nickjr wrote:I don't really understand the argument that these are CS's pets and not our pets. By that argument can we even dress them up? Name them? What makes the delete button different for that particular argument? If they're not our pets then we shouldn't be doing ANYTHING to them (you don't just walk up to someone's dog and start dressing them up or declaring the dog's name). Can someone explain that argument a little more
Edit: hit submit too early; there's more I want to say, gimme a sec?
Been trying to remember my response so I’m going to post this and edit it when you finish lol
My argument with that is, if someone lets you borrow your pet, they can give you permission to nickname it, dress it up, and care for it, but they can’t say “yes you can delete my dog”
With trading, we could pretend you’re a pet hotel who has connections to other pet hotels
The person, giving you permission to do so, allows you to trade pets with those hotels
Though again, one cannot say “you can kill my dog”
—
Part 2 lol
Rereleases: If everyone’s saying rereleases will fix all, why can we only adopt 3 pets and why does it only happen once a year? Yes, there’s tones of people, but the chances of getting such rare pets can be slim. Especially with the want for new rares
Store Pets: Yes, but a rich person could buy other people’s “tokens” and delete them, making the numbers dwindle, demand rise, and people who have them may give them away for more rares, then they could end up in the wrong hands again, and the evil humans (who do exist) can delete even more of them, causing the economy to collapse. Not likely, but possible. One could gather monopoly by buying tons of a wanted store pet (I.e right now), saving them for a while, trade them for other store pets that are by then out of stores, delete those pets, cause those numbers to go down, the unwanted becomes rarer, and by then they’d have most of them..
Bullying: Yes, exactly. Deleting pets in terms of other players is always bad