Jump to content
Infinis

Get Rid of Name Exclusivity

Recommended Posts

Since names are no longer wiped, there is no longer any chance that names on inactive scrolls are freed up for active players to have. 

 

Given that, I feel like it's time to just get rid of name exclusivity and change the function of view/n/.

 

View/n/ could be changed to:

1) a list of dragons with that name that *you* own; OR

2) a list of all dragons onsite with that name, with dragons you own with that name specifically designated (f. ex., list them first, with a "you own this dragon" note)

3) ***NEW*** suggested by sundew: "I'd prefer to see a separate list of dragons you own, above a list of all dragons with the name." https://forums.dragcave.net/topic/187611-get-rid-of-name-exclusivity/?do=findComment&comment=9982003

 

I imagine it looking similar to progeny pages, with the lineage tiles rather than whole sprite displayed, and paginated if there are loads of dragons with the same name.

 

Removing name exclusivity has at least several benefits:

1) anyone can claim fandom names 

2) lyrical lineage builders no longer have to worry about pre-claiming names or adding extra spaces to names to make the lyrics (esp in later gens) work

3) it automatically resolves the "dead dragons keep their names" problem (with no name exclusivity, it no longer matters whether they stay named)

 

I'm not the only one who's sad that they can't get the names they want. ;_; Removing name exclusivity is a win-win situation for everyone. =D 

 

 

----

 

Alternatives:

 

*Wider scale (original style) name wiping (wipes all names on scrolls that have been inactive for a certain amount of time)

 

*Name stealing/individual scale name wiping: after a scroll becomes inactive for a set time, the names are no longer counted as taken by the system. they are not removed by the system until someone active tries to take it, at which point the name is transferred to the active player who tried to take it and removed from the inactive scroll.

 

*Unique names within your scroll, but sitewide availability (so you can have only one steve on your scroll, but anyone else can also have one steve on their scroll as well). Suggested by Odeen, quote:

 "I know in FR they address the question by having names be unique within YOUR ACCOUNT, but there can be as many dragons named Steve as there are lairs to hold them. I would like something like that best, as even if I really really like the name Steve I would rather not accidentally name 7 different dragons on my scroll Steve.

Edited by Infinis

Share this post


Link to post

I second this suggestion wholeheartedly. I've never understood the need for name exclusivity, and it especially hurts nowadays when I'm working on lyrical lineages.

Share this post


Link to post

But it means that everyone who has linked to ONE dragon with that /n/ function would have to deal with the fact that it would no longer actually BE THAT DRAGON they intended to link to.

Did you notice that the /code/ page nowadays creates the /view/n/ link automagically if the creature has a name? I for sure would be pretty miffed if I had to go and change all these links back to bare code.

 

No support. I'd rather see name-claiming after owner's inactivity be implemented. Also, unnaming of dead dragons.

Share this post


Link to post

Name claiming after inactivity is functionally name wiping, just on a smaller scale, and if we go that route, I'd rather just go back to name wiping and let the system take care of it rather than trying a name every several months just to test if it's still taken.

 

I don't think needing to change links is really unreasonable, though, because the overall result is a net benefit.

 

edit: I'm also not sure what you're referring to that the /view/code link turns to /view/n/? I haven't seen any instances of that - this is a dragon with a name and it shows by code: https://dragcave.net/view/EGiSz (it's an adult.) - not just when I post it here, but if I paste that link into a new browser tab or even into a discord reply.

 

edit2: we found where this is occurring, if you go to a dragon's progeny page then click the dragon again, it defaults to view/n/, but other instances don't.

Edited by Infinis

Share this post


Link to post

I support this! DC has been around for more than a decade, so a lot of the simple names are gone. I feel like it would be a relief to not have to add extra things to my naming conventions in order to find names that aren't taken yet. I think this would make DC more positive and relaxed!

 

Reimplementing names being wiped after a player's inactivity would make DC less positive and relaxed. Part of what I love about this game is that it's so easy to leave and come back after any amount of time. If I did leave for a while and forgot about the name-wiping time frame, I'd be so frustrated and discouraged to pick it back up again. I'd have to rename all 1000 of my (currently meticulously named) dragons. And because of the nature of my naming convention, the names I pick are never taken by anyone else, so I would feel like they weren't even wiped for a good reason. Wiping names feels destructive. Having multiple of the same name on the site feels additive!

Share this post


Link to post

It seems rather rewarding to have exclusive names, and since there are a (very) few dragons that are famous by the name they own I think it would be strange to lose name exclusivity, but I honestly don't care one way or another. I do feel as though we would benefit greatly from inactive scrolls having names wiped or at least people being able to "steal" names from inactive scrolls (so that only dragons with names people would actually want get wiped instead of all of them) if nothing else changes.

Share this post


Link to post

With my naming scheme I won’t ever have an issue with a name being taken, so it wouldn’t directly impact me either way. 
 

On the other hand, the exclusivity is rather arbitrary, to be fair. The best you could really say is “having the only dragon named this is cool” but that’s not strong justification for it.

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, KrazyKarp said:

On the other hand, the exclusivity is rather arbitrary, to be fair. The best you could really say is “having the only dragon named this is cool” but that’s not strong justification for it.

 

Exclusivity may be related to how dragons and their names are stored on the site, but that's a T.J. question as far as whether or not opening up duplicate naming is possible. I know in FR they address the question by having names be unique within YOUR ACCOUNT, but there can be as many dragons named Steve as there are lairs to hold them. I would like something like that best, as even if I really really like the name Steve I would rather not accidentally name 7 different dragons on my scroll Steve.

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, Odeen said:

being able to "steal" names from inactive scrolls (so that only dragons with names people would actually want get wiped instead of all of them)

^^^ This seems more fair than name-wiping indiscriminately, although I'd hope people wouldn't abuse it to steal and erase specific players' names.

 

IF name-wiping or name-stealing did get implemented, I'd love a little note on the action page or naming action page that said "previous names" or something like that.

Share this post


Link to post

I added Odeen's idea to the first post as well as name wiping suggestions 🙂 I like odeen's suggestion more than either version of name wiping.

Share this post


Link to post

First and foremost: Please NO to reverting to name-wiping for inactivity. There were issues with that then and there would be issues with it now. Unless the 'inactivity' was sufficiently long like 2+ years. There are plenty of people who only play around the holidays, for instance, and dozens of other reasons people go and come back. 

 

That said. I don't really care either way about getting rid of the exclusivity. Downsides I can think of: 'Famous' names like TJ's Thuweds and the original Dorkface pair would most definitely be 'faked', although if you take note of codes/dates you could verify if it's real. And as was already mentioned, the entire /n/ would be something completely different, which would royally suck for anyone who externally linked to a dragon using it's name at any point in the past decade.... But I guess the pros probably outweigh any cons on this one.

Share this post


Link to post

I wouldn't mind this being a thing, but I've always used a surname because all of the names I tried when I joined were always taken. Aside from Thuweds and Dorkfaces and SAlts, few dergs are really well-known for their names. Others only hold personal significance and such a thing can be shared between totally unrelated people. You're not the only person who might be attached to the name "Sally Lu Drew" or something for whatever reason, but why are you the only one who gets to have it? There's no justification to lock others out of it beyond "I just want it for myself only".

 

This likely won't affect me either way, but it'd make lyrical lineages and such easier on breeders.

 

I'm against name-wiping though. That'd suck for the guys who return after several years only to discover some or all of their names taken from them. And recently on the discords, a lot of people have returned after several years. I know I'd hate to come back from a hiatus and be stuck having to rename anywhere up to 5k+ dergs because of an inactivity wipe. As much as I'd love to name steal a few things, I don't know if there was a special reason why the current owner used that name. That would also suck to realize I swiped a "cool" name, only to find out it was their great grandma's cat who was there at their birth and was their best friend through school...and I just took it "because I want it".

Edited by animatedrose
accidentally hit Reply before finishing typing

Share this post


Link to post

IIRC fake thuweds already happen, and I know that multiple thuwed names have been taken before TJ gets them - so the only way to know if a thuwed is genuine anyway is to see the "verified thuwed" notation. 

 

Dorkfaces were a victim of name wiping themselves as well, and since iirc their owner is not active anymore, those names would get wiped (or stolen) again unless their owner logged in at least once in whatever timeframe was decided upon.

Share this post


Link to post

Ruby Eyes was likely referring to how the Get Code function exclusively uses the name of the dragon for linking, which would probably cause a bit of a mess for anyone who's used it to display, say, an adult they particularly like.

SmartSelect_20200930-133200_Samsung Internet.jpg

Edited by Shadowdrake

Share this post


Link to post

I forget "get code" even exists anymore... x'D

 

But it's worth noting that that kind of thing wouldn't be ideal if name stealing or wiping were implemented, because if that name were to be stolen, the picture would still be the old dragon, but would link to whatever had the name now. Which would be super weird. x'D

Share this post


Link to post

I'm 1000% in support of just being done with exclusive names. There's dead dragons with names I'd really like, and I recently went and saved a bunch of names and really wished I didn't have to. (Though I was surprised at some of the names I managed to snag)

 

I have to speak against Odeen's addition mostly just because that's bad for lyricals with repeated lyrics. And also there's some names I'd like to have on multiple breeds. But if its Odeen's version or nothing I'll live.

 

As for /n I'd like to see all the dragons personally. I could spend lots of time just looking at the different breeds people named the same thing. I'm more in favor of somehow highlighting things you own in the list. And if we have the techonology applying it to /progeny too

 

Just last week I saw a fake 2g thuwed in the ap, from a pair of newer releases, I got really excited and then sad lol. Some people do it on purpose to be jerks, some people don't realize thuweds are supposed to be Special, either way it already happens. I wouldn't be against TJ's thuweds having the only exclusive names though, because I can see people copying his exact thuwed setup and breeding to screw with people and causing drama if the names were the same.

Share this post


Link to post
39 minutes ago, Infinis said:

I forget "get code" even exists anymore... x'D

 

But it's worth noting that that kind of thing wouldn't be ideal if name stealing or wiping were implemented, because if that name were to be stolen, the picture would still be the old dragon, but would link to whatever had the name now. Which would be super weird. x'D

If the owner went inactive, they probably wouldn't even notice that weirdness wherever they had linked to their DC creature.

Share this post


Link to post

I've been arguing with myself in my head about this for a long, long time now, and I think I can finally say that I'd be fine with doing away with the name exclusivity system. Another thing I was thinking was perhaps adding some names to a ""illegal"" list where it is not allowed (such as TJ's Thuwed names) but I can't really see a purpose for an illegal name list outside of that.

 

Anyways, 100% support. I don't see a reason for name exclusivity anymore, even if it did have some purpose in 2008-2011.

Share this post


Link to post

While I've come to sorta like name exclusivity and think it adds some charm to DC, I think the freedom granted by its removal is worth more, so support.

I really like the second suggestion for the view/n/ page - I often use /n/ to quickly find my dragons and this would allow me to still do that while allowing us to view all dragons with a certain name :3
Please NO name wiping of any sort for reasons stated above. I also have to say no to Odeen's suggestion just because if someone wants a scroll full of only dragons named Steve I think they should be able to.
also fake thuweds yes let us rain chaos down upon the ap

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Ruby Eyes said:

But it means that everyone who has linked to ONE dragon with that /n/ function would have to deal with the fact that it would no longer actually BE THAT DRAGON they intended to link to.

Did you notice that the /code/ page nowadays creates the /view/n/ link automagically if the creature has a name? I for sure would be pretty miffed if I had to go and change all these links back to bare code.

 

No support. I'd rather see name-claiming after owner's inactivity be implemented. Also, unnaming of dead dragons.

 

I'm with ruby here, 100%.  I like the exclusivity and it leads to some wonderfully creative names. But I would like to see unnaming of dead dragons.

 

1 hour ago, HeatherMarie said:

First and foremost: Please NO to reverting to name-wiping for inactivity. There were issues with that then and there would be issues with it now. Unless the 'inactivity' was sufficiently long like 2+ years. There are plenty of people who only play around the holidays, for instance, and dozens of other reasons people go and come back. 

 

That said. I don't really care either way about getting rid of the exclusivity. Downsides I can think of: 'Famous' names like TJ's Thuweds and the original Dorkface pair would most definitely be 'faked', although if you take note of codes/dates you could verify if it's real. And as was already mentioned, the entire /n/ would be something completely different, which would royally suck for anyone who externally linked to a dragon using it's name at any point in the past decade.... But I guess the pros probably outweigh any cons on this one.

 

I really don't want to have to memorise codes to find out if something is "real."

Share this post


Link to post

I'm neutral here. I prefer the name wiping/stealing after an extended period of inactivity. 

Share this post


Link to post
31 minutes ago, Fuzzbucket said:

I like the exclusivity and it leads to some wonderfully creative names.

 

I disagree. Even outside lyrical lineages and other such lineages where repeated names are super useful, it is really disheartening to try name after name after name, searching for a combination that hasn't been done yet. It took me almost ten minutes to find a name for a special gift just a few days ago because everything that I really liked had already been used. People can be incredibly creative without the restriction of unique names; I don't think that's a good argument for keeping the exclusivity.

 

I'm not a fan of name wiping or name sniping as alternatives, either. As someone who has taken multiple hiatuses of various lengths since she first started playing in 2008 (yes, I've been here 12 years now!), I would be heartbroken to come back to my scroll of 4000+ dragons to find their names gone or stolen away.

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Infinis said:

Unique names within your scroll, but sitewide availability (so you can have only one steve on your scroll, but anyone else can also have one steve on their scroll as well). Suggested by Odeen, quote:

 "I know in FR they address the question by having names be unique within YOUR ACCOUNT, but there can be as many dragons named Steve as there are lairs to hold them. I would like something like that best, as even if I really really like the name Steve I would rather not accidentally name 7 different dragons on my scroll Steve.

I like this idea personally - look at websites like Howrse and Chicken Smoothie. There's tons of horses/pets with the same names BUT not owned by the same people.

 

It would also help when there's a lineage with an apparent affix/name trend (ex. Every dragon is named "*name* food bag" - someone getting an egg now has to choose if they want to keep the "*name* food bag" trend going [thus robbing the original breeder(s) of a name for future dragons] or let it end and name it different.)

 

About the only problem I see is the potential for people overcharging trades for eggs from fake Thuweds*, Dorkface, HM/Original prizes by giving an identical dragon the same name (suddenly everyone with a CB male Gold is the owner of "The Original Midas Dorkface" - and the only way to know the actual real one is know the code/date/owner [yes, TJ'S Thuweds have a note on their page but every other 'famous' lineage doesn't])

 

Still, in the long run - I feel the benefits of a lack of name exclusivity outweigh the few negative effects [plus, theres still a chance you end up with a unique name. For example, there's over 16 million horses on Howrse - yet somehow I'm the only person to own one named "Catherine's Dream"]

 

Full support

 

*I am aware this already happens with people taking thuwed names before TJ can get them

Share this post


Link to post
21 minutes ago, ShorahNagi said:

and the only way to know the actual real one is know the code/date/owner [yes, TJ'S Thuweds have a note on their page but every other 'famous' lineage doesn't])

 

 

side note: not all of TJ's Thuweds have that 'verified' note, although you can still tell by the absurd amount of views usually. 

 

I'm trying to understand why 'exclusive to scroll but not site-wide' would be better than just dropping exclusivity altogether. Wouldn't that include the site keeping track of *more* things, like which 'Steve' belongs to which scroll and if a specific scroll has already used 'Steve'? And that wouldn't help with lyrical lineages at all, if you can't have more than one of the same name on your scroll... 

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Fuzzbucket said:

 

I'm with ruby here, 100%.  I like the exclusivity and it leads to some wonderfully creative names. But I would like to see unnaming of dead dragons.

 

 

I really don't want to have to memorise codes to find out if something is "real."


I’d rather have the names I want than have to be ‘creative’ though. I don’t want y o r u i c h i, I want yoruichi, no spaces, but it’s taken by someone else, as are many or all of the fandom names I desperately want. I only started using a surname because so many names aren’t possible without a surname. It’s not really creativity thats being done here so much as being forced to work around exclusivity.

 

Edited by Infinis

Share this post


Link to post

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.