found this in the current (insofar as that term applies, lol - though for once they have it out pretty promptly) FooPetter :
(click for new "Rules" - have to tie it to an image to put it on the page "live")
...they have apparently created this as a (somewhat) warmer and fuzzier version of the new and heavily-fanged TOS. some points bear comment...
* first and foremost, they retain their claimed right to arbitrarily declare anything/anyone they choose (er, find offensive, unacceptable, or, in the words of the old homegrown TOS, "not ok for the site") deletable and/or suspendable...and this theme is carried throughout this latest offering.
* it is against these Rules to share your OWN information - Foo-related or not - now. how this is any of their business, we're not certain...
* here's a good one - "We will not intervene in transactions; if you feel that someone has acted inappropriately, please report it to support with as much supporting evidence as soon as possible. We will investigate each report and take proper action." they won't intervene - but you're welcome to waste time telling them if it makes you feel better? what exactly IS "appropriate action", if they have a hands-off policy - selective enforcement providing a pretext to get rid of someone troublesome in other ways?
* number 11 is interesting. outside links are not "supported". Huh? we aren't aware that anyone asked them to endorse any...as the TOS do NOT forbid them, we suppose they are hedging a bit. someone - er, unfashionable - on the Forums was recently asked to remove the few they had remaining (KibbleCat, the ASPCA donation link, and so forth), so they do enforce the unwritten ban when it suits their purposes, but there appears to be no real, legal, official restriction per se. hmmm.
* "Breeding Shelters are not allowed" : reputable shelters never bred - and as recent changes have made shelter operation difficult to impossible, this seems tactless at best...
* "No unauthorized transfers" (of accounts) - this implies authorization can be obtained. WHERE? HOW?
most of the rest is either common sense and/or courtesy (asking from members what they seem to lack themseves, lol), and reiteration/justification of previous format changes like the removal of roleplay, but these points seem to bear a bit of examination...
This is the bit that really makes me laugh -- "the spirit of our site". What spirit. They killed the spirit a while ago
ReplyDeleteI too fail to see how it is any of their business what personal information we choose to share. Parents already have the dashboard that can turn off messaging etc on a kid's account, so presumably we are adult or have adult consent if we want to share, say, an email address. If it only were against the rules to ask, that would be fair enough, but to give of one's own free will? that should be okay.
As for the shelter nonsense, yes, the shelter ethos simply seems to mean that if you have the word shelter in your name you must not breed.
It seems to me that they have relaxed rules that, although overly protective, would make for less scamming if run properly, and have gone with "at your own risk" for that, but for other matters such as a desire to pass a functioning account over to a friend rather than send all pets but one to the AC and then leave the poor last one to freeze, we have the joy of suspensions or or bannings rules. Yay foo.
What amused me most was that the foopetter said how excited they are to produce this new rules of conduct, as if it was something we had all been hoping for for ages.
ReplyDeleteall they did was put the new TOS into friendlier (and i use the term advisedly) language and put it where it might get a better chance of being read.
ReplyDeleteCarrie, there IS a way to get the last pet off, but not for public revelation...email me if you need it or know someone who does.
(((hugs))) Gold Rush yes I do know that it is possible -- I have been passing the word quietly -- but it is not supposed to be, just as we are not supposed to be able to foster non-friend pets. What irks me is that they will not make it simple for people to care for others' pets, insisting instead that to bring back fostering would bring back uncontrollable fights (LOL) and they will not do the decent thing and release all the pets on deleted accounts to the AC as per their promise to the members who do delete. They refuse to do anything that will ease our hearts without taking anything from their precious pockets, and instead they release a nice friendly TOS for the kiddies (I agree with your analysis) as if that were what we had all been gasping for this past few months.
ReplyDeleteSorry for the outburst, I am tired and a bit fed up. I shouldn't really post when I'm like this but oh well...
for what it's worth, folks, Pet Tales, Rivet's "new" game, is experiencing a foo-style meltdown, with weekend code crashes, uncorrected - or uncorrectable, it isn't clear which - glitches, unsupported Support, and aribitrary and unjust Mod behavior on the Forums..."We have all been here before"..
ReplyDeleteOh LOL... You know what, that gives me a real laugh, yes I have a weird sense of humour. Well to be honest I am glad that they are proving to be as stupid on PetTales as they continue to be on Foo, it stops me from feeling like the skeleton that they have shoed into their closet.
ReplyDeleteWhat it seems to me that they have never done is to spend money on what really matters -- making the actual product rock-steady and the customer interface intelligent. Anyone who has ever had their copy/paste rubbish replies in Support knows what I mean there.
They could learn something from a firm such as Mind Candy who makes Moshi Monsters. It is not a game that I find particularly appealing, but I have tried it and still actually have my pet which I visit all too infrequently. The game is solid, they spent time at each change so that things went smoothly, and when they finally came out of beta and made areas of the game require payment, you really got something for your cash. There is a continuously updated news sheet which really does give fun and exciting updates for the kids. It is too expensive for me, but I still have my pet which remains free. Of course they may suddenly go downhill now that I have said this, LOL, but the fact remains that they made the game have a solid feel to it and they do give their customers, paying or otherwise, something good.
Rivet appears to NOT have testing, solidity of product, and decent customer service as their basis. Perhaps one day they will grow up.
i recently discovered a site called "Aywas" which is similarly well designed and run - and you can do pretty near everything except certain types of breeding for free (plus if you are creative enough at exploring, designing, selling, and trading, you can do it ALL with no real-cash investment). and it's NOT aimed at the under-13 market, you have to be fairly intelligent raher than fairly rich. these sites prove incontrovertibly that pay-to-play is NOT necessary : good product and good service are.
ReplyDeleteI'm so terribly impressed that they got a new ToS out in seven months. They must have been working their asses off! Phew! Time for at least a year vacation for that one.
ReplyDeleteAnd of course, since we have to pay for foo now, and it is relatively expensive, and one can get games that one can own forever for a simple one-off fee, they are shooting themselves all over the place. I have still a fondness for a series of old pet games that are still on my computer, and I was just now looking into some amazing new pet games where you can own the game forever and choose whether to partake of an online element... so really I have to wonder whether Rivet has rocks in its head or is indeed, as has been suggested before, is aiming to get the site to shut itself down. The latest Foopetter is yet another laughable recycle with pointless "Tip" LOL
ReplyDeleteEventually, they will chase all the die hard players away, I am surprised that anyone is still there. I heard from someone else that hacking is still going on at Foo pets, so much for using that as an excuse for chasing off the " free" players. I am glad I left when I did
ReplyDelete