*DISCONTINUED* Rares List Guide (1 March 2019)

[nickjr]

-slumps- I wonder if we should move the in-depth explanations, including the explanations of the poll options, to the second page (the actual second page--I don't mean the second post) and instead just have the first post be our list of one-liners and leave the second post as it originally was

[~ V ~]

I'm awaaaake

At this point I feel like we need something to address the fact that this poll was not a yes/no binary

aaaa the front page just keeps getting longer and longer. it’s getting confusing lol

I still personally feel the definitions of each poll option are unnecessary. They should at least be shortened if we really still need them. As long as we have the data, I don’t think the definitions will be useful in the future. This will shorten the first post as well.

Edit: Moving them would also be a good option c: Nick you stole my sorta idea >< xoxo

[Hyensa]

You couldn't combine option 1 or 2 regardless, because voting is anonymous and it would be impossible to ask and make sure everyone would want to combine/switch their vote. I'm not sure why this is still being discussed this hard (maybe just new people in the discussion?), when it's just an unfairly impossible suggestion to begin with.

[Takk]

I think it was just a question, the majority did want to keep the list which can be confusing

More people who wanted the list retired were against a repoll with just restructure and retire, they posted more often about not wanting another poll that there werent enough voices for another one. Quite a few of us wanted a repoll to be sure, but more wanted the list to ‘take the results and leave it alone’

[nickjr]

Something else to think about:

If it had, instead, been Maintain and Restructure that were neck-to-neck with Retire lagging behind... I assure you a lot of us would've brought up the fact that the majority of people in this scenario would not want the List to be used as it is ("majorly update", restructure, and rebuild mean that the List as we have known it would probably not remain; retire means that this List would not receive updates like Maintain would want)

and would've asked to either combine Restructure and Retire or to do a repoll with "keep using or stop using as it is" (but with better English because I currently cannot English)

There are a lot of different ways you can force these three options into binaries; to ask for a keep rarity+demand mix guide/don't keep rarity+demand mix guide repoll means prioritizing that binary over other binaries, and I don't see why that should be prioritized over, say, keep this version/don't keep using this version

[bailey.exe]

For those talking about the repoll:
It was agreed several times that option 2 was a middle ground between 1 and 3. Option 2 could result in an entire rebuilding of the list or just reorganizing the tiers, pets, etc. This made it a perfect compromise between the two which is why it wasn’t combined with option 1.

For example: If option 2 were to win, it would split off into another poll - rebuild and reconstruct. Rebuild would be rebuilding it from scratch, essentially retiring this list and restarting a new one based off of this ones principles. Reconstruct would be tier placement, pet movements etc. This is why it couldn’t be combined. It’s honestly not as simple as keep vs get rid of.

Also, a lot more retire voters were active on this thread than restructure voters. This is a simple fact that we cannot deny. Votes were always 10 to 1 in favor or retire when problems arose.


Also, I think we should get back to the front page topic. There is a thread to discuss all of this in so that the thread owners won’t get confused by the debates. ^^

Reminder:

Since there is a new Discussion Thread, all discussion unrelated to finalizing the front page of this thread does not belong here and will be deleted moving forward. Otherwise, we have two threads containing the same discussions and that would not be acceptable. Also attaching reminder posted on that thread about unacceptable user engagement:



There are ways to get your points across without insulting others, arguing, and causing spam. Civil discussions and debates are of course okay but some of you are starting to cross a line here. We understand that this is a contentious topic and transition however please remember to follow our rules and be respectful towards everyone.

[Sinbreaker]

I haven't caught up so if I'm missing out on a point already made then feel free to ignore me.
But on the list pages it has in big red letters "these pets will eventually be moved up" perhaps you should remove this so it does not confuse players/have future players ask about these pets?

As well as remove any quotation boxes containing "to be discussed" in terms of revaluing.
If this thread is still active to clean up the front and provide proper information, then I think this should be addressed.

[Zetirian]

I haven't caught up so if I'm missing out on a point already made then feel free to ignore me.
But on the list pages it has in big red letters "these pets will eventually be moved up" perhaps you should remove this so it does not confuse players/have future players ask about these pets?

As well as remove any quotation boxes containing "to be discussed" in terms of revaluing.
If this thread is still active to clean up the front and provide proper information, then I think this should be addressed.

I agree.
If anything archive this. State somewhere that these pets were planned to have moved up the list, however the list was voted to cease operation and therefore nothing is to be changed.

[Solloby]

Wow are you guys writing a summary or a novel?
Surely we don't need more than 2-3 short paragraphs to summarise the thread's history and retirement?
I can guarantee that nobody is going to read either of the first two posts.

The overview section is too large a block of text and makes no mention of the push in 2017 for a greater focus on rarity which was an important precursor to the 2019 poll. The rest of the content in that box is fine but I would delete the rest of that post, we don't need poll explanations anymore.

The second post looks like a data dump. It's fine to capture a lot of that data but I'm not sure it belongs there. It's not in a readable format aside from the lists of misplaced pets, which basically indicate that the list in its current state is unusable so should not be used for trading which conflicts with the title that implies it can still be used.

I would help out with wording but I'm on my phone atm, and also focused on other projects. Just wanted to quickly type up some feedback, hopefully some of it helps!

[ramattra]

I’m glad someone mentioned how long the first posts are getting to be! If i were a user coming to find out what happened to the rares list, I know I wouldn’t read those just because of the length lol. I 100% agree with removing the poll explanations as they are unnecessary. I also think we could get rid of the little to be discussed section since theres the explanations above it that already gives all the info needed.