Get Rid of Name Exclusivity

[MissK.]

If the main concern for the view/n/ link is that people want to find their own dragons, which is the only reason I use it as well, that is very easy to solve by displaying those first on the list of results. So it could be split in two, first your dragon(s) with that name, then everyone else's, and possibly some sorting options like schenanigans mentioned above. 

 

But honestly it would be even better to combine that with the view/n/scrollname idea. Using the link with the scrollname would take you straight to the dragon owned by that person, while using the normal view/n/ link would give you the list. Personally I don't see an issue with allowing the link to work even with hidden scrolls because you already have to know that a specific person owns a dragon with that specific name, so what privacy are we protecting exactly? 

[Mood]

Surely adding a search feature for one's own scroll wouldn't be too much of a hassle if name exclusivity was going to be removed? Would make finding specific dragons significantly easier as opposed to the problems concerned with the view link.

[OMGitsKairi]

1 hour ago, Umi said:

Surely adding a search feature for one's own scroll wouldn't be too much of a hassle if name exclusivity was going to be removed? Would make finding specific dragons significantly easier as opposed to the problems concerned with the view link.

 

This would be super useful as well.

 

And honestly I don't even tend to use the view/n/ functionality to find my own dragons. I do ctrl+f on desktop or "find in page" if I'm on mobile.

 

4 hours ago, MissK. said:

So it could be split in two, first your dragon(s) with that name, then everyone else's, and possibly some sorting options like schenanigans mentioned above. 

 

This is a nifty addition that I hadn't even thought of. 

[Shadowdrake]

A sort-and-filter list doesn't really seem like TJ's style, so I wouldn't expect much more than a progeny-style page. A basic scroll search would be much simpler to use than trying to finesse a directory/info link into a personal management tool, though.

[KageSora]

On 9/20/2021 at 6:56 AM, Falorni said:

Yeah I have to agree that the reaction is a bit overblown and almost comes off as hostile - which is really discouraging when I'm genuinely trying to understand where y'all are coming from as someone who personally doesn't use the function much. 

I apologize, as it's not directed at you in particular, or any specific user for that matter--I've followed this thread for a while without saying anything and have gotten a distinct feeling, from various users, of a sort of attitude that's best described as people being annoyed at being asked to consider how to preserve or rework the current view/n/name function to retain its use instead of those of us who use it regularly just accepting the feature being removed.

 

None of this was said in those exact words, of course, but it's a persistent feeling I've gotten from various replies and my frustration at that more abstract feeling seems to have communicated itself despite my efforts to tone down the hostility since it isn't anything you, in particular, have done.

 

I suppose it also stems a little from feeling like, in the past at least, there was an issue of "the more complex a suggestion is the less likely it is to be considered" (I could swear I recall users trying to find ways to simplify suggestions to make them more likely to be considered...) and I consider reworking the current view/n/name feature into a different version rather than removing it entirely to be adding complexity depending on which suggested solution was implemented.

 

That's why the view/n/name/scrollname is the one I have least issue with because it not only doesn't add an extra step on the user's end (no sorting through or filtering a list, waiting for it to load your dragon so you can click it) and doesn't appreciably increase the time to locate a dragon (manually searching through a group or your scroll), but it's likely also one of the simplest alterations.

 

However, I still have a concern with it: if you have more than one dragon with the same name, how would that be handled?  Obviously somebody like me would make sure they didn't name their dragons the same thing, but other people might by mistake or intentionally (I know people brought up lyric lineages).  Would it be shifted to something like, say, view/n/name/scrollname/1 bringing you to the oldest dragon you have with that name, view/n/name/scrollname/2 to the second oldest, etc.?

 

That adds a little layer of complexity, I think, and I feel like it would be easier to just remove the function entirely than bother with an alternative that takes those things into consideration.  (That's how I typically handle it when working on a project and encountering a situation where I need to remove or alter something--unless removing it would be more work than reworking it, I tend to favor just getting rid of things when I come across such situations)

 

Though I suppose if the idea is to create a name directory no matter what, then if you own multiple dragons with the same name it would simply redirect to the directory page, perhaps.

[ShorahNagi]

On 9/22/2021 at 10:48 PM, KageSora said:

However, I still have a concern with it: if you have more than one dragon with the same name, how would that be handled?  Obviously somebody like me would make sure they didn't name their dragons the same thing, but other people might by mistake or intentionally (I know people brought up lyric lineages).  Would it be shifted to something like, say, view/n/name/scrollname/1 bringing you to the oldest dragon you have with that name, view/n/name/scrollname/2 to the second oldest, etc.?

On another website, same name is handled with the oldest one being displayed first and descending from there (sorted by date)

 

For example, say I've 4 dragons with the same name but different breed:

 

Riven (gold) - Stolen on: 1/2/13

Riven (silver) - stolen on: 2/4/12

Riven (white) - stolen on: 5/5/13

Riven (black) - stolen on: 5/5/13*

 

I use view/n/Riven/Shorahnagi

 

They would display as follows:

 

Riven (silver)

Riven (gold)

Riven (black)*

Riven (white)*

 

*In the case of same name/date, it would default to breed sort OR it could go by time the egg was caught/bred

 

Honestly, if view/n/ is one of the major hang ups, I'm okay with the addition of adding the username to see (as it seems most use this on their own scroll as opposed to searching others)

[Keileon]

Apologies if this idea has been brought up as I haven't followed the thread in a while and it is very late and I'm tired;

 

Instead of view/n/(name)/(scrollname), what about view/n/(name)/(number)? Where (number) turns into what order the dragons were named, so like view/n/bob/1 for the first dragon to be named bob, /bob/2 for the second, etc.

 

The numbers would start counting up from the time that exclusivity would be removed (thus starting all already-named dragons at /1) and would NOT be recycled as dragon names change, so if /bob/2 was renamed, the dragon after it would still be /bob/3 instead of taking the 2. This way links don't change and you don't have to know scrollname.

[Fuzzbucket]

That might trouble those who named their "Bob" late in the day and have to scroll through them all to find him. I think scroillname works better.

[KageSora]

17 hours ago, Keileon said:

Apologies if this idea has been brought up as I haven't followed the thread in a while and it is very late and I'm tired;

 

Instead of view/n/(name)/(scrollname), what about view/n/(name)/(number)? Where (number) turns into what order the dragons were named, so like view/n/bob/1 for the first dragon to be named bob, /bob/2 for the second, etc.

 

The numbers would start counting up from the time that exclusivity would be removed (thus starting all already-named dragons at /1) and would NOT be recycled as dragon names change, so if /bob/2 was renamed, the dragon after it would still be /bob/3 instead of taking the 2. This way links don't change and you don't have to know scrollname.

The entire point of the view/n/name/scrollname suggestion is to retain the current function of view/n/name, which is to take you exactly to one specific dragon immediately with no hunting around for it.

 

How do you find your number?  Unless you know you're the first person to use a name, how exactly do you discover which number your dragon is?  Manually check through potentially hundreds of links until you find the right one, if you happen to name it long after exclusivity is removed and want a popular name?  I suppose there could be an additional second added to the "get code" section that gives you your direct name/number link...

 

But the other problem is that then you have to potentially memorize entirely different numbers for different dragons unless you're somebody who makes sure that there's no currently named dragons with the name you want (thus making all your dragons number 1).  With using a scrollname as an alternative, you only need to remember your scrollname.

 

I'm not really seeing what a number system does other than make the entire proposed alternative far more hassle, and the entire point of the proposed scrollname alternative is to retain the current extremely fast and simple function we have.  (Which is why it's pretty much the only way I'm willing to even consider accepting removing name exclusivity)

 

From what I've seen, honestly the majority of us that want to retain the function of view/n/name want to do so because we use it to find our own dragons, not because we go hunting around for others (unless we're checking to see if the name is taken--and a simple solution would be retain the "this name is in use" function only have it not prevent people from using the name, just letting them know their dragon won't be the first to use it.  Or include a directory of all dragons with a given name)

Edited September 28, 2021 by KageSora
forgot some words

[MissK.]

5 hours ago, KageSora said:

[snip] 

 

From what I've seen, honestly the majority of us that want to retain the function of view/n/name want to do so because we use it to find our own dragons, not because we go hunting around for others (unless we're checking to see if the name is taken--and a simple solution would be retain the "this name is in use" function only have it not prevent people from using the name, just letting them know their dragon won't be the first to use it.  Or include a directory of all dragons with a given name)

 

Bolded is mine. Maybe I've said this before, but I would still really like it if we still saw if a name is unique at the time of choosing it. It might not make a big difference to some, but there is a satisfaction in it for me (and possibly some others) even if more people end up using the name later. 

Edited September 28, 2021 by MissK.

[KageSora]

12 minutes ago, MissK. said:

 

Bolded is mine. Maybe I've said this before, but I would still really like it if we still saw if a name is unique at the time of choosing it. It might not make a big difference to some, but there is a satisfaction in it for me (and possibly some others) even if more people end up using the name later. 

Agreed--I'd be fine with at least a directory since if there's no dragons with the name it'd turn up empty, but I like picking a name that nobody's used before, even if it's just swapping out a letter or slightly modifying the spelling on something.  But I like the challenge of figuring out a name that isn't in use.  Having some sort of "hey, you're not the first to use this name" marker would allow for people like us to still pick names that are unique at the time of naming.

[PlatinumDream]

I feel like getting rid of name exclusivity would be a good thing for the site. I have several friends I've tried to get into DC who drop it once they realize names have to be unique. DC is such a timeless site and the name exclusivity thing feels like one remnant from a bygone era that's really holding it back.

 

I can't speak for the use of view/n/name/ because I'm still not sure what use people would get out of it, but I definitely support the lineage mockup on the first post. Being honest, even if name exclusivity wasn't removed, I'd love to still see the codes of named dragons in lineages! Needing to choose between preserving a good code in a lineage and naming a dragon is a conundrum. *insert meme here* Why not both?

 

Because of DC's long site culture/history of using unique names, though, if unique names were removed, I think a good feature to add in would be some sort of indicator of how popular a name is. For example, if I go to name my dragon "Jim" on the name page, instead of a checkmark or x indicating available/unavailable, you could have a set of messages that pop up:

• There are no dragons with this name (no dragons registered on DC with this name, same validation system as we currently have)

• There are a few dragons with this name (maybe something like 1-25 dragons with this name on site)

• There are several dragons with this name (maybe something like 26+ dragons on site with this name)

 

That way we can preserve the culture of unique naming while allowing people who don't care about unique names to name their dragons what they want.
 

Apologies if anything here has already been suggested! I'd also be down for "scroll name exclusivity but sitewide availability" as mentioned in the first post.

[Xopwe]

I want to support this but it might make spotting inbreeding tricky. 

[DragonLady86]

6 hours ago, Xopwe said:

I want to support this but it might make spotting inbreeding tricky. 

Sigh you can already name dragons nearly the same but with different spaces. People already name things this way to mess with people. Just like they can name something Thuwed or Dorkface that isn't. This is a non-argument that keeps coming up.  And inbreeding being bad is purely a player decision. The game doesn't care and suggestions shouldn't depend on it. Use an inbreeding checker if you must. Easier when its a big lineage anyway. 

[Fuzzbucket]

2 hours ago, DragonLady86 said:

  And inbreeding being bad is purely a player decision. The game doesn't care and suggestions shouldn't depend on it. Use an inbreeding checker if you must. Easier when its a big lineage anyway. 

 

Yes and some of us WANT to do it and do need to be able to see. (It isn't actually easier when it's a big lineage,BTW.)

[Keileon]

17 minutes ago, Fuzzbucket said:

(It isn't actually easier when it's a big lineage,BTW.)

As someone who has intentionally inbred lineages and also wants to avoid them sometimes, I do find an offsite inbred checker to be easier. This is a huge YMMV.

Edited October 1, 2021 by Keileon

[Fuzzbucket]

I do indeed use an off-site checker. But the /name does help/

[HeatherMarie]

15 hours ago, DragonLady86 said:

Sigh you can already name dragons nearly the same but with different spaces. People already name things this way to mess with people. Just like they can name something Thuwed or Dorkface that isn't. This is a non-argument that keeps coming up.  And inbreeding being bad is purely a player decision. The game doesn't care and suggestions shouldn't depend on it. Use an inbreeding checker if you must. Easier when its a big lineage anyway. 

 

This, so much. There have been many issues/concerns pointed out in this thread about different aspects of this suggestion, but of all things inbreeding really shouldn't be a reason to not get rid of name exclusivity. 1. There are off-site inbred checkers that are very simple to use 2. People already can *and do* name dragons in ways that makes it difficult to see if something is truly inbred or not 3. There is nothing *wrong* with inbreeding in-game so a naming-change that might *hypothetically* make it more difficult to see inbreeding right away isn't necessarily a bad thing. 

 

Users can be very picky about lineages, some people collect lineages with Dorkfaces or Thuweds in them, some don't, some like long or short lines, some prefer no inbreeding and some seek out inbreeding. Personal preference over what types of lineages you want (and the ease of figuring out whether you want it or not) shouldn't be a factor in suggestions imo. (I regularly collect dragons with 35+ generations and I have literally spent *hours* going through long messy lineages to figure out if something was inbred (some lineages just flat-out break inbred-checkers) or has a Thuwed somewhere, I don't have to spend the time doing that but that's my preference...)

[Sextonator]

If it’s a long lineage you can just scroll over the oldest of certain branches to see if there are any repeating codes, and you can write them down if you need to.

 

And an indicator that a name has been used or not would be, imo, a fine compromise. It wouldn’t matter to me, as long as I don’t have to worry about making a unique name.

[SomeRandomCorviknight]

personally, i wouldn't really want this. It would stop really random names and just lead to "bob" "lilleth". How would you feel if you managed to grab a really good name only for everyone else to be able to use it? Even though you grabbed it first? 😕

[Fuzzbucket]

Many people in this thread and elsewhere have taken issue with that attitude - especially where the "perfect" name is on an abandoned scroll.

[MissK.]

6 hours ago, SomeRandomCorviknight said:

personally, i wouldn't really want this. It would stop really random names and just lead to "bob" "lilleth". How would you feel if you managed to grab a really good name only for everyone else to be able to use it? Even though you grabbed it first? 😕

 

It makes me happy when I grab a name like that first, like Morgan Stark right after Endgame came out. But it also feels unfair that nobody else can use that name just because I have it, seems a bit too punishing. And when those names just end up locked for 10 years in abandoned scrolls...yeah, feels like a waste.

[Falorni]

7 hours ago, SomeRandomCorviknight said:

personally, i wouldn't really want this. It would stop really random names and just lead to "bob" "lilleth". How would you feel if you managed to grab a really good name only for everyone else to be able to use it? Even though you grabbed it first? 

I have the names of all the Resident Evil Village vampires on my scroll - sure, it'd be a slight bummer to no longer have that little "aha I got 'em first" thing but it's sth I'd happily give up for the greater good.  Someone else naming their dragon Lady Alcina Dimitrescu does not take away from my enjoyment of my dragon in any way.  In the nicest way possible, the whole "but I got the name first so it should be MINE" thing feels like.... a really childish attitude to have about it.

 

Also, I never understood the "omg now everyone will name their dragons bob!" argument bc... they're not your dragons and it shouldn't be your concern how people name them.  Of course, it'd be nice to have sth like the uniqueness checker some ppl have brought up for those who do want their names to be unique at the time of naming.

[Arcy]

I think people are greatly overestimating the number of Bobs, Smaugs, etc. that will crop up if this is implemented. people aren't going to stop giving their dragons "creative" names just because there's no longer a limit. if anything, I think there would be an increase in those types of names o: and in the end, it really shouldn't matter since, as stated before, not your dragons.

(and once again, creativity is subjective and simple names like Bob, Smaug, Lilleth aren't inherently uncreative or bad!)

[KageSora]

Personally, I'd rather if the problem is "I'm mad because I can't have the name I want because its on an inactive scroll" that the solution just be "after X amount of inactivity if somebody else tries to use the name it gets transferred to the new dragon and the old one is unnamed".

 

But if it must happen and we can preserve the functionality of the view/n/name link as it currently stands, I still want a way to check if a name is used because I don't feel like naming my dragons something 800 other people have already done.  I happen to like the challenge of figuring out a name that's unique.

 

(Personally I'd also like a "disable sharing names" option that you can toggle if you dislike the idea of your names being used by anybody else, but I have a feeling the people who can't handle not getting their preferred name already wouldn't be happy about that, so I'd settle for preserving the view/n/name function and letting users see if a name is in use or if they're the first to use it)