Does anyone else feel like Demand is killing CS?

[Brackensnake]

The skelebun thing is getting out of proportion. I’m pretty sure it was only one that got deleted, the person had a right to delete that pet. They were quitting.... That pet wouldn’t have seen the light of day regardless. I want to move on from it, it’s not that big of a deal. It was the same as any other skelebun finding a forever home.

Anyway 100% agree with constellation! It’s the fear of having only one valuable pet that is a zebra, and because of it’s ‘bad demand’ your goal for whatever it is you want will come to a standstill because you have to patiently wait to trade it off because everyone is too scared of it’s ‘bad demand’.*Like the zebra has bad demand who actually believes that? It’s a stunning baby.

[Guest]

Oh my gosh I totally agree with you guys I recently acquired a UR strawb which I value at 2 nons (I value allot of the the OMGSRs the same) and get a lot of people telling me that it's not worth 2 nons because it has bad "demand" which kinda ruins it for me because I just want to get cute pets and trade not be swamped by comments about bad demand ;-;
Edit: what happened to the strawberry wasn't it meant to be loved and adored because of it's cute tiny face ;-; ;-;

[ariadne]

unfortunately yes. I saw the thread where it happened (didn't interact with it) but someone did indeed delete a skelebun recently-ish? which is a shame. completely irrelevant to me personally as I have no desire to own a skelebun but I do agree with amar that it seems the only reason to do something like that would be to ensure that no one who does want it can have it.

Did they give a reason for it?

um. well. yes and no? their "reason" was very melodramatic to the point that it seemed like the kind of thing someone would say to draw attention/start drama and probably wasn't their actual motivation. I'm not completely sure it's something that can be repeated within CS rules.

I just saw the thread for the featured "Skelebun is cancelled" artwork and somebody said that we should delete all Skelebuns so it "holds no power anymore" which I suppose is a roundabout way of saying "the demand for this pet is so suffocating that we wish it didn't exist"

[jarside]

Did they give a reason for it?

um. well. yes and no? their "reason" was very melodramatic to the point that it seemed like the kind of thing someone would say to draw attention/start drama and probably wasn't their actual motivation. I'm not completely sure it's something that can be repeated within CS rules.

I just saw the thread for the featured "Skelebun is cancelled" artwork and somebody said that we should delete all Skelebuns so it "holds no power anymore" which I suppose is a roundabout way of saying "the demand for this pet is so suffocating that we wish it didn't exist"

im pretty sure it was an inside joke of sort where one or two might have been deleted. though i disagree with deleting them and think the design is amazing, i agree with the fact there is something slightly annoying about the increase in demand for them.

but honestly, its not a surprise they had a demand increase? when they switched to purple people just had to notice their forever increasing value. and deleting only adds to the demand.

on the topic of deleting, i think deleting pets of honestly any rarity is ok, but deleting pets that will never be released again (store pets) is kinda annoying and only adding the supply - demand problem.

[Loelya]

I don’t think many would say that deleting a pet isn’t within the rights of the person who owns it, but... just because it’s valid in that way doesn’t mean it’s not still kind of an unpleasant thing to do.

[jarside]

I don’t think many would say that deleting a pet isn’t within the rights of the person who owns it, but... just because it’s valid in that way doesn’t mean it’s not still kind of an unpleasant thing to do.

exactly! delete pets as you wish, but sometimes the pets you delete might be unpleasant to others.

[ariadne]

I still hold that it would be a better idea to rerelease store pets - by periodically offering sales on them in the store - than to let their designs disappear forever someday. This is a game about appreciating cute pets, why do we have to be so merciless about "rarity" and "scarcity"?

[Loelya]

I still hold that it would be a better idea to rerelease store pets - by periodically offering sales on them in the store - than to let their designs disappear forever someday. This is a game about appreciating cute pets, why do we have to be so merciless about "rarity" and "scarcity"?

I’m sure that not rereleasing the store pets is more about the admins wanting to uphold their word than it is about trying to keep store pets rare and scarce. If I was in an admin’s shoes on this site, I would also refrain from rereleasing something that was made clear to be limited availability, even if I was bummed at the thought of certain pets eventually disappearing entirely.

[obsceneSymphony]

Sorry, but that’s just not how the world works. There’s no objective principle that dictates value. The economic value of anything, including little digital images of fun pets, is what people are willing to pay for it. No one can change that just because you don’t like those values any more than they can change how gravitation works because you want Earth to have a smaller gravitational force. 🤷

[ariadne]

I still hold that it would be a better idea to rerelease store pets - by periodically offering sales on them in the store - than to let their designs disappear forever someday. This is a game about appreciating cute pets, why do we have to be so merciless about "rarity" and "scarcity"?

I’m sure that not rereleasing the store pets is more about the admins wanting to uphold their word than it is about trying to keep store pets rare and scarce. If I was in an admin’s shoes on this site, I would also refrain from rereleasing something that was made clear to be limited availability, even if I was bummed at the thought of certain pets eventually disappearing entirely.

I mean that's fair but I think that people are allowed to change their opinions after such a long time, especially since back then there was no way they could predict how the site would turn out. I don't think anybody would think they were breaking their word if they changed an outdated decision to be more in line with the current site's state.
I would suggest a poll to see if people want the rerelease in the first place, though.