Things that annoy you.

[Takora Drakan]

Are you people all so greedy that you want to steal the pets of people who don't sign up?

Those pets have a name printed on them and so they are owned. If you want a pet so bad try to trade it, but not to take it away from people!

[Minimanta]

Now just to clear it out.
What I mean when I say this is annoying, it's because I don't know if the pets have or don't have an owner. It's not annoying because I can't get the pets.

I wouldn't steal peoples pets and put them to the pound!
They choosed not to sign up and that's fine. So it would be totally unfair to take their pets.

[shez]

Are you people all so greedy that you want to steal the pets of people who don't sign up?

Those pets have a name printed on them and so they are owned. If you want a pet so bad try to trade it, but not to take it away from people!

I have not now, nor ever had any intention of "taking it [a pet] away from other people".

[Shian]

Yes, I find it horribly annoying too. It's very irritating to see all those pets that will never be able to be traded.

That said, CS has two ways to play. You can use the account feature with the adoption limit and trade for what you need to complete a full set. -Or- you can not sign up for an account and get all the pets you want. The downfall is, they're not tradable.

Everyone has a different way of playing. The way I play may not be how someone else plays. It's not a bad thing.

[Nico]

My now 6yr old daughter with special needs and I have adopted CS pets together since late July/early August of last year. She has a speech & language disorder and the pets growing and evolving give her something exciting to look forward to, and to talk about and to describe. Between you & me, it's one of my secret speech & language therapy tools. but it's ever so much fun for both of us!

I only made an account because I just happened to flit through the forums one day and saw there was a cut off point for having pets added to your forum account. I joined and had Posie's pets added to my account as there's really no reason for us both to have one when we visit CS together.

Truthfully, my daughter gains no more and no less pleasure from her pets now that they are on an account.

The only real benefit is that I am able to enjoy the trading aspect, and I can usually trade for a monthly pet she likes even if we don't happen to receive it in our monthly adoption limit. For example, she's mad keen on the Nick Sun Horse, so I'll wind up trading for it since we didn't hatch one together on my/our account.

Seeing "rare" pets without an account doesn't necessarily mean it is unloved, unwanted or even unvisited. Posie would still love her pets just as much were they not on an account and we would still adopt more each month.

If you think about it, really it is no different than seeing a "rare" pet that will never, ever be traded sitting on an account somewhere where the owner may or may not be active.

[qhost]

I thought I told you not to eat me...

Okay, to get this straight, this isn't a complaint thread. Just saying my opinion. If people are still adopting pets, then yes, leave them. But pets that were adopted in July - December who's owners haven't adopted anymore are just taking up room on the site. I didn't say anything about stealing pets, but giving newer members a chance. There's probably only about 20 dogtag moons out there, and the chances of a newbie getting one aren't high. There are a few reasons why they would adopt them and leave that I didn't think about, like if they just adopted one to put in a sig or something like that. But I agree with Nico about inactive accounts, too. If the user hasn't logged in in almost a year, that means they most probably aren't checking their pets, which is pretty much the same as pets without an account. But think, if someone adopted a heap of pets from (example) October 23 - November 12, then stopped adopting pets, do you think they're coming back? I doubt they would...

[Nico]

Let's just say, for the sake of discussion, that you are serving in the armed forces. Maybe you have a CS account, maybe you don't. Perhaps you are sent abroad in active duty which may mean you are stationed somewhere with little to no internet access for, oh, one to three years. Should your pets be redistributed then because you haven't visited them or were unable to do so?

It's not so much about what we want, sometimes, Kiara, but rather protecting others' rights to play in the manner of their own choosing (whether or not you find it annoying).

[qhost]

Let's just say, for the sake of discussion, that you are serving in the armed forces. Maybe you have a CS account, maybe you don't. Perhaps you are sent abroad in active duty which may mean you are stationed somewhere with little to no internet access for, oh, one to three years. Should your pets be redistributed then because you haven't visited them or were unable to do so?

It's not so much about what we want, sometimes, Kiara, but rather protecting others' rights to play in the manner of their own choosing (whether or not you find it annoying).

I doubt anyone serving in the armed forces would be on CS, but I see what you mean.
It isn't exactly what I want, or even what other people want, but it just seems pointless to have accountless pets around when no one wants them.
Even if we would add old pets to the pound, I wouldn't get anything out of it. Apart from the fact that I'm hardly ever on when the pound is open, or when a rare pet is available, for that matter, my internet's so slow that by the time I get to the page it's on it'd be gone anyway. And I probably wouldn't need it anyhow, since I have most of the rare pets. This isn't about what I want, since these pets have nothing to do with me. But we can't share 20 pets between 30,000 people. Unwanted pets out there could go to someone who loves CS and will stay here for several years, not to someone who forgot about CS a long time ago.

[Nico]

Why do you doubt military folks are into CS? I suspect you would be very surprised at what some folks here do for a living!

How do you determine which pets are wanted and which are not? Who decides? How regularly and how many exactly do we need to adopt to "prove" our care & attention to our pixel pets?

What exactly is the cut off point beyond which someone's pets (loved or not) are thrown into The Pound for everyone else to scrabble over through no wrongdoing of our own?

All rightie, let's get a little more extreme with our for-instance/example scenarios:-

Maybe both my husband & I were to lose our jobs, or some other family crisis meant we could no longer afford internet access. It's not that I don't want to adopt more, or visit our existing pets, I would simply be unable to do so. How long until my & my daughter's pets are considered fair game because newer players want them?

What if I were knocked down by a doubledecker bus tomorrow and rendered comatose for six months? I can't adopt anything, I'm comatose. I don't love my pets any less, I'm simply unable to adopt more, or visit the ones we already have. Should my pets be impounded or raffled off or given away to whoever fancies them for reasons which are utterly beyond my control?

Sometimes real life intrudes upon online time. Sometimes our priorities shift & change. Sometimes we come back, and sometimes we don't. I can say that it was jolly nice to return to all our pets, safe and sound still in our account, after our absence from CS from Oct 08 to January 09.

[Minimanta]

Oh wow Nico. That's some extreme examples you have!

But you are so right!
We can't say for sure that the pets are abandoned or the owners are unable to check them. If any accountless pets should have accounts, then it would be people who signed up and have some accountless pets they adopted before they joined. But that's not an option anymore.