Get Rid of Name Exclusivity

[_Charky]

On 10/28/2020 at 9:17 AM, 11th said:

But there have been some proposed workarounds for that, particularly for lineages where it's important for breeders to be able to quickly spot duplicates.

I saw this earlier but forgot to ask- aren't there tools for this? I'm sure a bunch of hatcheries have inbred checkers where you just plop a code in. If that's not a thing, I'd happily apply for an API key and write one myself.

[DragonLady86]

57 minutes ago, dracocharky said:

I saw this earlier but forgot to ask- aren't there tools for this? I'm sure a bunch of hatcheries have inbred checkers where you just plop a code in. If that's not a thing, I'd happily apply for an API key and write one myself.

Yes, the complaint is they have to go off site. Which for large lineages or certain naming schemes is already necessary.

[Fuzzbucket]

 

12 hours ago, Shala said:

Could a poll be added to this thread? It might show a clearer picture of how forum users, at least, feel about the issue. I'm sure I'm not the only one who would weigh in more readily anonymously to avoid further contention. It seems a simple yes or no question, with maybe a 'no, except within scrolls' as a third option.

 

11 hours ago, KrazyKarp said:

Seconding this. Polls are a fantastic way to get a view on how many people agree with something, because many people have many reasons for not wanting to post in threads. Especially since we're at a point where little to nothing new is being added to the discussion on either side.

 

9 hours ago, DragonLady86 said:

Polls are highly unreliable. Only a small percentage of people even visit this section of the fourm, less would vote, and if someone changes their mind due to arguments presented, they can't change their vote. 

 

This last is what TJ said when he disabled polls in Suggestions, years ago. He said he'd rather see what is actually said, as proportionally only a TINY percentage of forum members and an even tinier share of actual players, chip in to these threads. And especially that last one - I remember a thread where I changed my mind - and  SOCK even changed theirs - and so the poll was wrong in the end.

 

What someone did once was list all the people in the thread and which way they felt... but even then that didn't allow for a change of mind.

[Fuzzbucket]

OK. There are a whole 75 people in this thread.

 

75 out of a forum membership of 69,828 , never mind number of active scrolls, isn't exactly enough to call it representative, or the result of counting to be a majority of anything. But:

 

Pro the suggestion         42

Against                             14

Neutral                             13

Have so many caveats that they aren't sure. 6

 

That's where this thread stands. A clear majority among the 75 people who have posted are in favour. (Assuming no-one has changed their mind since posting ! ) 

 

But when TJ makes decisions he looks at more than numbers, as we know. Our reasoning, feasibility, and what he wants to see in his game. It would be good if he would comment 

 

@TJ09  - your thoughts?

Edited October 29, 2020 by Fuzzbucket

[BeLovE]

5 hours ago, Fuzzbucket said:

 

 

 

 

This last is what TJ said when he disabled polls in Suggestions, years ago. He said he'd rather see what is actually said, as proportionally only a TINY percentage of forum members and an even tinier share of actual players, chip in to these threads. And especially that last one - I remember a thread where I changed my mind - and  SOCK even changed theirs - and so the poll was wrong in the end.

 

What someone did once was list all the people in the thread and which way they felt... but even then that didn't allow for a change of mind.

I totally agree with u, I joined the game in 2015 but only in 2018 I joined the forum and even now Im not so much active in the forum as I just use it to send PM to friends or like now checking what's new as I just have back from a year of hiatus from the game. 

I'm sure there is many ppl like me,  as  some of my friends not even have a forum profile here. So a pool for vote won't be a good solution at all... 

[Alwerien]

5 hours ago, Fuzzbucket said:

OK. There are a whole 75 people in this thread.

 

75 out of a forum membership of 69,828 , never mind number of active scrolls, isn't exactly enough to call it representative, or the result of counting to be a majority of anything. But:

 

Pro the suggestion         42

Against                             14

Neutral                             13

Have so many caveats that they aren't sure. 6

 

That's where this thread stands. A clear majority among the 75 people who have posted are in favour. (Assuming no-one has changed their mind since posting ! ) 

 

But when TJ makes decisions he looks at more than numbers, as we know. Our reasoning, feasibility, and what he wants to see in his game. It would be good if he would comment 

 

@TJ09  - your thoughts?

 

I respect your opinion against this idea but I would appreciate you didn't ping TJ with false statistics.

After going through this thread and writing down names so I could switch who changed their opinion I have come to these numbers. Of course, it's hard to judge neutrality unless they explicitly state they are neutral, so the real numbers might be little different. I have counted several people I know are for this as neutral simply because they haven't stated as such.

 

Pro: 52

Neutral: 15

Against: 10

 

I'd like to note that many of the neutrals recognize the benefits of this suggestion, they are just staying neutral or would need some changes to switch to support like symbols of unique/first used name. Some even suggested helpful solutions.

Several were also in support of wiping of inactive/dead dragon names, though there was overwhelming response against this.

Out of the 10 people against, 3 of them voiced support for wiping of inactive names (suggesting they aren't entirely happy either), another 3 offered no constructive criticism nor engaged in the discussion besides one sentence on them not liking it. At least one recognizes the benefits for others.

 

Most common worries: 

• broken links - there were several suggestions here on replacing the n/ page with a list of dragons, various suggestions on how it should look
• repeating names within scroll - most people want no account restriction, others don't want to name their own dragons the same - here I think warning about name already being on your scroll would be a good idea - those that want to will proceed, others will change the name
• difficulties recognizing inbred lineages - there are very easy off-site solutions or suggestion to include a button to display codes in lineage view

 

[Fuzzbucket]

I'm not pinging him with stats - I am pinging him for his input., As I said - he reads threads, rather than counts heads.

 

But you and I must differ a good deal.... Whatever -  there is a majority in this thread in favour. I'd be interested how you came up with so few against.... Just curious - I absolutely agree the consensus in this thread is pro. But that IS only in this thread.

[Alwerien]

5 minutes ago, Fuzzbucket said:

I'm not pinging him with stats - I am pinging him for his input., As I said - he reads threads, rather than counts heads.

 

But you and I must differ a good deal.... Whatever -  there is a majority in this thread in favour. I'd be interested how you came up with so few against.... Just curious - I absolutely agree the consensus in this thread is pro. But that IS only in this thread.

 

I know, I would love to know his input too, especially on the  easibility of suggested solutions to people's concerns. But you did include statistics that are probably incorrect along with it even though there was no need for any numbers since you yourself state that he reads, rather than cares about the numbers. Am I wrong to want to clear that up when it's right there? I do recognize my numbers might not be correct either, the truth is probably somewhere in between.

 

I'd prefer to stay on topic of the suggestion rather than argue numbers, but you are welcome to PM me list of names you consider against this idea and I will go re-read all of their comments and we can compare and discuss.

Edited October 29, 2020 by Alwerien

[Fuzzbucket]

Doesn't matter that much - I was just curious. (And I suppose there may be people who changed their minds; I didn't check TOO hard for that; on the whole I went by their first appearance in the thread.) The important thing, numerically, is that in this thread, the clear majority want this.

[Uther_Pendragon]

Yes please, can we stay on topic? I appreciate it! 
 

  I haven't seen an explanation if there's a difference when a dragon technically has the same name as another, but with creative spellings or added characters. Does this bother you as much as a dragon having the same exact spelling? (You being a general you)

Do you lose anything if another dragon has the same name? I believe I did read something about possible trading value, but, imo, that's catering to a select few, and not the DC population as a whole.
 

Is there any other loss? (besides possible trading value) How would it impact you? Would you even know?

If I named, idk, a/many Soulstone(s)Fred, I feel it really wouldn't affect me at all if someone named their soulstone(s) the same thing, and most likely, they would choose a totally different dragon breed to name Fred.
I'm just not understanding how ending exclusivity harms anyone's gameplay, and I'm really interested in being educated.

 

Which brings the third: how often currently do you search to see if someone has named their dragon the same, but with the added misspellings?

From my point of view, if exclusivity ends, we still can dream up creative, unique names. Why not have the option for both styles of gameplay?

[Daydreamer09]

2 hours ago, Uther_Pendragon said:

Do you lose anything if another dragon has the same name? I believe I did read something about possible trading value, but, imo, that's catering to a select few, and not the DC population as a whole.
 

Is there any other loss? (besides possible trading value) How would it impact you? Would you even know?

If I named, idk, a/many Soulstone(s)Fred, I feel it really wouldn't affect me at all if someone named their soulstone(s) the same thing, and most likely, they would choose a totally different dragon breed to name Fred.
I'm just not understanding how ending exclusivity harms anyone's gameplay, and I'm really interested in being educated.

I think the only argument I've heard that makes sense to me and I can sympathize with would be lineages. Discerning if your egg's descended from a pair of dragons legitimately could become tough if other people are able to use the same names. That could be said for some of TJ's thuwed pairs and the Dorkface lines where other players can mimic the CB pairs. Players would have to look at the scroll owner (if the owner's name is even visible) or the dragon's code.

 

Still, Dragon Cave has evolved over time from other game changes occurring. It's not enough of a reason in my opinion.

[HeatherMarie]

2 hours ago, Uther_Pendragon said:

Yes please, can we stay on topic? I appreciate it! 
 

  I haven't seen an explanation if there's a difference when a dragon technically has the same name as another, but with creative spellings or added characters. Does this bother you as much as a dragon having the same exact spelling? (You being a general you)

Do you lose anything if another dragon has the same name? I believe I did read something about possible trading value, but, imo, that's catering to a select few, and not the DC population as a whole.
 

Is there any other loss? (besides possible trading value) How would it impact you? Would you even know?

If I named, idk, a/many Soulstone(s)Fred, I feel it really wouldn't affect me at all if someone named their soulstone(s) the same thing, and most likely, they would choose a totally different dragon breed to name Fred.
I'm just not understanding how ending exclusivity harms anyone's gameplay, and I'm really interested in being educated.

 

Which brings the third: how often currently do you search to see if someone has named their dragon the same, but with the added misspellings?

 

 

(bolded for emphasis) This, honestly, is the main reason I just sincerely don't understand the pro-name-exclusivity. Do many users actually go around checking to see if anyone else has a similar name? If someone wanted to name their dragon 'Jessica', and I had a dragon named 'Jeszica', would they care? Would they know? I understand that, right now, if you try to use a name that's already taken you'll know someone else already has it, but is that something people are actually going to go *searching* for if duplicate names are allowed? I want to name my dragon 'Kazaam', but oh look at that some dragon I've never seen before has that name too, does that suddenly make me not like that name anymore? I just genuinely don't think tons of users are going to be poking around random scrolls and tossing away tons of naming potential just because some other random dragon might have that name too?

[Switch]

Support. If we absolutely can't have the ability to take inactive names back again for some reason, then yeah this pretty much needs to happen because as it is our naming system sucks about as bad as Neopets', and even those guys clear inactive names sometimes. I rarely even bother with names anymore because of how restrictive it feels (unless it's some dumb meme name that's guaranteed not to be taken and that's only funny for so long) and the fact that most names I'd legitimately want are rotting away on someone's dead scroll. That includes variations 99% of the time, mind you. Unless removing name exclusivity is legitimately technically impossible, in which case it'd... be nice if someone would say so at this point.

[Keileon]

21 minutes ago, Switch said:

Unless removing name exclusivity is legitimately technically impossible, in which case it'd... be nice if someone would say so at this point.

Obviously I can't know for sure as I'm not TJ and don't have access to the code, but I'd wager that surely the code can't be that old and bad that it would be impossible.

 

From what I understand, DC was built off of a framework that many other adoptable sites also use, rather than completely from scratch. Considering that these other sites don't have exclusivity, I don't see why it would be impossible for DC to remove its own.

[Pilauli]

Here's a thought, which may not convince the dyed-in-the-wool pro-name-exclusivity crowd, but I'll put it out here anyway.

 

If names are special, it's not because of uniqueness.  Names are special for the significance they have to players.  Allowing "duplicate" names doesn't make the names themselves less special.  It would remove the distinction that attaches to players and dragons from being the only one with access to that particular name, but the name itself would remain special.

 

For example, if I name my dragon (eoGvk) "Eoguk", I don't think anyone else wants that name.  But people are interested in names of fictional characters, names of family members, names that describe the dragon, puns, lyrical lineages... not because they're unique, but because they have some other significance.

 

And this proposal, I believe, is to let more people have access to special (to them) names without having to jump through so many figurative hoops.

[Fuzzbucket]

6 hours ago, Uther_Pendragon said:

I haven't seen an explanation if there's a difference when a dragon technically has the same name as another, but with creative spellings or added characters. Does this bother you as much as a dragon having the same exact spelling? (You being a general you)

 

Never. I don't care if they are similar, not a bit.

 

6 hours ago, Uther_Pendragon said:

Do you lose anything if another dragon has the same name? I believe I did read something about possible trading value, but, imo, that's catering to a select few, and not the DC population as a whole.

 

The ability to find a dragon for certain sure, without having to resort to code.

 

6 hours ago, Uther_Pendragon said:

 

Is there any other loss? (besides possible trading value) How would it impact you? Would you even know?

 

The first time I searched for a dragon whose name had been reused I'd know. Which would be often, as I use the/n/ link most days.

 

6 hours ago, Uther_Pendragon said:

If I named, idk, a/many Soulstone(s)Fred, I feel it really wouldn't affect me at all if someone named their soulstone(s) the same thing, and most likely, they would choose a totally different dragon breed to name Fred.
I'm just not understanding how ending exclusivity harms anyone's gameplay, and I'm really interested in being educated.

 

Which brings the third: how often currently do you search to see if someone has named their dragon the same, but with the added misspellings?

 

Never.

 

6 hours ago, Uther_Pendragon said:

From my point of view, if exclusivity ends, we still can dream up creative, unique names. Why not have the option for both styles of gameplay?

 

3 hours ago, HeatherMarie said:

 

(bolded for emphasis) This, honestly, is the main reason I just sincerely don't understand the pro-name-exclusivity. Do many users actually go around checking to see if anyone else has a similar name? If someone wanted to name their dragon 'Jessica', and I had a dragon named 'Jeszica', would they care? Would they know? I understand that, right now, if you try to use a name that's already taken you'll know someone else already has it, but is that something people are actually going to go *searching* for if duplicate names are allowed? I want to name my dragon 'Kazaam', but oh look at that some dragon I've never seen before has that name too, does that suddenly make me not like that name anymore? I just genuinely don't think tons of users are going to be poking around random scrolls and tossing away tons of naming potential just because some other random dragon might have that name too?

 

You don't have to check to see if it's taken at present; you will know as soon as you try to use the name. I assume it would tell us if a name was taken, if this happened, so that you could, if you minded, change your plans,.

 

19 minutes ago, Pilauli said:

If names are special, it's not because of uniqueness.  Names are special for the significance they have to players.  Allowing "duplicate" names doesn't make the names themselves less special.  It would remove the distinction that attaches to players and dragons from being the only one with access to that particular name, but the name itself would remain special.

 

Actually no - I don't name dragons for the "significance to me" (with ONE exception, which isn't likely to be a name anyone else would try for, and also a sort of lyrical line.) I name them to have names which are unique and which I can find at once. For me it isn't "because of" uniqueness, nor because of "significance to me"; it is unique once it's done and I would hugely prefer it to stay that way.

 

[Pilauli]

1 minute ago, Fuzzbucket said:

Actually no - I don't name dragons for the "significance to me" (with ONE exception, which isn't likely to be a name anyone else would try for, and also a sort of lyrical line.) I name them to have names which are unique and which I can find at once.

Okay, I guess I hadn't fully considered that.  I'm sorry.

 

You've said before that you don't want to have to deal with other dragons by the same name making it harder for you to find the one you're looking for, but I think that a properly-set-up page ought to not be too hard to use when looking for a particular dragon.  Would it work for you if the view/n/Hypothetical-name-that-multiple-dragons-have page looked something like this?

It should ideally have enough important information that someone can identify the dragon they are looking for at a glance.  I'm sure that breed, code, and owner (if the owner is visible on the dragon's page) should go a long way; would there be any other information that would be super-useful and fit on the page?

 

If there is only one dragon by that name, then DC should automatically route that to the dragon's view page just like it does now.  Because making people click extra would just be annoying.

 

(Hmm... maybe view/n/Hypothetical-name-that-multiple-dragons-have/1 could go to the first dragon that was given that name, and .../2 could go to the second one, if there was one, and so on?  That would mean that if you knew your dragon's name was unique when you gave it, you could use two extra characters to say "just give me the first one" and skip the full list.  Would that work?  I still think that it would be most logical for the generic view/n page to go to the full list of dragons by that name.)

 

This system would, admittedly, get unwieldy if everybody decided to name all their Heartseekers the same mushy romantic phrase or something like that.  But I feel like if that becomes a thing, it's likely to be the obvious names that get "overloaded", so the slightly more unique names that currently exist (anything made by someone who couldn't get the obvious name and made up a more complicated one) and any where unique ones where someone could have chosen a duplicate name (and opted for a unique one instead) probably wouldn't have a ton of other dragons on their pages.

 

Someone mentioned in this thread, and I support, the idea of indicators beside the naming field for whether a new name follows the structural rules (not too long, first and last characters are not punctuation marks, etc.), for whether it is unique across the whole site (for those who care about that), and whether it is unique within the scroll (for absentminded people who might forget they already named a dragon that).  Of course, if there were no name exclusivity, only the "breaks structural rules" version would prevent a name from being used, and the other two would just be information for people who wanted to maintain some level of uniqueness in the names they used.

[Eggy0]

I have been looking at this thread every now and then, and now I think I would like to post.

I would very, very much support the removal of name exclusivity. It's part of the reason why most of my dragons aren't named - I don't consider myself easily capable of thinking up names, but I've found that even if I do come up with something, it tends to be taken, so I don't even bother at this point. I recently tried to name a dragon something I really liked, only to find that name was already used on a dragon from more than 10 years ago. I only started playing in 2013 (although my account was created in 2011 but I then forgot it existed). And so, there was no way I was able to use that name as it was, simply because the user that came up with it first was there long before I could think of it, and as a result I had to resort to an intentional typo to get it to go through. I hate the typo, but with the name exclusivity, that's the closest I was able to get to what I wanted.

Unique names are really nice, I must admit. But sometimes, I do want to name a dragon of mine something common, like a real given name, and with a necessity for unique names across every dragon that has existed and will exist, that's hard or even borderline impossible because people before me have used the common things up. Heck, even some of the intentionally typo-ed names are taken.

[Terces]

Agreeing with Fuzz in that I don't name my dragons because the name is special to me, I name them because it's nearly impossible for me to remember all their codes. I caught my first CB Gold back in 2008, I can't for the life of me remember his 4 letter code but I've always easily been able to find him by n/Athurok which is (somehow) easier to remember than short random code. It's not too unusual, I've seen enough of "Shadow Walker CB M1" names or such while wading through the sea of Halloween eggs just this year alone - it's all about making a specific dragon easier to find with minimal effort. It's like an identifier you can choose if the code is too difficult.

 

The proposed n/ page looks nice with just a small amount of dragons on it, how would it look if it had thousands? I worry it could make the search-by-name feature laggy if there are hundreds or thousands of dragons with the same name. I can't speak for anyone else, but when I try to breed a standard dragon I definitely get lag as it loads the thousands of dragons all at once all on one page and it's only accessing my scroll in that case. There's probably tens of thousands of users if not more (not sure of total population number these days) and there's no limit to how many dragons we can keep so it makes me wonder, is that why we've had names locked for so long?

 

TJ is probably the only one who can really say if that would or would not be the case I guess. It would be nice to hear from him because we're kind of navigating in the dark. I'm not really opposed to the suggestion especially if lag will not be an issue. I did put ungodly amounts of time and effort into coming up with names for over 9400+ dragons - at the same time I'm tired of picking up eggs from unnamed parents and maybe this will help although I'm doubtful. The only other thing I can think of is that it'll be a bit of a bummer if names can no longer be traded for things you otherwise might not be able to trade for. I know quite a number of players who want nothing in DC anymore but collecting unique codes or names, it's pretty much the only way you can trade with them. It's nice for people who may not be fast at catching or not good at being social, even a newer player who doesn't know anyone can be the one to reserve a nice name from a new game, movie, book, whatever and trade it (also much better for trading than codes are after the dragon has grown up).

[MissK.]

58 minutes ago, Terces said:

 

The proposed n/ page looks nice with just a small amount of dragons on it, how would it look if it had thousands? I worry it could make the search-by-name feature laggy if there are hundreds or thousands of dragons with the same name. I can't speak for anyone else, but when I try to breed a standard dragon I definitely get lag as it loads the thousands of dragons all at once all on one page and it's only accessing my scroll in that case. There's probably tens of thousands of users if not more (not sure of total population number these days) and there's no limit to how many dragons we can keep so it makes me wonder, is that why we've had names locked for so long?

 

That's a very reasonable concern. Perhaps we could avoid it with something as simple as pagination? Obviously it all depends on what will work the best with the site's coding and all but there should be some ways of avoiding a ton of dragons loading at the same time - I wouldn't want that either.

[ShorahNagi]

1 hour ago, Terces said:

at the same time I'm tired of picking up eggs from unnamed parents and maybe this will help although I'm doubtful. 

Sometimes, that might just be because the dragon grew up before the owner knew it and forgot about it [this is the case with several 'wall clear pick-ups' on my scroll. I've found and bred some of them due to having a nice lineage, but never got around to naming them]

[ADN6]

I personally enjoy the excitement of getting a neat name. I recently snagged "Adjunct Faculty" and was in awe lol. However, it is frustrating to have a name you really want but can't get. I often like doing the fantasy/keyboard mash ones, but that's not everybody's cup of tea and people shouldn't be forced to pair random syllables if they don't to. 
 

So basically, I feel like the best thing to do is what would benefit the most people. If having unique names is making the game much less fun for a lot of people, and even making some people quit, I think it makes sense to remove it. 

 

And definitely please no wiping names again. I went on a long hiatus just before name-wiping stopped, and came back to all my dragons nameless. It was exhausting trying to rename them all, and I totally understand the people saying it would stop them from returning. I have 2k dragons now, and I think I'd give up on coming back if they all got wiped. 

 

[Terces]

2 hours ago, MissK. said:

That's a very reasonable concern. Perhaps we could avoid it with something as simple as pagination? Obviously it all depends on what will work the best with the site's coding and all but there should be some ways of avoiding a ton of dragons loading at the same time - I wouldn't want that either.

 

Yeah, I'm sure there could be solutions for it too, I just don't know enough about coding or the inner workings of DC to make suggestions. I'm fine with pagination for example but some users really dislike it so I don't know. I only mentioned lag because on the breeding page it can get pretty bad for me and it only gets worse the longer I play and acquire more dragons - it's like a double-edged sword now when it wasn't in the past. Lag can really take the enjoyment out of DC. Right now the search-by-name feature works great for me with no major downsides, so I'm hopeful that some kind of method could be worked out that eliminates 'annoying side effects' while still allowing this suggestion to become a reality. I'd be disappointed to have another personally useful part of DC turn into a useful-but-also-a-burden thing that I can't do much to fix and have to live with like the bloated breeding page.

 

2 hours ago, ShorahNagi said:

Sometimes, that might just be because the dragon grew up before the owner knew it and forgot about it [this is the case with several 'wall clear pick-ups' on my scroll. I've found and bred some of them due to having a nice lineage, but never got around to naming them]

 

You're right, there's lots of reasons why dragons aren't named - and sometimes even those of us that like to name can forget or fall behind as happened to me earlier this year. I use parents names to come up with naming ideas when I raise a bred dragon, and when time is limited like during a holiday week I just prefer to grab eggs from already named parents so I don't have to wait and see whether the owner names them at a later date (or possibly never).

[Alwerien]

I touched up Pilauli's image a little - I think something like this would look quite good. The number of other people's dragons showing could be 3, it could be 10, the number limit could be separate for your own dragons and for others or shared (first taken by your own). I'd also suggest showing dragons that have had the name earliest showing up on top, but that would be up to TJ's implementation. Of course, there could be just regular pagination based  on your settings.

 

Spoiler

 

The show more could show another list that has pagination, or all of them. I suppose the lag can't really be tested until it's made. I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with pagination, the real issue many people have with it is the fact you can't filter the breeding page at all so pagination makes it harder to search. If this was sorted by when the name was first acquired, I think the proponents of name exclusivity would find it more agreeable?

Edited October 30, 2020 by Alwerien

[Sextonator]

What if we had a search function for our scrolls? Not only for finding dragons by name, but for specific breeds too?