08-15-2012 at 8:36 PM

I gotta say I agree with ZJ's points. If there were disputes between users about this, there would be more mod issues. As is, mod issues often take as long as they do simply because <i>we are waiting for replies from users</i>

08-15-2012 at 8:04 PM

Let's look at this purely from a feasibility standpoint:<br /> <br /> Let's assume that 1/5 of the players on Alacrity are active. That's 5k players. And assume per player, they have 3 litters of 4 pups a month, of which they sell 3 of each litter. That's 9 pups a month per player for a total of 45k pups a month. <br /> <br /> Now this is a rough estimate, obviously some players breed a lot more, some a lot less. Some retire most the pups, some sell all the pups. It's an average.<br /> <br /> Let's say, of those 45k pups, only 1/9 are under a contract. (For the sake of easy numbers.) That would be 5k dogs under contract sold per month. And of those contracts, assume that only 500 of those new owners violate the contract.<br /> <br /> There would be no way to set up some sort of miraculous limit system via coding - or at least I hope you do not expect to do that because that amount of coding would take a long time and could be devoted to bettering other aspects of the site. So I assume you wish to have the contract stated on the dog's profile and then if it's violated, the mods need to get involved. I'm not sure if you're familiar with coding, but something this complex would take a long time and a lot of work. <br /> <br /> That's 500 extra issues a month. Assuming a mod can handle 3 issues a day, and two of those have to do with other rule breaking, you would have 1 issue per mod per day regarding contract breaking. You would need 16 moderators to be active every day to handle those issues. Really you'd need more than that just because handling all those extra issues would take away from watching forums, chat and doing other daily duties. <br /> <br /> You may think that it's just, oh well transfer the dog. But Admins would have to transfer the dog themselves after vetting by mods, and then the player who was in the contract would argue they were abiding by it or didn't understand it or whatever else it would be. It wouldn't be like geting a CA made, this isn't a solve in the minute problem.<br /> <br /> Let's take it a step crazier. Assume it's all automated. The coders worked miracles and pulled this out of their butts in no time. 500 contracts broken a month, of those, let's say 1/10th of people feel they did no wrong or wish to contest what happened. <br /> <br /> That would be 50 extra issues for the mods to handle a month. 100 unhappy players because both the breeder and the new dog owner would be unhappy, because one had a contract broken and the other had their dog taken. If we sided with the new owner, the breeder would be even more upset. Plus then the new dog owner would be angry at the breeder and even if just 5 of those unhappy people harass the breeder for their dog back and call them ugly names, that's 5 problems too many regarding harassment.<br /> <br /> <br /> TL;DR?<br /> <br /> No way this could be coded, unless you want to wait a few years.<br /> <br /> Doing it via mods as a rule breaking thing would create so much work as to the fact it would be pointless.<br /> <br /> Disregarding both of those, it would create harassment and feelings of animosity amongst both seller and buyer.<br /> <br /> So yes, no support.<br /> <br /> Also I am in agreeance with what others said, this has no place on Ala. <br /> <br /> <b>If you don't want people to do x, y, or z with your dog, the only way you can ensure that is by never selling your dog.</b>

08-15-2012 at 7:52 PM

Sorry, but no support, for many reasons. First of all, trialing is expensive and time-consuming - why should another user force me to trial dogs against my will just to breed them? Especially if it's a low generation dog that doesn't have a good chance of actually winning trials. Then you're just costing the new owner more and more money. Also, what if the player breeds multiple litters and the pups are all undesirable? Or doing test litters with wolves - which don't factor into the pup predictor. Then the dog gets taken away from them just because they've bred too many litters? That doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Also, one time in the past, I had a favorite stud of mine that was about to die, but I hadn't yet maxed a bitch I wanted to breed him to. I made the decision to breed her unmaxed just so I could get a litter from them before he died, and I don't regret doing so. The pup is still in my kennel, and is maxed now, and the father is long dead. Why should another user have the right to tell me not to do that? Basically everything posed in this suggestion has someway that this could backfire at honest, hardworking players.<br /> <br /> I do genuinely understand your intentions - it stinks when other players don't take care of your dogs as you would like them to, and I've blocked players for similar reasons before. I'm sure all players have been dissatisfied with this at some point or another. I wish there was a way around it, but the fact is some people who know all about the game sometimes make intelligent decisions not to max before breeding, or to breed many litters, or to breed before trialing, etc, etc, etc... and it's not fair to limit that.

08-15-2012 at 7:32 PM

Well, Aust, it's a matter of opinion. I like glitches, some other players find them nauseating and hideous. I just so happen to dislike low TP dogs.<br /> Not everyone likes them, nor should everyone have to have a pup from their lines birth/sire them

08-15-2012 at 7:30 PM

<i>"What's so bad about low TP pups!?! Some people like them and they are easier to train for new members!"</i><br /> <br /> Although new members can very easily go and get a 2TP pup for $500 from the pound, I believe it clogs up the site, encourages unmaxed breeding, ruins lines, and they aren't worth the time or money spent trialing them because they simply never win trials. We tend to avoid 150TP and up because those are low enough for new players to max, and high enough to win very basic trials if maxed.<br /> <br /> It might come off as frank, but that's really just my opinion on the double-digit dogs.. I know many people disagree with it, it's why I'm on a couple member's no-sell list! lol :P

08-15-2012 at 7:14 PM

What's so bad about low TP pups!?! Some people like them and they are easier to train for new members!

08-15-2012 at 6:06 PM

<i>"ut for me to put a dog up for sale, I don't know where teh dog is going to end up. If someone I know takes the dog, I know their kennel management methods, I'll end the contract"</i><br /> <br /> ===========<br /> <br /> Or you can do what I do and advertise the dog but put "message me if you wish to buy", that gives you time to check out the potential buyer's kennel first and then choose whether or not you want to sell the dog to them.

08-15-2012 at 5:24 PM

Well, from what it seems, not everyone is a fan of this idea. Not everyone will use it and I'm sure there will be players, myself included, who will make acceptions to the contracts for players that are more trusted than others. I personally will gladly give away a dog with no contract to the right person, but for me to put a dog up for sale, I don't know where teh dog is going to end up. If someone I know takes the dog, I know their kennel management methods, I'll end the contract; but for a new player who has no kennel management methods because they don't know what they're doing or how to play, I'd rather keep the contact in place and I'll send them their money back if they violate my contract. That's my stand point.

08-15-2012 at 5:18 PM

<i>"And once again, you don't have to do this. This is for players who want to sell their dogs to see them prosper elsewhere."</i><br /> <br /> I would never put these rules into my kennel, but I would certainly be affected by them, being a dude who buys dogs from other users and sometimes studs from other users.

08-15-2012 at 4:40 PM

Again, the contracts aren't required. If someone doesn't have the courtesy to max out a dog they bought from someone else, would they really expect someone to keep the low TP pups? Most cases, no.<br /> And once again, you don't have to do this. This is for players who want to sell their dogs to see them prosper elsewhere. If you want to keep your champion Pit lines to yourself, by all means do so; but I don't like the fact that I can't sell a 2nd gen pup to someone who goes to breed it and tosses it away before it's maxed out.

08-15-2012 at 3:59 PM

<i>- The trialling amount is how many trials the dog has to ENTER (not win) before being able to breed or be retired. This is so the buyer actually USES the dog instead of breeds it and tosses it away once they have a ton of puppies.<br /> - The anti-retirement will give the buyer the option to return the dog to the contract owner before retiring! Hate seeing a dog retired as soon as it's been bought? This can help!<br /> - The breeding limit will warn a player when they're about to over breed their dog!<br /> - These agreements will NOT stop them, but a message on the page will say they're about to break their contract! They still can do what ever they want with the dog!!<br /> <br /> How this will help:<br /> When someone in real life breaks a contract, legal action is taken. A breeder in real life has the chance to take their dog back when a buyer breaks their contract. </i><br /> <br /> ==========<br /> <br /> No support, sorry. I do not want to be tied to an obligation to some bizarre rule about how many times I can breed a dog or trial it. What if the dog is high-TP and I want to sell the pups, so I breed a lot? There's nothing wrong with that.<br /> I, and many other users, like to go through the pound and dog sales and pick up very-low TP dogs (I'm talking like single or double-digit numbers) and retire them, to clean up the site so that there aren't unmaxed-bred-low-tp puppies hanging around. I don't want to buy a dog and retire it and have the old owner harass me about "you should have sent me it back!"<br /> Sometimes I buy, max, and breed dogs to get to higher TP, I don't want to have to waste my money trialing low-TP dogs just so I can eventually breed and get higher-TP dogs.<br /> <br /> I still support the basis of "if you don't want your dogs ____, don't sell them". It's very easy.<br /> - I don't want my dogs bred unmaxed, so I don't breed or sell them to people I see breeding unmaxed.<br /> - I don't want my dogs inbred, so I don't breed or sell them to people I know have severely inbred lines.<br /> - I don't want my lines flooding the site, effectively ruining them, so I don't sell or breed them to people I know over-breed.<br /> These are all the reasons why I'm not going to be selling my capped Pit Bulls and on the bright side, onec a dog is sold and immediately retired or whatever, I still got the money for it so it's not my loss :) Why am I gonna bookmark and stalk some dog that someone else owns now? Lol

08-15-2012 at 3:46 PM

I'm not support.

08-15-2012 at 3:14 PM

Shunky, with the predict tool matching the actual breeding script, that's not really necessary anymore.<br /> <br /> It's not always an guarentee that the breeder will take the dog back. After a certain point, there's going to be dogs they won't check up on. I don't really care about mine after they've been maxed out. And if they don't watch the dog to see the contract being broken, they won't know. There's no automated message telling the breeder the contract was violated. This is for those who will keep track of a pup for what ever reason.<br /> <b>And an automated item removal can be added like if the dog dies or is sent to the pound</b> so if the breeder does take the dog back, you still get your items back.<br /> <br /> And Aust, if there's a dog for sale under a contract and you don't want to have a contract on it, then ask the breeder if you can have the contract removed, if they say no, you'll just have to look else where. It's not a requirement to get a dog under a contract, its not a requirement for the dog to be put under a contract, it's not a requirement to follow the contract. These are OPTIONS for people.<br /> <br /> This isn't unfair; you're agreeing to the terms when you buy the dog and it's your choice to follow the contract or to break it. What's unfair is being told "Don't sell your dogs if you don't want this to happen" or being told "If you don't like it, don't play"

08-15-2012 at 3:06 PM

Support! <br /> <br /> I have put a LOT of time and money into my border collies. But yet barely any dogs ever leave my kennel. Why? I can't trust anyone with them. Quite honestly, I worry about those that have left. <br /> <br /> This would allow me to send my dogs out to other breeders but still be able to contain my lines. <br /> <br /> So full support.

08-15-2012 at 2:35 PM

I don't support this at all. <br /> I don't know about others, but I ALWAYS do a test litter as soon as my dogs are old enough if I'll be breeding them later regardless of the fact that they might not be maxed. I usually retire the puppies after, because of their TP, but it shows me how the official pups will turn out. If we had these, it'd ruin my chance to do this.<br /> On top of this, I think the game would be much less fun like that. Players taking their dogs back after someone breaks a contract will only cause anger and feelings of unfairness. Like Kit, I think that there should be no limitations on dogs like this. For example, if I were to buy a ghost dog and spent a very large amount of money on it and accidentally broke the contract, the previous owner gets the dog and my money. How is that fair? Plus I lose the puppies and the items on the dog, since I doubt they'd be removed. The only thing that would do is make me more frustrated.<br /> There are many more reason's I'm against this, but I think I've said enough<br /> No support.

08-15-2012 at 2:27 PM

I'm actually rather torn about this. For one thing, I understand how it is from the perspective of someone who wants to have good lines. I often sell my pups for cheap, and I know that they're going to probably be bred before they're maxed, or retired, or left on someone's account who joined, bought a dog, and never played again. It bothers me a little, but as someone who's not very accomplished as a breeder, I take it with a grain of salt and get over it. :P And since I'm in this halfway point, I see how difficult that can be for newer/not so accomplished players. Certainly it doesn't help to breed unmaxed and all, but with all these contracts it could get pretty difficult to get a nice dog.<br /> <br /> I think I'm going to have to say no-support. <br /> The best solution to your problem would be to explain to any potential buyers how maxing before breeding is beneficial, and if they still don't agree, well then they just lost the chance of getting a really nice dog. Their loss.

08-15-2012 at 2:25 PM

There was a typo in my last message. I meant to put "want" As in, "What if I want to buy a pup..."<br /> <br /> Sorry

08-15-2012 at 2:24 PM

If you buy a pup NOT under a contract, then it's too late to put a contract up for the breeder. These are set up BEFORE the dog is sold and there's an alert on the dog's page saying "This dog is under a contract" or in some way that's on the dog's page. If you buy a dog not under a contract, then you have free roam with what happens. If the breeder wants to have a contract, they have to put the contract on BEFORE they sell the dog.<br /> <br /> Just like in real life, if the dog is sold under contract, then the contract stands; if there was no contract agreed to, then it's too late.

08-15-2012 at 2:18 PM

What if I buy a pup from a breeder that wants me too? I don't want another member controlling what I do with my dogs.

08-15-2012 at 2:18 PM

I don't like the idea of the Guidline Contracts very much. I can see how they could be useful for the players that want to use them, but I know that I wouldn't use them. I liked Al's idea of making this addition as a perk.<br /> <br /> As for the Co-Ownership, I absolutely love this idea! It would help so much with the Cata line I am working on with a friend.<br /> <br /> So to sum it up, no support for the contracts but full support for co-ownership!