweetlings, for another it might be worth 12 Red hatchlings, etc.

 

If people are allowed to post things "in hand" and accept IOUs for them, I think the two parties to the trade should make their deal based on their own valuations and needs. I also think that that is the only way IOUs should be accepted- one member posts something they HAVE and that they are willing to accept IOUs and then the bargaining is done by pm. No postings of "I will breed anything on my scroll for _____". For one thing if the second type was allowed, they could easily overwhelm the trading threads and make it difficult to find offers of things you want to make offers for.

 

I do hope this can all be worked out.

 

Edit:Yes, holidays are a special case, and should be handled as exceptions, for a period of perhaps 2 (or less) weeks prior to breeding season til end of said season.

 

Edited January 12, 2013 by raindear

[olympe]

Another thought I had was to make an auto-email (which I thiiink is possible) reminding players of IOUs they currently owe.

I doubt this would be a good idea, as people who don't want to have anything to do with DC or their IOUs any more would either ignore their DC mails - or declare them as SPAM. The latter is something we should avoid, or it would get DC and/or TJ into trouble.

 

I offer to accept IOUs if I LIKE. But I think Cinnamin was right on the money with this post:

The biggest issue I see that needs to be addressed is the TYPE of IOU in question. I don't see anything wrong with ASKING for an IOU in a trade... but OFFERING an IOU should be a big NO NO.

 

Asking means you accept the risk and understand that you may receive nothing.

Offering means you have nothing and are begging for something.

Example - HAVE: cb gold - WANT: offers; IOUs acceptable - should be OK

Example2 - HAVE: IOU for cb gold - WANT: neglected hatchling - is what should be banned.

I still think that there should be one exception to that rule - namely breeding of holiday dragons. If I offered an IOU of a CB (regular) sweetling breeding at Valentine's Day, it would be guaranteed to result in an egg. Plus, I'd be able to get input on the mate the other player prefers. Of course, I couldn't offer an IOU for a breeding of an alt Sweetling, as I don't have one, but as long as I do have the dragons I offer for a holiday breeding, things should be fine.

 

The forum could be set to autocorrect "IOU" into "IOU (I recognize that these are not an official part of the game and I agree to assume all associated risks in the event it is not fulfilled)" or something similar - that way anyone running across the term for the first time would also know that it's not officially sanctioned by the game, they take it on at their own risk. But as long as the person offering is willing to assume the risks, and RECOGNIZES that if the IOU is unfulfilled that there's nothing that can be done (and I think the autocorrect would ensure that), I see no reason why it shouldn't be offered.

Brilliant! I love this idea!

[Thuban]

... if users can decide...

 

In my long time here, I have not seen many topics that have been implemented that has a clear majority of user support. It has always been about a 2:1 with come close ties in there. Since teleport, the userbase has grown by almost 80,000 people. Thinking of this, there is an entire new dynamic of desires. How can you unify all of these people while getting the input of newer players?

Again:

 

forums get to be the voice of the people. Come up with a "rareslist" What do you guys value each dragon as. Lots of polls and discussion would have to happen. If you really need an example set up, I'll throw together MY view on whats blocker, common.. whatever. Blockers and commons are more likely to switch more frequently than other breeds due to the "cave cleaning" projects.. but the other breeds tend to change more slowly.

 

 

Once you guys agree on what the ratings are for rarity, then set up guidlines for what the rate between levels is (providing numbers is always useful)

 

this allows us to set up a guideline. people would be expected to refer to that list (which i firmly believe needs to be user based, not run by a mod).

 

What this allows is the option to do posts like "Have cb gold, want 27 cb balloon hatchys" Yes, its painfully obvious it is an IOU trade, however, because its a set number that you the users choose, it gives the forum mods a guideline too for whats ok (which can also be transferred to the chat as well)

 

edit: this would not force people to trade by that lists values.. what it does is provide a guidline for the numbers allowed to be offered IN POSTS. what you set up behind the scene is and always be up to you. Im merely providing a way to be able to post requests within a set guideline.

Edited January 12, 2013 by Thuban

[Fuzzbucket]

In my long time here, I have not seen many topics that have been implemented that has a clear majority of user support. It has always been about a 2:1 with come close ties in there. Since teleport, the userbase has grown by almost 80,000 people. Thinking of this, there is an entire new dynamic of desires. How can you unify all of these people while getting the input of newer players?

Again:

 

forums get to be the voice of the people. Come up with a "rareslist" What do you guys value each dragon as. Lots of polls and discussion would have to happen. If you really need an example set up, I'll throw together MY view on whats blocker, common.. whatever. Blockers and commons are more likely to switch more frequently than other breeds due to the "cave cleaning" projects.. but the other breeds tend to change more slowly.

 

 

Once you guys agree on what the ratings are for rarity, then set up guidlines for what the rate between levels is (providing numbers is always useful)

 

this allows us to set up a guideline. people would be expected to refer to that list (which i firmly believe needs to be user based, not run by a mod).

 

What this allows is the option to do posts like "Have cb gold, want 27 cb balloon hatchys" Yes, its painfully obvious it is an IOU trade, however, because its a set number that you the users choose, it gives the forum mods a guideline too for what's ok (which can also be transferred to the chat as well)

 

edit: this would not force people to trade by that lists values.. what it does is provide a guideline for the numbers allowed to be offered IN POSTS. what you set up behind the scene is and always be up to you. Im merely providing a way to be able to post requests within a set guideline.

There will NEVER be an agreement about rarity. Never EVER. There are listings on the wiki. I even disagree with some of them - and - they change frequently, anyway.

 

When the blusangs/brimstones/olives showed up, people in different places were arguing all over that one or the other was clearly the rarest as they couldn't catch any. I caught blusangs for friends who caught olives for me. ARE the blusangs rare or is it just that they are so pretty in lineages that they are just being bred too much to appear in the cave as the ratios are skewed by the breeding rates ? (*feels guilty... has two such lineages running...*)

 

It can be user set - but it will never be generally agreed what is and isn't common/uncommon - about the only thing people agree on is that metals are rare and blacks hellish hard to find CB.

 

And no, it will also never be possible to please everyone. But that is life and not something we need to worry about, I think

 

I know what you are saying, Thuban - but the fact is that all that will THEN happen is impassioned threads about what is or isn't true...

 

Edited for code-fails

Edited January 12, 2013 by fuzzbucket

[Thuban]

I can understand shooting the idea down because of the fact everyone values tings differently, but I do think you guys have the ability to work out a scale. I base my scale on what i see when i hunt, and what I am able to breed. You guys are awesome at your ability to work out when things are wrong (tracking fail breeding with luminas, and bite statistics) and Im positive you guys can work out relative rarities.

 

 

At the very least, I did try to come up with an idea to give you guys a proper arguement towards making ious official, and maybe its possible that my insanity will trigger better forum based guidelines for whats ok. Its only one option, theres plenty out there, and if you guys want them back, you'll find a way to make it work. My option focuses on forum side because i do not believe tj should have to code ious into the main site.

[Kishing]

I get what you're saying too, Thuban, and I think we could all agree on a few rarity levels without too much squabbling (CB metallics, low-gen hollies, NDs are in high demand and relatively hard to obtain, etc.). The middle and bottom levels would probably be the biggest issues because people value those so differently. For instance, I'd usually swap a CB blusang for a pair of second gens, because that'd make it easier to expand my breeding pool. And I'd do a 1:1 trade for one 8th even gen blusang because it could help expand my personal lineage so much.

 

From what I understand, under this system I'd probably have to ask for a set number of 8th gens in my trading post, right? Like, five for a CB or something. I feel like that would scare people off, though, so I wouldn't have the chance to clarify behind the scenes - I could sneak the real number into my signature, but then, well, it wouldn't be too different from the unofficial declarations I have in there now.

 

But I 100% agree that an IOU system should be forum-based. Non-forum players wouldn't really be exchanging them anyway, and any cave system might get obnoxious. SolarCat, I'm also behind your forum autocorrecting idea! Nice and simple.