Get Rid of Name Exclusivity

[angelicdragonpuppy]

@Fuzzbucketthe point isn't to be wild about it; it's to come up with compromises to soften the blow if this goes one way or another. I still very much want unique names, but if they leave, being able to still easily use the /n/ function and check lineages for inbreeding are my "must haves."

 

Likewise, for those of you who DON'T LIKE unique names, what are some livable middle grounds?

[ShorahNagi]

2 hours ago, MissK. said:

As I understood angelicdragonpuppy's suggestion, the /n/ link would take you to the first dragon with that name, but then (possibly underneath?) also your own dragons with that name. And finally there could be an extra link along the lines of  "show all dragons with that name", but that would not interfere with finding yours.

The one problem I see with that is what if the original dragon with that name has it changed? Does the second dragon to be given that name now have the n/link go to it, with the other links unchanged or does it just default to the list of all dragons with that name?

 

That aside, I'm still all for getting rid of name exclusivity. As I stated earlier in this thread, it is stil possible to have a unique name [on another website with nearly 18 Million pets (17,977,746 at time of this post) - I somehow own the only one with a certain name]...which is an impressive feat.

 

6 minutes ago, angelicdragonpuppy said:

Likewise, for those of you who DON'T LIKE unique names, what are some livable middle grounds?

A liveable middle ground to me would be to add a way on site to check for inbreeding [maybe a little star or note on a dragon's lineage page that says "X dragon is inbred"] - which removes the issue of checking similarly named dragons using offsite tools.

 

Or, as I also suggested at one point...a Cut off point with names. Meaning all dragons with names given before X Date, keep those names and they can NOT be duplicated. But any names used after X Date can be duplicated. Removing a name off a dragon after the X Date cut off frees it up for duplication.

[Falorni]

36 minutes ago, angelicdragonpuppy said:

Likewise, for those of you who DON'T LIKE unique names, what are some livable middle grounds?

Freeing up names taken by dead dragons is a massive one for me - even though it doesn't really relate to name exclusivity itself, it'd help free up some names that are currently lost forever!  Making names case sensitive could also help, although I'm not a massive fan in most cases (pun unintended)

[KrazyKarp]

On 3/20/2021 at 8:43 AM, MissK. said:

do think that this thread would benefit more from discussing people's interests and not just repeating the same positions though - sure, you can say "I want my dragon names to stay exclusive", but where does that come from? Do you legitimately not want anyone else to have a thing that you have, do you want an indication of which names are still unique, do you just want the joy of being the first to think of a name?

I think a lot of support for name exclusivity was founded upon wanting to continue to feel special at the expense of others, i.e. "I want this for my own joy and no one else can have it!!!!". I think when people who favor exclusivity realized that kind of reasoning won't really fly, they started grasping at straws to find some sort of logic in exclusivity, which still hasn't been found to any considerable amount. That's been my point of view, anyway.

 

The only possibly justifiable reasoning in this thread that's appeared for favoring exclusivity is inbredness. Though people already need to go off-site to check for inbred lineages sometimes, so I'm not sure keeping exclusivity is actually helping as much as people think. But regardless of naming, the site could benefit from an inbred checker anyway, which would immediately solve any issues in relation to eliminating exclusivity.

 

I think to really sum up what I'm thinking, I'm honestly just... uncomfortable that some people want name exclusivity to stay so that they can enjoy getting names at the expense of others. And even if that isn't someone's claimed main reason for supporting exclusivity, they're an enabler; fundamentally, grabbing names at the expense of others' joy of naming is what exclusivity does constantly. It's the same as when some didn't support CB holidays coming back because they wanted to continue to have special scrolls at the expense of others, which were equally uncomfortable posts as the ones here. And those people, too, began grasping at straws when they realized they'd need to come up with some sort of shaky logic to try to justify the limited appearances of CB holidays.

[angelicdragonpuppy]

@KrazyKarp I don't think that's fair to paint those of us who favor exclusive names as greedy joy sucking tyrants. I've been gifted names that someone chose to give to me knowing they'd be giving them up. I've racked my brains to find interesting names that no one else had yet thought of. And, in a game where everyone's dragons look exactly the same, I've liked seeing something, ANYTHING different about my dragons to make them stick out to me. Why is my joy so less important than yours?*** Isn't it greedy for the rest of you to want to take special names others have treasured for years and sometimes worked hard to get and then just copy and duplicate them willy nilly?*** What if people really love trading for names, is your desire to also have that name so much more special than their desire to play as they have for a decade?*** How about the fact that duplicate names make us have to work harder to keep using handy /n/ links or check lines for inbreeding, isn't that selfish of you to ruin that for us?***

 

*** I DON'T ACTUALLY THINK THIS. I think there are good arguments on both sides. However, you choosing to bring greed and accusations into it is eye roll inducing and does not move the conversation forward. Don't imply people have hidden greedy motives. It doesn't help. Respond to actual arguments. 

 

@ShorahNagi If a first named dragon is unnamed, whichever dragon next claims that title would become the new "original." Yes, this means /n/ links might not always direct to the same dragon, but that's true now as well. 

While from my perspective the "no original names after X time" would elicit a sigh of relief... I don't think it'd get much traction. Most of the classic / easy / pop culture names are already taken, so people would only have access to the unclaimed names at this point, which people are already saying aren't enough. Maybe instead there could be a limit on how many copies of a name there could be (10? 100?), though I don't see that being very justifiable in the long run.

 

@Falorni ughhh being able to unname dead dragons would be great for so many reasons. I've had to carefully remove names from zombie fodder for years and there are many stories of poor fools who didn't realize they needed to and lost nice names--to all of us--forever.

Edited March 21, 2021 by angelicdragonpuppy

[MissK.]

54 minutes ago, ShorahNagi said:

The one problem I see with that is what if the original dragon with that name has it changed? Does the second dragon to be given that name now have the n/link go to it, with the other links unchanged or does it just default to the list of all dragons with that name?

 

That is a good question, in my mind it makes more sense that the link would then go to the next dragon indeed. I mean, technically that is what happens now, right? If I rename my dragon and someone else takes the name I had, the link now goes to that dragon. But honestly either way is fine, maybe others have different opinions. Edit: okay great I see angelicdragonpuppy had the same thing in mind lol.

 

27 minutes ago, Falorni said:

Freeing up names taken by dead dragons is a massive one for me - even though it doesn't really relate to name exclusivity itself, it'd help free up some names that are currently lost forever!  Making names case sensitive could also help, although I'm not a massive fan in most cases (pun unintended)

 

Agreed with this. 

On a related but probably more controversial note, I would also like to see name wiping take place again after, say, 5 years of inactivity or so (and yes I am someone who has taken several long breaks from DC myself). But I know most people are against that so I'd probably be in favour of any kind of way that at least frees up some names.

Edited March 21, 2021 by MissK.

[Fuzzbucket]

1 hour ago, angelicdragonpuppy said:

@Fuzzbucketthe point isn't to be wild about it; it's to come up with compromises to soften the blow if this goes one way or another. I still very much want unique names, but if they leave, being able to still easily use the /n/ function and check lineages for inbreeding are my "must haves."

 

Likewise, for those of you who DON'T LIKE unique names, what are some livable middle grounds?

 

Oh I know. But someone asked if that would be OK with me. Sadly - no. I realise I am mean and beastly and trying to feel special (see below )

 

48 minutes ago, ShorahNagi said:

The one problem I see with that is what if the original dragon with that name has it changed? Does the second dragon to be given that name now have the n/link go to it, with the other links unchanged or does it just default to the list of all dragons with that name?

OMG I never even thought of that...

 

48 minutes ago, ShorahNagi said:

 

That aside, I'm still all for getting rid of name exclusivity. As I stated earlier in this thread, it is stil possible to have a unique name [on another website with nearly 18 Million pets (17,977,746 at time of this post) - I somehow own the only one with a certain name]...which is an impressive feat.

 

A liveable middle ground to me would be to add a way on site to check for inbreeding [maybe a little star or note on a dragon's lineage page that says "X dragon is inbred"] - which removes the issue of checking similarly named dragons using offsite tools.

I think TJ nixed that on the grounds that inbreeding is perfectly OK within the game, and a warning would suggest that it wasn't.

 

48 minutes ago, ShorahNagi said:

 

Or, as I also suggested at one point...a Cut off point with names. Meaning all dragons with names given before X Date, keep those names and they can NOT be duplicated. But any names used after X Date can be duplicated. Removing a name off a dragon after the X Date cut off frees it up for duplication.

 

I would hugely appreciate that./ And if it ever did happen, I would probably start using a "surname"... (perhaps there could then be a way to "register" a surname so that it was ONLY usable by its owner ? Like this thread:

 

15 minutes ago, KrazyKarp said:

I think a lot of support for name exclusivity was founded upon wanting to continue to feel special at the expense of others, i.e. "I want this for my own joy and no one else can have it!!!!". I think when people who favor exclusivity realized that kind of reasoning won't really fly, they started grasping at straws to find some sort of logic in exclusivity, which still hasn't been found to any considerable amount. That's been my point of view, anyway.

Thanks for that; it isn't my motivation AT ALL.

 

15 minutes ago, KrazyKarp said:

 

The only possibly justifiable reasoning in this thread that's appeared for favoring exclusivity is inbredness. Though people already need to go off-site to check for inbred lineages sometimes, so I'm not sure keeping exclusivity is actually helping as much as people think. But regardless of naming, the site could benefit from an inbred checker anyway, which would immediately solve any issues in relation to eliminating exclusivity.

 

I think to really sum up what I'm thinking, I'm honestly just... uncomfortable that some people want name exclusivity to stay so that they can enjoy getting names at the expense of others. And even if that isn't someone's claimed main reason for supporting exclusivity, they're an enabler; fundamentally, grabbing names at the expense of others' joy of naming is what exclusivity does constantly. It's the same as when some didn't support CB holidays coming back because they wanted to continue to have special scrolls at the expense of others, which were equally uncomfortable posts as the ones here. And those people, too, began grasping at straws when they realized they'd need to come up with some sort of shaky logic to try to justify the limited appearances of CB holidays.

 That is NOT the only reason. the /n/ one is huge for many of us.

[Sextonator]

I think it’s a little unfair that some of the reasons of being for name exclusivity is that the names seem to be the only enjoyment that people get out of the game, so the other users are expected to feel frustrated or left out that they can’t have to joy of naming their dragons what they want. And the creative debate is just such a poor one because it implies people should feel bad for not being able to come up with something 100% complete.

 

but I also can’t think of a reasonable solution that would be acceptable to all. Heck, the only one I can think of is “make the code a mandatory part of the name” and like anyone would want that.

 

I feel like the /n/ link leading to a page of dragons with your own on top would work best, even if we have thousands of dragons with the same name.

 

Or, y’know, keeping track of codes for certain dragons.

[schenanigans]

1 hour ago, ShorahNagi said:

Or, as I also suggested at one point...a Cut off point with names. Meaning all dragons with names given before X Date, keep those names and they can NOT be duplicated. But any names used after X Date can be duplicated. Removing a name off a dragon after the X Date cut off frees it up for duplication.

 

I'm just going to chime in that I don't think this makes much better or would actually fix the issue for a lot of people - so people who have been around forever get an extra advantage and punish new people (this is the case NOW, but if we removed name exclusivity it would be an actual benefit for old vs new), and/or scrolls that are no longer active/BURNED can just maintain names that now NOBODY EVER will be able to get? That will defeat the purpose for a lot of names and removing name exclusivity, considering the most popular fandom and real word names have been long, long taken. 

Edited March 21, 2021 by schenanigans

[MissK.]

30 minutes ago, KrazyKarp said:

I think a lot of support for name exclusivity was founded upon wanting to continue to feel special at the expense of others, i.e. "I want this for my own joy and no one else can have it!!!!". I think when people who favor exclusivity realized that kind of reasoning won't really fly, they started grasping at straws to find some sort of logic in exclusivity, which still hasn't been found to any considerable amount. That's been my point of view, anyway.

 

The only possibly justifiable reasoning in this thread that's appeared for favoring exclusivity is inbredness. Though people already need to go off-site to check for inbred lineages sometimes, so I'm not sure keeping exclusivity is actually helping as much as people think. But regardless of naming, the site could benefit from an inbred checker anyway, which would immediately solve any issues in relation to eliminating exclusivity.

 

I think to really sum up what I'm thinking, I'm honestly just... uncomfortable that some people want name exclusivity to stay so that they can enjoy getting names at the expense of others. And even if that isn't someone's claimed main reason for supporting exclusivity, they're an enabler; fundamentally, grabbing names at the expense of others' joy of naming is what exclusivity does constantly. It's the same as when some didn't support CB holidays coming back because they wanted to continue to have special scrolls at the expense of others, which were equally uncomfortable posts as the ones here. And those people, too, began grasping at straws when they realized they'd need to come up with some sort of shaky logic to try to justify the limited appearances of CB holidays.

 

While I get what you mean, I think this is a bit too harsh. The game has definitely been moving away from the trend of exclusivity with the market, re-releases of CB Holidays, more raffles for CB prizes (though that still needs a lot of work imo) etc, so I do agree that it doesn't make much sense to stick to name exclusivity when it clearly favours older players and all. But I don't think the people who want to keep exclusivity consciously want to make others feel bad or something - at least not all of them lol. It is a matter of perspective in some ways; codes are unique in the game for example, so if someone decides to keep a super special code then nobody else can have it. And that's not unfair or mean, it's just the game. To me, names don't have to be the same as that, and it would be better to keep going in a direction that also benefits new players, but I guess I can understand that someone might just view it differently without malicious intentions. 

 

1 minute ago, Fuzzbucket said:

 That is NOT the only reason. the /n/ one is huge for many of us.

 

I don't entirely agree with all of KrazyKarp's post as you can see, but to be fair, all of your concerns about the /n/ link were addressed in the suggestion I asked you about...and you still don't like it. That's valid of course, it's your opinion and that's why I asked, but then it does seem like the motivation behind this sentiment is more just not wanting things changed rather than concerns about functionality. 

 

2 minutes ago, schenanigans said:

 

I'm just going to chime in that I don't think this makes much better or would actually fix the issue for a lot of people - so people who have been around forever get an extra advantage and punish new people (this is the case NOW, but if we removed name exclusivity it would be an actual benefit for old vs new), and/or scrolls that are no longer active/BURNED can just maintain names that now NOBODY EVER will be able to get? That will defeat the purpose for a lot of names, considering the most popular fandom and real word names have been long, long taken. 

 

Wait, burned scrolls maintain names?? If so the need for some ways of freeing up names is even bigger than I thought...

[Falorni]

If burnt scrolls really maintain names, then a good middle ground for me would be to free those + dead dragon names + names from scrolls that have been inactive since a certain time period.  As @MissK. said the last one might be controversial, but I've been on a lot of other sites where names get wiped after a specific amount of inactivity and it really isn't as scary or big of a deal as it might sound.

 

edit to clarify// I didn't know the site used to wipe inactive names actually, but if there has been disdain over that before then disregard - several other people have also said this would be a big deal for them n even tho I personally wouldn't care I understand where y'all are coming from

Edited March 21, 2021 by Falorni

[purplehaze]

I am really against removing names from inactive scrolls. I have recently seen a number of people posting that they were returning after a hiatus of years! Coming back to find all your dragons unnamed would be very disheartening. Historically the site used to do that, but it was changed and I see no reason to go back to that.

[Slavic]

Tbh since every dragon has a uniquely generated code I genuinely don't understand why name exclusivity has been held onto so strongly.

 

I'm someone who has been playing on and off since 2008, I started a naming theme with my dragons then (naming after cities, towns, villages in the world) because I'm not creative enough to make nice names that aren't like, George. Mathilda, etc. So I started this and I have a BUNCH of really nice, really big/popular/famous world cities and towns.

 

Even then I really would love to see name exclusivity go. I wish I could name my dragon Ruslan, or Cactus, or something like that. I've never been a fan of spaces and symbols in names but that's just me, and it's made naming stuff so difficult here, especially after I've come back from a multi-year hiatus.

 

If exclusivity it to be held onto as strongly as it has been, I'd love to see names purged from dead (actually dead, NOT Zombies) dragons, burned scrolls, or scrolls that have been inactive for like 5+ years.

Edited March 21, 2021 by herduleik

[Fuzzbucket]

22 minutes ago, schenanigans said:

 

I'm just going to chime in that I don't think this makes much better or would actually fix the issue for a lot of people - so people who have been around forever get an extra advantage and punish new people (this is the case NOW, but if we removed name exclusivity it would be an actual benefit for old vs new), and/or scrolls that are no longer active/BURNED can just maintain names that now NOBODY EVER will be able to get? That will defeat the purpose for a lot of names and removing name exclusivity, considering the most popular fandom and real word names have been long, long taken. 

 

Please don't use words like punish. that isn't anyone's motive, and we all know where language like that can lead.

 

I'm OK with removing names form burned scrolls - even though it plays hell with some lineages - (as long as Sock's names stay !) but NOT from inactive scrolls; lots of people leave for ages and come back. Some through no fault of their own - I seem to recall someone who lost their home and their internet for a couple of years once...

 

18 minutes ago, MissK. said:

 

While I get what you mean, I think this is a bit too harsh. The game has definitely been moving away from the trend of exclusivity with the market, re-releases of CB Holidays, more raffles for CB prizes (though that still needs a lot of work imo) etc, so I do agree that it doesn't make much sense to stick to name exclusivity when it clearly favours older players and all. But I don't think the people who want to keep exclusivity consciously want to make others feel bad or something - at least not all of them lol. It is a matter of perspective in some ways; codes are unique in the game for example, so if someone decides to keep a super special code then nobody else can have it. And that's not unfair or mean, it's just the game. To me, names don't have to be the same as that, and it would be better to keep going in a direction that also benefits new players, but I guess I can understand that someone might just view it differently without malicious intentions. 

Good point about codes   As they are unique - why shouldn't names be ?

 

18 minutes ago, MissK. said:

I don't entirely agree with all of KrazyKarp's post as you can see, but to be fair, all of your concerns about the /n/ link were addressed in the suggestion I asked you about...and you still don't like it. That's valid of course, it's your opinion and that's why I asked, but then it does seem like the motivation behind this sentiment is more just not wanting things changed rather than concerns about functionality. 

 

I am very much of a "if it ain't broke don't fix it" mind. But if ALL my concerns had been addressed by your suggestion, I would have been fine with it. LOGIC, see

 

8 minutes ago, Falorni said:

If burnt scrolls really maintain names, then a good middle ground for me would be to free those + dead dragon names + names from scrolls that have been inactive since a certain time period.  As @MissK. said the last one might be controversial, but I've been on a lot of other sites where names get wiped after a specific amount of inactivity and it really isn't as scary or big of a deal as it might sound.

Not from inactive scrolls, please... See above.

1 minute ago, herduleik said:

Tbh since every dragon has a uniquely generated code I genuinely don't understand why name exclusivity has been held onto so strongly.

99% of the time who cares about a code. Code collectors are different, but they have their exclusivity anyway. Names one thinks up for oneself. That's different form a random code, more personal.

[angelicdragonpuppy]

One suggestion regarding names on inactive scrolls is don't WIPE them, but allow them to be claimed if someone else tries to claim them. I understand that people can and do return after years of absence... but some don't. I feel 5 years of waiting is a very reasonable compromise. Honestly I'd make it closer to 3 or even 2.

[BlueLatios]

I have an idea, it adds one more information onto the database per dragon but who knows, maybe it'll help.

 

Aliases, or secondary names.

 

Basically, the same as names, but it's secondary, meaning that it will not show up in view/n/ searches, but it will be a little addition below a dragon's real name (or code if unnamed). In lineage views, people then can toggle to see the dragons' real names, or their aliases (or perhaps even both with "a.k.a secondname"). In view pages for father and mother, I think it's safe that their real names (or just codes) should always be shown, and the secondary ones optional or toggle-able. I propose this idea in case anyone's interested that this may be a possible solution, and considering a bit of what both sides want. I'm neutral towards this overall so I probably won't be back to reply or discuss further, hope there exists a meeting point between both sides!

[angelicdragonpuppy]

Just now, BlueLatios said:

I have an idea, it adds one more information onto the database per dragon but who knows, maybe it'll help.

 

Aliases, or secondary names.

 

Basically, the same as names, but it's secondary, meaning that it will not show up in view/n/ searches, but it will be a little addition below a dragon's real name (or code if unnamed). In lineage views, people then can toggle to see the dragons' real names, or their aliases (or perhaps even both with "a.k.a secondname"). In view pages for father and mother, I think it's safe that their real names (or just codes) should always be shown, and the secondary ones optional or toggle-able. I propose this idea in case anyone's interested that this may be a possible solution, and considering a bit of what both sides want. I'm neutral towards this overall so I probably won't be back to reply or discuss further, hope there exists a meeting point between both sides!

OooooOoo

 

I actually love this! It preserves unique names on paper and in /n/ and lineages, but for people who want to enable using and viewing it essentially NO name is unique. Even for those who like unique names, this could serve as a kind of "tag" feature. I'm not going to rename my dragons to specify they're CB--but I wouldn't mind adding "the First" or "I" underneath their actual names!

 

This is actually really great! I'll make a mock-up when I'm home but I figure it'd be like:

Name

(Title)

 

 

[Fuzzbucket]

13 minutes ago, angelicdragonpuppy said:

One suggestion regarding names on inactive scrolls is don't WIPE them, but allow them to be claimed if someone else tries to claim them. I understand that people can and do return after years of absence... but some don't. I feel 5 years of waiting is a very reasonable compromise. Honestly I'd make it closer to 3 or even 2.

 

THAT works, actually.

 

5 minutes ago, angelicdragonpuppy said:

OooooOoo

 

I actually love this! It preserves unique names on paper and in /n/ and lineages, but for people who want to enable using and viewing it essentially NO name is unique. Even for those who like unique names, this could serve as a kind of "tag" feature. I'm not going to rename my dragons to specify they're CB--but I wouldn't mind adding "the First" or "I" underneath their actual names!

 

This is actually really great! I'll make a mock-up when I'm home but I figure it'd be like:

Name

(Title)

 

That's better than almost every other idea in this thread.

[dragongrrl]

20 minutes ago, angelicdragonpuppy said:

OooooOoo

 

I actually love this! It preserves unique names on paper and in /n/ and lineages, but for people who want to enable using and viewing it essentially NO name is unique. Even for those who like unique names, this could serve as a kind of "tag" feature. I'm not going to rename my dragons to specify they're CB--but I wouldn't mind adding "the First" or "I" underneath their actual names!

 

This is actually really great! I'll make a mock-up when I'm home but I figure it'd be like:

Name

(Title)

 

 

So, if I have the first version of the name, does this stick my dragon with some additional title? I really wouldn't like that unless it wasn't visible on my scroll or in the lineage.

[GalacticNovie]

Personally I feel like the only compelling argument towards exclusivity is the /n/ links as offsite inbred checkers are 1) easy and accessable to use and 2) scan for inbredness using codes, which are already a unique, unmodifiable identifier for a dragon. It doesn't make sense to have two such identifiers both gameplay-wise and lore-wise. The "I want my dragon to be unique" argument - in my opinion - honestly kind of brings to mind the "I got what I want and that's all that matters" mentality which is usually derided, and neglects the existence of descriptions, which are explicitly stated to be used to personalize your dragon.

 

Even for the /n/ link issue, I think a good idea is - if this suggestion were to go through - to create a disambiguation page via these links set up similarly to the Bitten page where it shows all the dragons with the name, sorted by named date (so that the dragon with the original name shows up first), and it also links to the dragon's progeny/bitten page so you can quickly check to see if you're looking at the right dragon if the ones with the same name are the same breed.

[Stormcaller]

28 minutes ago, angelicdragonpuppy said:

One suggestion regarding names on inactive scrolls is don't WIPE them, but allow them to be claimed if someone else tries to claim them. I understand that people can and do return after years of absence... but some don't. I feel 5 years of waiting is a very reasonable compromise. Honestly I'd make it closer to 3 or even 2.

 

I like this idea a lot.  Five years is a long time though; IMHO, 3 would be plenty.  As long as it allows time for a  person to recover from a RL disaster of sorts.

 

31 minutes ago, BlueLatios said:

I have an idea, it adds one more information onto the database per dragon but who knows, maybe it'll help.

 

Aliases, or secondary names.

 

Basically, the same as names, but it's secondary, meaning that it will not show up in view/n/ searches, but it will be a little addition below a dragon's real name (or code if unnamed). In lineage views, people then can toggle to see the dragons' real names, or their aliases (or perhaps even both with "a.k.a secondname"). In view pages for father and mother, I think it's safe that their real names (or just codes) should always be shown, and the secondary ones optional or toggle-able. I propose this idea in case anyone's interested that this may be a possible solution, and considering a bit of what both sides want. I'm neutral towards this overall so I probably won't be back to reply or discuss further, hope there exists a meeting point between both sides!

 

I'm not sure what this would involve.  If this would mean I have to go back and make an addition to every name I gave my dragons, I wouldn't like it.  That  would be a massive amount of work to do in addition to playing normally.  If it was something that happened automatically, I might not mind it so much. 

[Fuzzbucket]

12 minutes ago, Dragonalassa said:

Personally I feel like the only compelling argument towards exclusivity is the /n/ links as offsite inbred checkers are 1) easy and accessable to use and 2) scan for inbredness using codes, which are already a unique, unmodifiable identifier for a dragon. It doesn't make sense to have two such identifiers both gameplay-wise and lore-wise. The "I want my dragon to be unique" argument - in my opinion - honestly kind of brings to mind the "I got what I want and that's all that matters" mentality which is usually derided, and neglects the existence of descriptions, which are explicitly stated to be used to personalize your dragon.

 

But we shouldn't need to go offsite for this... Not to mention the API goes down at times.

Edited March 21, 2021 by Fuzzbucket

[GalacticNovie]

10 minutes ago, Fuzzbucket said:

But we shouldn't need to go offsite for this... Not to mention the API goes down at times.

 

Not to be rude, but... don't we usually have to go offsite just to raise our dragons in the first place? What makes this so different? But if it's really that big of an issue, then why not show both name and code on the lineage page, and have the code be in bold if it shows up more than once in a lineage? That way it wouldn't be an in-your-face indicator of inbredness, but it would still serve as a helpful reminder.

Edited March 21, 2021 by Dragonalassa

[Fuzzbucket]

True - but that's to get views - we shouldn't have to for information, I think (many have asked for such a feature ON site !)

[Stormcaller]

5 minutes ago, Dragonalassa said:

Not to be rude, but... don't we usually have to go offsite just to raise our dragons in the first place? What makes this so different?

 

Correct, and it's easy to do, and works well.  I see no problem doing it.