Jump to content
LibbyLishly

Unfreezing

Recommended Posts

Well... 12 unfreezes per year, restricted by 53 weeks of cool down, will overwhelmingly benefit old players: they have old holidays and discontinued breed hatchies and could benefit right now of those 12 unfreezes. While new players, that i.e made a mistake last week, need to wait.

So, if the cool down is deemed necessary, it should start, initially, not from the date those old hatchies have been frozen but from whenever the suggestion is implemented. So everybody would need to wait, not just the newbies.

You have a point, and tbh I wouldn't mind waiting even for my measly Red, I want this one to grow so very badly. I bet you'll get some grumbling at first but for the same reasons people have been giving this whole time (mostly that DC is a game where long waits are typical and expected) I'm sure most people with dragons waiting to be unfrozen would be willing to wait that much time, too.

Share this post


Link to post
So, if the cool down is deemed necessary, it should start, initially, not from the date those old hatchies have been frozen but from whenever the suggestion is implemented. So everybody would need to wait, not just the newbies.

Not only do I agree that would be fair (and not too big a thing to ask us older players--we've waited this long, what's another year or two?), but I think it makes more sense on a technical side, personally. It seems to me it would be easier to just set all timers to 0 and have them count up from there rather than having to program it to check existing ones.

 

Actually, I'm not even sure if the site keeps frozen-on records that far back. I know they show up in the action long, but I'm not sure how far beyond dropping off the log they're kept, or even at all. That'd be TJ's domain, and he'd have to be the one to decide what would make more sense from a technical point of view.

 

But I, personally, am in favor of the wait starting at implementation rather than retroactively being allowed into place.

 

On the other hand, though, I can see the frustration with "Okay, a new feature has been added that nobody can use at all". But, you'll STILL have that frustration with people who don't have anything that can unfreeze no matter when it's implemented or how it's done.

 

But I'm sure TJ can figure out what he thinks is the best way to handle it.

Share this post


Link to post
Not only do I agree that would be fair (and not too big a thing to ask us older players--we've waited this long, what's another year or two?), but I think it makes more sense on a technical side, personally. It seems to me it would be easier to just set all timers to 0 and have them count up from there rather than having to program it to check existing ones.

 

Actually, I'm not even sure if the site keeps frozen-on records that far back. I know they show up in the action long, but I'm not sure how far beyond dropping off the log they're kept, or even at all. That'd be TJ's domain, and he'd have to be the one to decide what would make more sense from a technical point of view.

 

But I, personally, am in favor of the wait starting at implementation rather than retroactively being allowed into place.

Yes, I think that's fair enough.

 

That said - it is the older players who will have the most that "needs" unfreezing. A newer player isn't likely to have a shedload of mistakes and regrets.

 

On the other hand, though, I can see the frustration with "Okay, a new feature has been added that nobody can use at all".  But, you'll STILL have that frustration with people who don't have anything that can unfreeze no matter when it's implemented or how it's done.

I can't see this one. If you don't NEED a feature, why would you care that you have nothing to use it on ? There's no frustration to have ! I didn't see anyone complaining that they had no zombies when expunge came in.

Share this post


Link to post

Blegh, no, not another unnecessary handicap on older players. What happened with the encyclopedia was so dumb. Why must older players always be punished instead of rewarded for having stuck around so long? e__e

Share this post


Link to post

I don't see this as a punishment, and as for rewards, the trophies that no newer player can (currently) get are a pretty good one. I agree I was frustrated by the encyclopedia, but in both cases starting from zero makes sense.

Share this post


Link to post

So, if the cool down is deemed necessary, it should start, initially, not from the date those old hatchies have been frozen but from whenever the suggestion is implemented. So everybody would need to wait, not just the newbies.

Exactly. Let those players who have waited for almost two years since the removal of scroll limits for holiday dragons wait another year to get their old CBs unfrozen. Let those very old players wait another year who have already waited more than 6 years since the old pinks' retirement or more than 5 years since the frills' retirement so they can unfreeze their retired breed hatchlings. It's only fair, after all.

 

Oh, and in case someone else joins in the time between the introduction of unfreezes and the actual usability of the feature, you'd need to start the 53-week-long wait anew for everyone who registers. After all, it wouldn't be fair to the new players that older players had their countdown started before they even joined. (This is actually a very logical conclusion of the argument in the quote. If it's unfair to the now-new players to have to wait while older players may be able to use the feature at once, it would be just as unfair one year from now for the then-new players.)

 

Why not implement a feature that cannot be used for a whole year, anyway? I'm sure TJ is dying to do just that.

 

(Just in case someone didn't notice: This was pure sarcasm. ~Removed~)

 

I'd prefer if unfreezes were awarded on the first of every month, or the first of every other month (February, April, June, August, October and December) if we go for 6 per year. So, everyone would be able to start with one unfreeze. I'd also like it if these unfreezes could be saved up for later use, up to one year's worth of unfreezes.

 

This has several advantages over the current system used for freezes: You know exactly when you'll get the new unfreeze, no matter when you last used one. You don't have to use it up ASAP in order to get a new one. And even new players can save up unfreezes for up to a year when they should be able to use them, if they so please.

Edited by SockPuppet Strangler

Share this post


Link to post
I don't see this as a punishment, and as for rewards, the trophies that no newer player can (currently) get are a pretty good one. I agree I was frustrated by the encyclopedia, but in both cases starting from zero makes sense.

Starting from zero doesn't make sense here, though. Yah, for the encyclopedia it was to keep a 100% accurate count of what you'd seen from that point on, which was understandable even if aggravating, but there's no reason to do it here.

 

If this is added and I accidentally freeze something, and a newbie does so at the same time, we'll both be waiting the same amount of time. And if a fairly new user froze something a few months ago, they'll have that much less time to wait. And if I've been waiting five years with something frozen, I've already put my time in. That's not unfair, that's... natural time progression. Everyone still has to wait the same amount of time, it's just some of us have already waited.

 

Resetting the timer for everyone is like increasing the drinking age and then making everyone who's already at that age have to wait a few years still anyway for "equality." It's just dumb.

 

(In b4 someone chooses to nitpick that metaphorical comparison instead of the real problem >__<)

Share this post


Link to post
Not only do I agree that would be fair (and not too big a thing to ask us older players--we've waited this long, what's another year or two?), but I think it makes more sense on a technical side, personally. It seems to me it would be easier to just set all timers to 0 and have them count up from there rather than having to program it to check existing ones.

 

Actually, I'm not even sure if the site keeps frozen-on records that far back. I know they show up in the action long, but I'm not sure how far beyond dropping off the log they're kept, or even at all. That'd be TJ's domain, and he'd have to be the one to decide what would make more sense from a technical point of view.

Quoting the main reason I think it would be easier and make the most sense to start from zero, bolding by me.

 

Anyway like I said, it's not really a big deal to wait a year. I already do to get certain frozen hatchlings or to complete certain aspects of my personal scroll goals, I don't mind waiting to unfreeze something that's been frozen for a long time, too.

Share this post


Link to post

Why? Just take the "bred" or "stolen" date and check if a year has passed. If so, allow an unfreeze with a "just bred" date of today. Takes care of counting down (since it's replaced with a simple check, creating less data to be handled by the site), of "frozen on" dates (which won't be needed), of the 53-week-long wait on breeding (for holidays especially). Keep it simple.

Share this post


Link to post

Back to topic: older players have NOT been waiting. The feature does not exist. So you did not wait, are not waiting and will not be waiting until it is implemented. For what I'm concerned, the cool down is not necessary but if it must exist, it should impact everybody.

Edited by SockPuppet Strangler

Share this post


Link to post
Please, note and abide by the forum Rules HERE. Name calling and insult, no matter how obscure, are still name calling and insult. Respect is the subject of the first rule. Please be aware that this thread has been reported.

Share this post


Link to post

Back to topic: older players have NOT been waiting. The feature does not exist. So you did not wait, are not waiting and will not be waiting until it is implemented. For what I'm concerned, the cool down is not necessary but if it must exist, it should impact everybody.

And what are we going to do once the feature has been around for a year, and the new players who make a freezing mistake have to wait a year while the old "new" players can already unfreeze? You aren't making things equal, you're just kicking older players in the teeth for the first year.

 

That's why the whole "set everyone to zero!" argument is silly and falls apart. People here seem to have some mysterious obsession with wanting to pretend old players haven't already put time into things, and I just don't get it. Yes, I have some things I could unfreeze right away, but so would the players who joined a year and a month ago and made a silly freezing choice in their first month. It's not some huge outrageous inequality thing to let people who have already put time in have that to their name, whether the time paid in is five years or one year or even just one month.

 

At least with the encyclopedia it had some points to do it that way, but here it's just silly.

 

And, of course, this is all relying on the 12 unfreezes + 53 week cool down thing, when I'm starting to favor the 6 unfreezes + no cool down thing for simplicity reasons.

Edited by SockPuppet Strangler

Share this post


Link to post
People here seem to have some mysterious obsession with wanting to pretend old players haven't already put time into things, and I just don't get it.

Nobody here pretends that old players haven't already put time into things. They did and, in consequence, have scrolls full of things that new players will never get i.e. old Holiday CBs and discontinued CBs. They had also the time to "network" and that's an added benefit. I could go on and on.

Over and over again, some, very few, "old players" invoke status to obtain something before others. How many times should "status" count? I'll not call them silly but the argument reeks of self-interest.

Share this post


Link to post

I have to agree that starting at zero really has no merit here and I am strongly against it. Everyone else has said what I would say, however.

Share this post


Link to post

But, Bambi, players who joined and froze a year ago would also benefit. Heck, people who froze a month ago would benefit. All that much time less waiting. Anyone over a year would get to use it right away, and just a year of playing is hardly old. And, again, even if you DID push it back, people who joined a year from the time of it starting would still have to wait a year, so... I really don't see the point in needlessly putting a hold on anyone over a year. People have put the time in. People have waited. It's pointless to try to pretend they didn't. People aren't "instantly" getting something--everyone puts the same time in the end. It's just some already did.

 

And I have always supported rereleasing old CB Holidays and discontinued, so if you're trying to imply I'm a greedy grubby status invoking old fart, it isn't working. I'm just pointing out that the logic doesn't hold up. And I really don't understand your desire to keep playing devil's advocate when the suggestion has been so well hammered out already.

 

To reiterate, I support either:

- 12 unfreezes a year / 53 week cool down after you freeze

- 6 a year / no cool down after you freeze

 

In both cases you get instant adults. As far as how unfreezes are spread throughout the year, I think each should just have a year long cool down to become acailable again, with a note on the action page saying when the next one is available. (Ex: "You have x unfreezes left. You will gain an xth on October 25, 2016.") Something like that.

Edited by angelicdragonpuppy

Share this post


Link to post

I really don't see the point in needlessly putting a hold on anyone over a year.

Exactly my point. In consequence, no need for cool-down.

 

Edit: by the way I did not imply anything, in particular what you were suggesting. Even if the suggested mental picture was quite funny smile.gif

Edited by NotBambi

Share this post


Link to post
Exactly my point. In consequence, no need for cool-down.

And that's fine, I just support only 6 unfreezes a year in that case. That's my strongest preference, actually.

Share this post


Link to post
Why? Just take the "bred" or "stolen" date and check if a year has passed. If so, allow an unfreeze with a "just bred" date of today. Takes care of counting down (since it's replaced with a simple check, creating less data to be handled by the site), of "frozen on" dates (which won't be needed), of the 53-week-long wait on breeding (for holidays especially). Keep it simple.

This. Based on what we already know the site definitely stores, this seems like it would be the easiest way to determine unfreezing eligibility, and would make the most sense to me. But if the only way to get unfreezing is to have everyone start from zero and wait yet another full year, so be it -- at least the option will exist at the end of that year, rather than the not at all that we have right now.

 

Either way, though, I suspect that's an implementation detail we should leave to TJ, rather than something that needs to be hashed out to any great extent. It made sense to debate ways to avoid unfreeze-abuse, but this is getting so much farther into the nitty-gritty as to not matter, from the user's perspective.

Share this post


Link to post

I can't see this one. If you don't NEED a feature, why would you care that you have nothing to use it on ? There's no frustration to have ! I didn't see anyone complaining that they had no zombies when expunge came in.

I freely admit I may be a bit biased, as I'm rather used to groups where people will (loudly) complain about the most inane things not going how they personally wanted them to go, other people who are happy with the results be damned.

 

Oh, and in case someone else joins in the time between the introduction of unfreezes and the actual usability of the feature, you'd need to start the 53-week-long wait anew for everyone who registers. After all, it wouldn't be fair to the new players that older players had their countdown started before they even joined. (This is actually a very logical conclusion of the argument in the quote. If it's unfair to the now-new players to have to wait while older players may be able to use the feature at once, it would be just as unfair one year from now for the then-new players.)

Personally, I would argue that anybody genuinely arguing that isn't thinking logically at all--it is reasonable to assume "this feature starts now, for all who have a current account and something applicable to this feature's use". It's not reasonable to assume "Every single person, including those who join 52 weeks from now, must be on the exact same page so therefore it needs to restart every time somebody joins".

 

People here seem to have some mysterious obsession with wanting to pretend old players haven't already put time into things, and I just don't get it.

Honestly, for me, it's not that I think we older players haven't put time in already, but I look at it this way: I've already put in years of my life, for a game that often has waiting as a part of it. I've waited almost 2 years since the holiday change to have a chance. I've waited longer if you count the things I would unfreeze if I could that are even older than that. So, to me, asking another year or two of waiting seems small.

 

First of all, it not very nice to call me stupid, in particular adding the infinite part.

I don't believe it was meant as a personal attack on you in particular--YOU weren't arguing that every single time a new user joins the site the timers for EVERYBODY should be set to zero and we start all over again, I don't believe.

 

Back to topic: older players have NOT been waiting. The feature does not exist. So you did not wait, are not waiting and will not be waiting until it is implemented. For what I'm concerned, the cool down is not necessary but if it must exist, it should impact everybody.

 

That actually depends on how you view it.

 

If you view it as "waiting in terms of when the feature was put in", then you're very correct. And, actually, that's the reasoning I would follow in my support of a wait.

 

However, it's just as reasonable to say that we older players have put in our time in waiting--without hope, I might add--for a feature to be added that would allow us to change our regrets and mistakes.

 

Both arguments are right in their own way, it simply depends on when you decide to count the "waiting" as having started--waiting from implementation, or waiting for a potential implementation?

 

Either way, though, I suspect that's an implementation detail we should leave to TJ, rather than something that needs to be hashed out to any great extent.  It made sense to debate ways to avoid unfreeze-abuse, but this is getting so much farther into the nitty-gritty as to not matter, from the user's perspective.

I do agree with this.

 

We've put forth a few ideas about implementation, the some of the pros and cons of them, and in the end it's something that would be up to TJ to decide what would be easiest or most logical for him to go with if he were to add this feature, as well as how to announce it to the userbase depending on how he decided to go about it.

 

If TJ would like us to continue hammering that out, he's perfectly capable of dropping by and letting us know.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't believe it was meant as a personal attack on you in particular--YOU weren't arguing that every single time a new user joins the site the timers for EVERYBODY should be set to zero and we start all over again, I don't believe.

No. NotBambi's point was that everyone would have to start with a one-year wait to make things equal. But wouldn't it be just as much of an inequality if the players joining later would have to wait for a whole years while others didn't have to wait that long any more? So, on the basis of this point of perceived "equality", the wait could never stop, or things would start to get unfair all over again. In essence, it's impossible to actually make things "equal" at all, for someone will always have to wait longer than an older player, unless you do not implement the feature at all. Which leads the original argument ad absurdum.

 

And, in order to prevent this part of the argument from being necessary in the first place, I proposed the following:

 

 

Everyone starts with 0 unfreezes. At the beginning of each month (in the case of a 12/year limit), everyone gets one additional unfreeze.

 

Unfreezes will build up to a limit of 12 (yearly limit). So, you can save up to 12 unfreezes to use up all at once. You won't ever get a 13th unfreeze, though.

 

 

 

This means that everyone starts the same, and after 12 months, pretty much everyone (but the newest noob, who would probably lose a single unfreezing action due to not having a frozen hatchling from day 1) will have the opportunity to unfreeze 12 hatchlings - either all at once, in the case of a newer player, or spread out over the year. The fact when these unfreezes were used does not affect when they will regenerate, as long as they did get used.

 

It can't get more fair than that, can it?

 

And, regarding the "frozen date" (with a slight change to my earlier suggestion): Take the "hatched on date" for reference. If the hatchling has hatched at least 1 year ago, it can be unfrozen. This way, holidays unfrozen 1 year after hatching will grow up instantly during the breeding window (or afterwards). They should automatically get assigned with the "last bred date" at the end of the holiday season, as is the case with freshly raised holiday hatchlings from the same year. Both features - "hatched on date" and the "last bred date" for new holiday adults are already there, hopefully keeping TJ's workload for this feature at a minimum.

 

Over and over again, some, very few, "old players" invoke status to obtain something before others. How many times should "status" count? I'll not call them silly but the argument reeks of self-interest.
Very much so. With my hoard of zero frozen hatchlings, I have everything to gain from being able to unfreeze at once when the feature gets implemented.

 

It has got nothing to do with status whether you have the year-old frozen hatchling or not so you can start unfreezing at once. When BSAs were implemented for already existing breeds, did the older dragons of this breed get the BSA or not? Of course they did. After all, they are part of the breed - and why shouldn't they have it in the first place?

 

When breeding got introduced, did it happen for all dragons, or only those raised after the date of implementation? Of course it got introduced for all adult dragons. After all, they're just as eligible for breeding as their younger counterparts.

 

When trophies and trophy levels with new scroll limits got introduced, did everyone have to start afresh? Of course not. The adults and frozen hatchlings already on people's scrolls did, of course, count. (And they were raised under worse conditions than even bronze trophy level conditions. One could argue that the old limits were even worse than the no trophy level limits.)

 

The sole exception to that rule is the encyclopedia, and that might be due to the fact that a complete set of new data had to be collected for it to work. (And the beta testers didn't have to put in the whole work again, either. After all, they had already done their part by the time the feature got available to the public.)

Edited by olympe

Share this post


Link to post

Well whats wrong with people unfreezing from the get go? Like the moment everything is implemented everyone has 12 unfreezes to use regardless of whether they froze 3 years before or 10 minutes prior to the implementation of the feature. Its either everyone starts at 0 or everyone starts at 12, not some at 0 and some at 12.

 

If everyone starts at 12 then the only people who would have the cool down applied to them is those who freeze after implementation. Anyone who froze before the feature was implemented gets to use the feature as if they already waited that year to unfreeze whatever they choose.

 

There is no cherry picking here. Either everyone has the cool down applied to them at the moment of implementation and they have to wait the year to get their unfreezes, or everyone gets to unfreeze regardles of when it was frozen before the feature was implemented.

Share this post


Link to post
This. Based on what we already know the site definitely stores, this seems like it would be the easiest way to determine unfreezing eligibility, and would make the most sense to me. But if the only way to get unfreezing is to have everyone start from zero and wait yet another full year, so be it -- at least the option will exist at the end of that year, rather than the not at all that we have right now.

 

Either way, though, I suspect that's an implementation detail we should leave to TJ, rather than something that needs to be hashed out to any great extent. It made sense to debate ways to avoid unfreeze-abuse, but this is getting so much farther into the nitty-gritty as to not matter, from the user's perspective.

This.

 

I think who can unfreeze right away vs waiting needs to be left in TJ's hands, because I strongly suspect that the easiest, least strain on the site way to do it is just what bbik outlined. Which would mean, no wait for hatchies frozen over a year ago.

 

Having said that, I'm against penalizing older players for having those old Holidays, which is what forcing them to wait an extra year would do: penalize them for HAVING those extra holidays, by forcing them to miss yet another year of breeding those old Holidays. It also sets them behind the NEW players were actual mistakes are concerned. They have to choose between rectifying that really old mistake (of which their simple AGE means they likely have far more of) or the newer ones.... All with just 12 unfreezes (or even 6! And if you were freezing CB Holidays, you have more than 6 frozens, likely, of just Holidays).

 

And before people go off screaming ELITIST! at me, take a good hard look at my scroll. I have just ONE frozen CB female Pumpkin (of which I have 2 already).... and no other frozens I'd want to unfreeze. Either way, whatever is decided, it does not affect me.

 

But I personally think that in a game where older players have precious few "loyalty incentives" (CB old Holidays being really the only one, everything else except the 2 retired breeds (which won't happen again and 1 might be coming back) are still here), seeking out new ways to handicap them is a recipe for driving those older, loyal players away.... and a game with this long of a play-time can't afford that.

 

And yes, there ARE a bunch of people out there who are trying to get the older badges they aren't actually entitled to. So pardon me if I feel strongly about how older players are constantly being treated and viewed.

 

Cheers!

C4.

Share this post


Link to post
No. NotBambi's point was that everyone would have to start with a one-year wait to make things equal.

Actually no. My point is and was that cool down was not necessary.

 

Let's think about an example:

Player A: Experienced player, chose to freeze old Holidays and discontinued CBs

Player B: New player, made a mistake two weeks ago, froze the wrong hatchling, even posted about that on Bad Luck.

Next week TJ announces a new feature: it will be possible to unfreeze up to 6/12 hatchlings but only 53+ weeks after they were frozen. Great. Player A happily proceeds to unfreeze his/her hatchies and breeds them on the Holidays. Player B reads the new feature and wonders why he/she cannot benefit.

Do you remember what happened on the 8th Birthday? Great, we can now breed the GoNs. What was the reaction of the people (some of them older players?) that had no GoNs? I read some posting "sooner or later you will summon one" but that did not stop the not-haves from being quite unhappy and feeling excluded.

 

I've no skin in this game, I've nothing in my scroll that I would really want to unfreeze. Oh... and I do not care about badges, new or old. For sure I do not want to penalize older players. But I do not want to see newer players being penalized either.

 

Again... cool down from freezing date is not necessary and would penalize the newer players. And, if there would be a cool down, as suggested enthusiastically by a few (at this point I suspect the enthusiasm was due to the fact that the restriction would not apply to them), be it from implementation. Plagiarizing AnanoKimi: "no cherry picking".

 

Reality is: TJ will implement or not, will take a look at the points of view expressed here or not. *shrug*

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Actually no. My point is and was that cool down was not necessary.

 

Let's think about an example:

Player A: Experienced player, chose to freeze old Holidays and discontinued CBs

Player B: New player, made a mistake two weeks ago, froze the wrong hatchling, even posted about that on Bad Luck.

Next week TJ announces a new feature: it will be possible to unfreeze up to 6/12 hatchlings but only 53+ weeks after they were frozen. Great. Player A happily proceeds to unfreeze his/her hatchies and breeds them on the Holidays. Player B reads the new feature and wonders why he/she cannot benefit.

Do you remember what happened on the 8th Birthday? Great, we can now breed the GoNs. What was the reaction of the people (some of them older players?) that had no GoNs? I read some posting "sooner or later you will summon one" but that did not stop the not-haves from being quite unhappy and feeling excluded.

 

I've no skin in this game, I've nothing in my scroll that I would really want to unfreeze. Oh... and I do not care about badges, new or old. For sure I do not want to penalize older players. But I do not want to see newer players being penalized either.

 

Again... cool down from freezing date is not necessary and would penalize the newer players. And, if there would be a cool down, as suggested enthusiastically by a few (at this point I suspect the enthusiasm was due to the fact that the restriction would not apply to them), be it from implementation. Plagiarizing AnanoKimi: "no cherry picking".

 

Reality is: TJ will implement or not, will take a look at the points of view expressed here or not. *shrug*

I... Have to disagree with you. A cool down is necessary to deter explicit abuse. A severe cool down is not necessary as it can definitely be seen as a punishment more than a deterrent. 4-6 month cool down, sure. It makes people wait, really makes them think about being careful, makes the mistake seem less severe. A whole year seems more like a punishment for having made the mistake in the first place and really makes you contemplate if you really want to risk making said mistake ever again by freezing or considerably not freezing at all.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
I... Have to disagree with you. A cool down is necessary to deter explicit abuse. A severe cool down is not necessary as it can definitely be seen as a punishment more than a deterrent. 4-6 month cool down, sure. It makes people wait, really makes them think about being careful, makes the mistake seem less severe. A whole year seems more like a punishment for having made the mistake in the first place and really makes you contemplate if you really want to risk making said mistake ever again by freezing or considerably not freezing at all.

Well.. our opinions differ on the "abuse" part. The last thing that I'm concerned about when I read a suggestion about a new feature is if and how will someone abuse it. "Abusers" will indifferently abuse old or new features and I think they are a minority.

As previously discussed, if the abuse we are concerned about is i.e. someone getting a bunch of CB Halloweens by freezing and unfreezing, there's nothing stopping them from having eggs hosted by their almost-inactive friends etc. You put a restriction in place and the "abuser" finds a shortcut, work-around. Who ends being "punished" is the common player.

 

Share this post


Link to post


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.