![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
lol
usually the more overblown "digital victim defense" is compared to the actual "crime", the more likely that the victims aren't victims at all. this is peak example.
usually the more overblown "digital victim defense" is compared to the actual "crime", the more likely that the victims aren't victims at all. this is peak example.
Oh wow, no, that was not the account I've seen. I've only noted very similar writing style, but not something as exactly as you found.
The one TrissyCat linked on FB is Dyja #189685
Another one is Keladry #162282, who posts about selling dragons with the stipulation that they get exalted, not resold or kept. Trissycat posted the same on facebook.
Side note: noticed that they bought around 40 Veilspun UMAs from one artist. Like different ones, but each x5. They don't even have Veils in their lair, except fodder ones? Like, what?
The one TrissyCat linked on FB is Dyja #189685
Another one is Keladry #162282, who posts about selling dragons with the stipulation that they get exalted, not resold or kept. Trissycat posted the same on facebook.
Side note: noticed that they bought around 40 Veilspun UMAs from one artist. Like different ones, but each x5. They don't even have Veils in their lair, except fodder ones? Like, what?
ayrt
Yeah, like I said in the previous post, it makes sense in cases of like "why did staff ban my previous account" and similar specific moderation actions, but has also at times been applied a little too widely in some cases to shut down most critique of the site both unreasonable and reasonable.
There's definitely instances (e.g. discussing moderation actions) where it makes sense bc there's nothing of value to be gained in publicly discussing those. However, some of the other times it's been applied I don't agree with.
For example, I recall it being applied pretty liberally at various points in regard to special eyes (I don't remember the specifics so it may have been on release or after some time), and while some of that was users being bitchy and toxic at each other, some of it was reasonable and productive discussion that was shut down in sweeping comment deletions that seemed from the outside to just be a dislike of negative public opinion rather than having a real and legitimate reason.
Feedback forms are great, but there is sometimes genuine value in having things (again, not moderation actions) discussed publicly because ideas can be iterated on and improved. For example, if user John's idea of fixing eyes is to make eye changes a dropdown box on all dragons with unlimited changes for free, maybe user Jane sees that (when she wouldn't have thought to send a feedback form otherwise) and goes, "Well that seems unreasonable and against the point of the feature, but perhaps X price or Y limitation might make it something the admins would be more willing to consider." Then further users can contribute as well until there's enough variety to pull a genuinely good starter from, rather than if John had just sent in "make it basically free and unlimited and easy" which would have only indicated demand for the feature and not given any reasonable ideas on how to accomplish it. This is honestly kinda a shitty example bc of how extreme John->Jane is, but it was so long ago that I don't remember better specifics, and what one user thinks is good is so subjective that I can't give idea progression everyone will agree with anyway.
But yeah, generally I do agree with you (as stated at the end of what I wrote) that specific moderation actions just aren't worth discussing publicly and should be shut down. The problem is when the rule is taken and applied too generally even outside of discussion of specific actions and is used to silence general discontent over site features or additions. (I think it's been done over new genes as well once or twice, though I don't remember specific examples.)
My personal opinion for what shouldn't get removed/shut down but has in past:
- Non-heated, non-toxic discussion about new site features, genes, or similar site discussion/critique. (A rarity, but it does exist and has gotten removed in the past, throwing the baby out with the bathwater.)
My personal opinion for what should be removed/shut down:
- Toxic bitching ("Wow, this gene is so lazy, [Artist] really phoned it in on this didn't they?")
- Moderation discussion ("I got banned bc Undel personally came to my house and didn't like my cat!" reality: multi, or "Why did my forum thread get locked? I did nothing wrong!" reality: broke ToS)
Yeah, like I said in the previous post, it makes sense in cases of like "why did staff ban my previous account" and similar specific moderation actions, but has also at times been applied a little too widely in some cases to shut down most critique of the site both unreasonable and reasonable.
There's definitely instances (e.g. discussing moderation actions) where it makes sense bc there's nothing of value to be gained in publicly discussing those. However, some of the other times it's been applied I don't agree with.
For example, I recall it being applied pretty liberally at various points in regard to special eyes (I don't remember the specifics so it may have been on release or after some time), and while some of that was users being bitchy and toxic at each other, some of it was reasonable and productive discussion that was shut down in sweeping comment deletions that seemed from the outside to just be a dislike of negative public opinion rather than having a real and legitimate reason.
Feedback forms are great, but there is sometimes genuine value in having things (again, not moderation actions) discussed publicly because ideas can be iterated on and improved. For example, if user John's idea of fixing eyes is to make eye changes a dropdown box on all dragons with unlimited changes for free, maybe user Jane sees that (when she wouldn't have thought to send a feedback form otherwise) and goes, "Well that seems unreasonable and against the point of the feature, but perhaps X price or Y limitation might make it something the admins would be more willing to consider." Then further users can contribute as well until there's enough variety to pull a genuinely good starter from, rather than if John had just sent in "make it basically free and unlimited and easy" which would have only indicated demand for the feature and not given any reasonable ideas on how to accomplish it. This is honestly kinda a shitty example bc of how extreme John->Jane is, but it was so long ago that I don't remember better specifics, and what one user thinks is good is so subjective that I can't give idea progression everyone will agree with anyway.
But yeah, generally I do agree with you (as stated at the end of what I wrote) that specific moderation actions just aren't worth discussing publicly and should be shut down. The problem is when the rule is taken and applied too generally even outside of discussion of specific actions and is used to silence general discontent over site features or additions. (I think it's been done over new genes as well once or twice, though I don't remember specific examples.)
My personal opinion for what shouldn't get removed/shut down but has in past:
- Non-heated, non-toxic discussion about new site features, genes, or similar site discussion/critique. (A rarity, but it does exist and has gotten removed in the past, throwing the baby out with the bathwater.)
My personal opinion for what should be removed/shut down:
- Toxic bitching ("Wow, this gene is so lazy, [Artist] really phoned it in on this didn't they?")
- Moderation discussion ("I got banned bc Undel personally came to my house and didn't like my cat!" reality: multi, or "Why did my forum thread get locked? I did nothing wrong!" reality: broke ToS)
SA
Oh, also forgot that sometimes rule changes even do have legitimate reasons to be discussed. For example, iirc when the global, forum-wide "you can only bump a thread once every 24h" rule was implemented, it originally applied also to forums like ibaz which users pointed out moves too quickly for that, leading to users "totally not bumping" or creating dozens of threads bc no one goes past the first page. If my memory is correct, user discussion of and feedback on that rule resulted in it being removed for ibaz (and maybe dragons sales? I don't remember but I feel like there was one other subforum unaffected) and the general experience improved.
Stuff like that is pretty important, especially given the general community consensus that the admins don't really play their site all that much themselves. (Which makes sense; if a site was my job I wouldn't necessarily want to play it on my personal time, I'd probably want a break. But it can result in some out of touch stuff going on...)
Oh, also forgot that sometimes rule changes even do have legitimate reasons to be discussed. For example, iirc when the global, forum-wide "you can only bump a thread once every 24h" rule was implemented, it originally applied also to forums like ibaz which users pointed out moves too quickly for that, leading to users "totally not bumping" or creating dozens of threads bc no one goes past the first page. If my memory is correct, user discussion of and feedback on that rule resulted in it being removed for ibaz (and maybe dragons sales? I don't remember but I feel like there was one other subforum unaffected) and the general experience improved.
Stuff like that is pretty important, especially given the general community consensus that the admins don't really play their site all that much themselves. (Which makes sense; if a site was my job I wouldn't necessarily want to play it on my personal time, I'd probably want a break. But it can result in some out of touch stuff going on...)
what a fucking loser
i hope he IP hacks dreamwidth to get revenge on me for calling him a fucking loser by blocking me
i hope he IP hacks dreamwidth to get revenge on me for calling him a fucking loser by blocking me
the mass buying UMA is to resell. obviously hoping to choke out the stock and then resell it for a profit. was it from a popular artist?
The new genes are hella funky but it's also weird that the 'mask' swaps between m/f pose without actual rules to them? I thought that the half-mask was m only but it seems like staff just chose whichever of the two to do masked. It would have been super neat to have a gender-specific colour, but I also understand that some of the userbase could have been upset by that- just frustrating that there's no logic applied between the different markings now instead.
Also gem? Really? They look baldwin imho and I'm just a little frustrated with how many genes are gem now. 20% (8/40? math? dude idk I tried to count) of primary/secondary genes are now gem and they each cost over 10$ USD to get with RL conversion. FR is more than free to get that cashmonee, dropping over 15$ of my country's currency for a single item that applies to a single colour on a pixel dragon just isn't personally viable, so I'm gonna be petty in my own corner ig.
Also gem? Really? They look baldwin imho and I'm just a little frustrated with how many genes are gem now. 20% (8/40? math? dude idk I tried to count) of primary/secondary genes are now gem and they each cost over 10$ USD to get with RL conversion. FR is more than free to get that cashmonee, dropping over 15$ of my country's currency for a single item that applies to a single colour on a pixel dragon just isn't personally viable, so I'm gonna be petty in my own corner ig.
I like them, but I don't know how they justify them being gem genes while something like flaunt/flair are treasure genes.
I'm surprised people don't think they should be gem genes - they're pretty flashy and complex, which is typical of most gem genes in my opinion (though they could have fit in with Baldwin too, where we also have several funky genes). It's actually weird to me that Flaunt/Flair aren't gem genes as well.
Although thinking about it now, sometimes the choices for what's a Gem/Treasure/Baldwin/Other gene don't always make sense (Looking at you, STAINED.) We have gem genes that are comparably simple to some Baldwin or even treasure genes. Maybe if it looks like it'll be popular and make money, it gets Gem'd. They got bills to pay afterall.
Although thinking about it now, sometimes the choices for what's a Gem/Treasure/Baldwin/Other gene don't always make sense (Looking at you, STAINED.) We have gem genes that are comparably simple to some Baldwin or even treasure genes. Maybe if it looks like it'll be popular and make money, it gets Gem'd. They got bills to pay afterall.
They spoiled us giving those as treasure genes.
I really think its exactly that deep
We've gotten multiple non-gem pri-sec gem pairs lately i don't understand how a new gem gene has people so tilted
We've gotten multiple non-gem pri-sec gem pairs lately i don't understand how a new gem gene has people so tilted
SA
Like, what, are they supposed to make the bland/ugly genes gem genes so no one grumps about prices? Sometimes that's the impression i get from some people
(Not painting everyone disagreeing with the price with the same brush, obvs. But you guys know how some fr users can be)
Like, what, are they supposed to make the bland/ugly genes gem genes so no one grumps about prices? Sometimes that's the impression i get from some people
(Not painting everyone disagreeing with the price with the same brush, obvs. But you guys know how some fr users can be)
i mean, it's also from last years fest so... safe to say it didn't win lmao
I dreamt my account was named something related to tropical birds and I exclusively kept Tundras with Iri/Shim and a tertiary called "Accent" that added shiny streaks of the tertiary color (think like iridescent bird feathers) it actually looked nice RIP :( I remember I was in talks with an accent artist to make like 20 copies of a tundra beak accent. Is this a sign?
you know what you need to do, nonny
it's tundra time
it's tundra time
lol Then folks will complain about how the gene 'isn't worth the price' like glowtail. They can't win.
Site's gotta make money and imo FR is quite generous with the gem gene/treasure gene ratio. Not to mention that gems are really easy to get by without spending any real-life currency.
For me it makes sense that these are gem genes because of their complexity. Flair is more the exception than the norm when it comes to treasure genes.
For me it makes sense that these are gem genes because of their complexity. Flair is more the exception than the norm when it comes to treasure genes.
don't do it. gene designers hate tundras and screw them over constantly. if it's not empty, uncoloured manes on secondary genes (seriously it's like half the genes, I'm not joking, they just leave it completely blank not even a half-assed gradient), then it's stuff like Harlequin leaving a huge swath of unfinished-looking space all over the front leg, shoulders, and back.
do NOT get into tundras unless you want 3/4 of new prim/sec gene releases to fill you with bitter disappointment bc your favourite breed is the one FR wishes they could remove and just make gaolers the new tundra. (srsly, almost all the genes that look lazy and unfinished on tundras look fine on gaolers.)
do NOT get into tundras unless you want 3/4 of new prim/sec gene releases to fill you with bitter disappointment bc your favourite breed is the one FR wishes they could remove and just make gaolers the new tundra. (srsly, almost all the genes that look lazy and unfinished on tundras look fine on gaolers.)
Site’s nearly 10 years old - if after all this time only 20% of the gene sets are gem genes, that seems incredibly fair. Especially given you can get free gems by doing on-site activities or through converting treasure with other people, without ever spending a real life penny, if you are patient and work hard enough. Not to mention there are plenty of very nice non-gem sets that are easily accessible (like Flaunt/Flair, which very justifiably could have been gem sets themselves, but you can buy both for less than a weeks worth of G&G.)
Harlequin and Jester are complex, colorful genes with a lot going on - they make sense as gem sets. Sure they could work in Baldwin, but the site needs money to run. Nice looking gem genes encourage people to buy gems directly, which gives the site money, which lets them continue to operate so you can play for free if you want.
Harlequin and Jester are complex, colorful genes with a lot going on - they make sense as gem sets. Sure they could work in Baldwin, but the site needs money to run. Nice looking gem genes encourage people to buy gems directly, which gives the site money, which lets them continue to operate so you can play for free if you want.
as a bird lover, I know for a fact that dream me would totally be a fan of your dream lair and would probably buy many dream bird tundra hatchlings from you
They came back on an alt, but got banned again lol. Their progens taglines were... Quite self aware, too.
Not sure how popular they are, but here's Trissycats order:
https://web.archive.org/web/20230413200044/https://www1.flightrising.com/forums/skin/3031820/120
https://web.archive.org/web/20230413200044/https://www1.flightrising.com/forums/skin/3031820/120
honestly it almost feels like a "sour grapes" situation- just people complaining about the things they can't afford. what's fucking hilarious to me are the people saying the new genes are ugly and that they're not worth the gems. like ok, don't spend your gems then. i don't get the problem lol
Page 23 of 121
- «
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 60
- 61
- 62
- 63
- 64
- 65
- 66
- 67
- 68
- 69
- 70
- 71
- 72
- 73
- 74
- 75
- 76
- 77
- 78
- 79
- 80
- 81
- 82
- 83
- 84
- 85
- 86
- 87
- 88
- 89
- 90
- 91
- 92
- 93
- 94
- 95
- 96
- 97
- 98
- 99
- 100
- 101
- 102
- 103
- 104
- 105
- 106
- 107
- 108
- 109
- 110
- 111
- 112
- 113
- 114
- 115
- 116
- 117
- 118
- 119
- 120
- 121
- »
Page 23 of 121