(just put this up in CF Ideas etc - we'll see what comes of it)
"we as members have a lot to say about what we want and expect from FooPets. well and good - we pays our money and makes our requests (bad grammar deliberate, don't kick me, lol).
but what does MANAGEMENT want from the site? where do they see it going, and what do THEY see as the next move? now that InstaCare and related issues appear to be stabilized, and they have a chance to start looking ahead a bit, where do they see FooPets going, in the short and the long term?
i think it's about time for a State of the FooNion Address from our Fearless Leader(s), don't you?"
About Me
- GOLD RUSH
- Tabby Road, New Furrsey, Foo S. A.
- i am a seven-year-old virtual Cream Persian FooCat (born on Little Christmas, 1/5/10), the mascot and spokesfurson for FooBA4U, the FooPets members' cooperative service site.
Well I would comment but I just got tagged for inciting members again for a post that was deleted supposedly not by Foo and supposedly they weren't sure why. 3 hours later, I get a message on my wall asking me not to incite members, and I'm like, what? So she sent me a SS in support, and yup, what do you know, it's the post that disappeared about a minute after I posted it and Traci said not one thing though she was right there except "we did not remove your post not sure AZ"....So why am I being warned 3 hours later? Furthermore she makes claim in Support that I had received a warning earlier that day, yesterday, about my posting, and I have NO CLUE what she is talking about. The last thing I see on my wall from her BEFORE the comment about my deleted post was to congratulate me for becoming a FooGuru. What is going on?
ReplyDeleteAlso, I made no attempt to repost this comment she was so upset over after it was deleted even though she claims it was not deleted by them, so what is the issue? Geez.
It seems like every time I ask a question I am "inciting" something. When I quit, I never want to see that word again.
::gob-smacked...just totally gob-smacked::
DeleteOh, for crying out loud!!! How on earth can they justify behavior like that to paying members?!? I mean, come on!!!!! I read the whole thread and honest to god, it isn't anything that we haven't all wanted answers to for forever and a day. It's just the things that Foo would rather not have to address.
But why? Why does it matter so much? Why won't they give us a direct and clear answer? Why can't they concede the point and say, "Ya know what, guys, we were wrong, you were right- we need an 18+ over forum and here ya go." and then just be done with it. Really. We know that it's not too much to ask. We know that it wouldn't be *that* stinking hard to create. We also have sorted out how to make it available to only those that are of age. We also know that other sites do it and it works well. So what's the real rub here?!? Why create all this obnoxious, time and energy consuming drama? Where, in a good business model, does it say, "Create bad feelings in the company and alienate all your longstanding customers by censoring them."?!?
Why? Just why? What is the deal? I'd honestly like to know and would really like to ask all this this *in the forum* without worrying about running the risk of getting censored and suspended or deleted.
I also wish I could speak out and support my friends who are asking the same without the same risk. It's absurd. Really absurd.
whew. rant over. thanks for reading this vent.
Az, I stand behind you!
i like "instigate" better than "incite" but both generally indicate that a spotlight is being turned on a sensitive area...and usually for good reason. i am assuming from context this is in reference to "Can We Just be Serious?", as i don;t see a link posted.
Deleteif so, you might enjoy my ("useful"d, but not responded to as yet, though Traci DID take the time to attempt to "cap" the CF thread referred to in this Foop issue) post on that thread -
"the answer to all this is to have passworded “private” forums for the various age groups – something i have seen instituted on several other sites in order to address this problem with fairness to all parties, INCLUDING the site itself. it was done at my request on one particular site, and was not an especially onerous or time-consuming process. and if access to it is locked to those who lack the password, the “safety” of members WITHOUT access is a nonissue.
not only adults (most of whom, myself included, would probably willing to pay a small registration fee – not all of us are fans of sites like FaceBook, and i’m sure it would be of benefit to Foo to keep its members on THIS site rather than having to go elsewhere simply to have a conversation…and “adult” does not necessarily mean X or even R rated, or even truly “inapproriate” for younger members, just a subject that would not especially interest them or perhaps go over their heads, making them feel left out and resentful), but the teenaged AND the youth membership would gain in their enjoyment of FooPets by having separate forums sections geared to them personally, to which the other age groups would not have access.
and i’m sorry, Ms. Lee, but the fact that we have underage members does NOT make this “a children’s site”, any more than having adult members (most of whom were here first, lol) makes it an adult site. FooPets, though most of its original following were grownups, opened its doors to 13+ quite a while back – and then Rivet, in a (failed, from their point of view) attempt to cash in on what they saw as a profitable youth market, tried to retrofit the site for their benefit, with mixed results. still, they are here now – and FooPets is what it has been for most of its existence, a mixed site. i love Ron dearly, but most of the “childguard” features predate his (welcome) reclamation of it and were inherited from the Rivet regime, along with the new under-13 membership segment.
there are dozens of sites which cater to multiple age groups. none appear to be having the problems which Foo does, which seems odd. the only difference i see is that this site seems to expect all players to adapt to the youngest common denominator, and the other sites expect all players – within reason – to adapt to the site they chose to join. forums and activities tasked to each age group are provided, but the sites as whole do not attempt to retool themselves on any one age group’s behalf."
Yes it was on that thread. Her issue was with this:
Deletehttp://support.foopets.com/attachments/token/kyn4jurhf3p20ec/?name=Screen+Shot+2012-11-15+at+2.40.18+PM.png
This was posted by me and deleted, I am assuming by a guru as Traci claims it was not poofed by Foo. But when I asked why it was deleted, I was told she was "not sure" and then 3 hours later I get a message about the deleted post being inciting to other members. I didn't even try to post it a second time.
And apparently, when she was referring to warning me previously about not inciting other members, she was referring to the times months ago she tagged me for speaking out about the glitched players who were banned getting fair treatment. Oy. I wasn't aware we were still back on that particular merry go round, but next time, I'll remember, keeping your mouth shut is much preferred to honesty. Not my issue that YOUR post was already inciting for most adult members to read, now is it?
Rant over.
Hugs CLC. I know, I know just what you mean.
Oh and this was the actual comment:
Delete"AZ no one is out to get you we are not flagging your posts, however I am warning you now to stop inciting members this has gone on long enough. Thank you for playing by the rules!"
Wth is this about? I never implied anyone was out to get me and I accepted her claim that Foo had not deleted or flagged my post. So what...I am SO lost.
sounds like a bad case of CYO, lol...Ron REALLY needs to either get more involved or at least sit Traci down for a serious session of FooPets 101, there is SO much she doesn't know about the site and its history. i'm not sure which is worse - wearing the know-nothing Happy Face, or speaking out from left field with no awareness of the actual facts involved.
Delete(tried to view the original text from the screenshot but had zero luck - i even dragged it to an "open" blog post and tried to hand-code it - now i'm REALLY curious, lol.)
DeleteYou couldn't view the SS? Try this then:
Deletehttp://i605.photobucket.com/albums/tt137/criminaltendency/IncitingSS.png Hopefully that will work. If not I'll just type out the response...
yes, that was visible, thanks (what is that confirm/override stuff at the end of the flags? never saw that before) - i said pretty much the same thing, even more explicitly, and she hasn't gone near me...hm. what was i saying about uneven enforcement?
Deletepower of the press, perhaps, lol. Traci has yet to take a swing at me, even after i went over her head to Ron about the glitch bannings. one wonders.
The override stuff I would guess is what Traci sees. She said she can still see deleted posts which was why she mentioned mine, but still really didn't take the warning back when I told her how long ago it had been deleted.
DeleteAlso, I notice OBC said something on there that were almost my exact words. I also notice that nothing has been said, to my knowledge, to anyone but me. Idk what's up with that. If I asked I'd either be told that it's not my business or that people delete warnings all the time.
Also there was a thread yesterday, lemme see if I can find it about not being able to track flaggers... there was some fancy footwork done on that one to put across the impression that isn't the case without actually saying it *could* be done, which leaves me wondering. Do they just want us to have the impression that they can track flaggers or can they actually do it?
Headdesk. I totally forgot about Recent posts being back lol, here it is http://www.foopets.com/topics/show/2410852?forum_id=34&page=2 see if you see what I saw lol.
Anyhow, as of now, I am a bit frightened to even post anything on my own thread in suggestions as I tend to be found "inciting" for some reason when I'm not even trying to.
best of my knowledge, they definitely know who flags "inappropriate" as this is tracked in two directions, both to tank the post if it collects too many, and to penalize those who use it frivolously or maliciously - that goes WAY back, i asked an amb who was a friend about it via email back in early 2010. stuff like "useful" or "funny", i don't know, but as points are accrued based on receiving and issuing them i would imagine so. computers keep some kind of track of just about EVERYTHING, it's just a matter of knowing where to look for it. for sure they can add or subtract flags at will.
Delete(just looked at the thread and am pasting this as a followup to a quote and parsing of Traci's rather - odd - post. this ought to be interesting...)
I think I am hearing crickets in that thread now. Weird how we ask for a direct answer and even PL comes in and says, "...let me know if you have *further* questions.." and Smidgeyy asks directly and then silence.
DeleteWell, at the risk of being labeled an instigator (giggles..) I threw a very direct question over to PL in her messages since she offered to answer further questions.
Here's what I wrote:
"Hi Parrot Lady. I hope your Sunday is treating you well. You offered to answer further questions in this forum: http://www.foopets.com/topics/show/2410852?forum_id=34&page=2#posts-57657137 and I have one that relates to that forum topic about flagging and who can see and do what and I'd love to know if you can share the answer with me? Is it possible for the admins( a's or A's..) to trace who flagged a post? If you can't share that info I understand. I just thought I'd toss it out there to you more directly since it seems like a direct question and answer might be better than the non-ambassador members kicking possible answers back and forth in the forum and maybe getting a bit riled up. Thanks a bunch and I hope you have a great rest of your weekend and a terrific Thanksgiving! :)
So... maybe we'll get a good and direct answer. ::grins hopefully::
And I just posted this in the forums in the hopes that we can keep the thread and the thinking about this issue (with the hopes for a revamp of the flagging system) in mind.
Delete"Hey Smidgeyy, and everyone else, I’ve emailed Parrot Lady directly and asked her Smidgeyy’s question: " I’d like to know if it’s possible for the admins to trace who flagged a post."
I suspect that if she can answer it then she will. Have faith that the answer will come, if it can, and I’ll keep y’all posted.
…oh,..and please, whatever the answer may be, including “no comment”.. please-oh-please don’t beat the messenger (me), k?
::looks out meekly from underneath her desk with wide eyes::"
well, THIS cricket just chirped again, lol, and we'll see what comes of it. as i mentioned, to the best of my knowledge the source of at the very least "inappropriate" flags was indeed a matter of record and checkable. whether this is (a) still the case, and (b) ever enforced, is another matter, though i'd be extremely surprised if it weren't, otherwise people would be able to delete A and a posts at will.
Deletei would observe that it would be very unlikely that anyone would be told who was harassing them, however - if i were management, i would not reveal their identities to their victims as there is enough bad feeling on the iste as it is.
Just to the above, to my knowledge, there is no way for anyone besides A's and a's to delete their posts as they don't have an inappropriate button for their posts.
Deletedemocracy in action, lol. not surprised...never noticed as i don't use the bloody things. still, i have no doubt that they can indeed find out who did what if they choose, for various reasons. they may keep it quiet for the point made in the second paragraph above, who knows...or possibly just quit enforcing the frivolous/malicious thing preRivet then never started up again.
DeleteYay for crickets as long as they can keep on chirping!!!! :D
DeleteCanaan, I loved your post about how to make an 18+ forum password protected! I saw it in the thread and thought to myself' "There- that sums it up! Let FooManagement take a crack at shooting that post down!" but thus far their way of shooting it down has been simply to not respond. ::sigh::
ReplyDeleteLittle wonder I woke up with The Rolling Stone's "Under My Thumb" running through my head this morning. Please all the gods of adults and animals that things get better!
as long as it remains visible - and if they disappear it now it would be even more obvious - it's doing its job...if i stick enough pins in enough right places, hopefully the Good Doctor Himself will finally come forward and we can start getting somewhere.
Deletegot another random ad in our Spam box, lol, this one praising our site (which i'm sure they know absolutely nothing about) and promoting paycheck loans in Great Britain. may do a feature on these for April Fool's Day, some of them are a hoot.
ReplyDeleteOoo- please don't save it for another 5 months until April!! Share them with us now, please?
DeletePay check loans in GB, huh? Sure, I'll take a dozen! ;)
oops- by saying that in print am I up-ing some algorithm that tracks and increases those offers based on demand? If so, I should come up with something really random and goofy and comedy-worthy to post instead. ::wanders off to ponder the comedic possibilities...::
So anyone else miffed by the Announcements post?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.foopets.com/topics/show/2411336?forum_id=6&page=1
I feel like the member being accused of "bullying" has a valid point that should have been respectfully addressed and not chalked up to harassment of the people involved. I know the person they refer to, and she is not one to leave a comment simply to be rude. Her point is actually a good one and Foo is sweeping it under the rug because, as usual, constructive criticism is not allowed. This is just getting to be ridiculous.
I saw it yesterday and nearly fell out of my chair! How JoeyLee warped Annie's comment into bullying is a real trick of imagination indeed!! And then Annie very directly asked for a retraction and nothing... Her note as of about 19 hours ago on page 6 made me feel so sad. Not for Annie necessarily, who clearly has her head screwed on straight as is right, but for all of us- for anyone who speaks directly and gets nothing- least of all respect. Just sadness. Shame JoeyLee isn't an elected official......
ReplyDeleteThis is absolutely ridiculous. Now Foo is not giving credit to artists who submit to spare the feelings of those who didn't get chosen. What? I don't even... so they're now taking credit for all the art they post basically since someone can work very hard and now they no longer even get named for their work. I don't see many people keeping submissions going if they are not credited. I certainly wouldn't.
ReplyDeleteokay, i didn't get into the Comments on that as i copied the relevant quote into "State of the FooNion" and went on to other things.
ReplyDeletenot all the way through yet, but a few salient points so far...there have ALWAYS been a plethora of amb-submitted items in the Mart for whatwever reasons. my thoughts on that were if you don't approve, don't buy 'em...
AuntieAnnie has a point about staff/family member submissions but it's not a very big pond here, i don't see a need to limit how many frogs can hop.
she is also not a bully in any way and it would take Traci to resort to that, lol...i'd make more a joke of it than an issue, that's all it merits as obviously no one (including PL, bless her for fixing Lainee's deleted post) agrees with her.
one think i REALLY like and will promote is the idea of blind voting on items by the membership - this has a LOT of potential.
on to read the rest...
okay, no significant additions other than AuntieAnnie being gracious - and honest - as usual. chimed in with my two cents worth, we'll see how it goes.
DeleteNo the place that I saw the thing about no longer putting names on it was page 3 here:
Deletehttp://www.foopets.com/topics/show/2412617?forum_id=34&page=4
As far as what you said on the forums, I 100% agree. If they're going to take off the name for some people, they should do it with everyone. That's also including old submissions because I just view it as unfair to name some people and not others.
With regard to Ambassadors being able to submit, I really have no issue with it. A lot of our very cool items in FM came from that source. What I thought was that if they wanted to avoid calls of favoritism, perhaps they should not post a bunch of submissions by only one person at once. But I find it highly unfair that the daughter of an Ambassador is still being credited for her work which was put in a few days ago, but work that came from that same contest, like Adeles stuff, has no name. If they're going to do something for these people here, they can't not do the same for another group of people over there. I actually know a few people who prefer to remain unnamed, in that case it should be up to them to state that and for Foo to keep them anonymous.
As far as PL goes, I have a ton of respect for her. When I posted asking what happened to the names of the people submitting on the Foo FB page, Traci (I assume) just came and said that I should know better and to take my question to Support, while PL actually took a minute out to answer my question *then* refer me to Support for anything further. I notice now that Traci has deleted her earlier comment on FB now that PL replied.
hmm. so there is some shame if not decency in there, lol? be interesting to see if the forum post does a fade as well...she's not about to retract, but she may well make it go away. SO glad to see PL standing up for membership, she has always been one of the good ones.
Delete(hit that other thread and gave THEM a nickle's worth, lol.)
DeleteSo, what they have just done under the guise of making people feel better by hiding artists' names is this- they have made it impossible for us to know whether they *are* playing favorites or not. I hate finding a conspiracy under every rock but good gravy...
Deleteon the other hand, this little to-do has shone enough of a spotlight on the whole process that they will pretty much HAVE to go one way or the other...i STILL don't understand why some people would get name credit and others not - the whole thing makes absolutely no sense. (wanders off shaking head)
DeleteAll I gotta say about Foo, is I'm dissapointed in them... I can't even imagine what there next move will be......... I've lost my faith in Foo honestly.
ReplyDeleteif the day ever comes when our biggest concern/battle is whether people are getting name-credit on FooMArt items i will dance naked in the streets...a large portoin of the Mart problem may just have been hurry-up coding to get something up and on display (sound familiar?) and given time will resolve itself.
Deletebigger concerns are a return of member sales of items and pets, a decent double-consent trading protocol, and an END to selling pets to the shelter. there should NOT be a bounty on breeding : if people breed pets that they cannot sell - and these days half the time they know this in ADVANCE - they should not be able to get a cash reward for doing so. there;s no limit on how many babies can live on profiles, and as most of these poor little tykes came from free CF+ LLs, it's no trouble to take care of them.
I haven't been on Foo for a little over a month now, so I'm kinda confused on things... All I know from their FB page is that insta care got fixed, the forum post link is back on our profiles, and the "big news" was bringing back user-submitted artwork. First off, why was that taken away in the first place? Second what is going on about Foo not crediting its members for their artwork, I'm cofuzzled here, if someone could please explain this to me, I'd be happy to know. Thanks!
DeleteUser-submitted art wasn't "open" because at that time the FooMart was limited and no new items to speak of were being added. after they found the buried sourcecode to reopen it in toto, they either redid the submissions coding or dug that up as well, and reinstituted it.
Deleteapparently, deliberately or simply through oversight (my money's on the latter, personally), some of the submissions - apparently from a contest they ran back when user art could not be placed in the Mart (eh? what was that again, lol?) - were their "test balloons" for the recoding, and not all of them got name credit on their pieces.
as one of the ones who DID was related to an ambassador, we had a bit of a fuss...not totally unjustified, but...at any rate, A did a CYA over this by saying that if some people had public credit for more submissions than others it would cause bad feelings. as that holds about as much water as a funnel, people (myself included) went on record for all-or-none as far as name credit on items goes, with a caveat that the person submitting could ask to remain nameless if that were THEIR choice.
You know there was one person who received name credit in this and had it taken away the next day? I feel this is something they can easily do, so why is it the only new item left with a name is the a's daughter? I actually feel badly for the one that still has the name because it does appear to be favoritism, and I can't imagine being put in that position. I would much rather see no names than only see mine and have a bunch of people pissed at me for something I had no control over.
Deletei still suspect that this whole thing was an artifact/defect in the coding - regrettable for all concerned - and with typical "i didn't do it" mentality they are trying everything to duck and cover rather than admitting "oops - we goofed". this has been the pattern all along and instead of gaining them credibility they lose it...you think that sooner or later, they'd LEARN this...
DeleteMeh, I dunno what to believe anymore from them. And you're right, if they'd have been up front in the past, I wouldn't keep suspecting that something wasn't right. But I have don't have any trust left for them. I just wish my time left on Foo wasn't always so depressing.
Deleteif they would only just be HONEST for once. right or wrong, good or bad, popular or not, for pete's sake tell the TRUTH - and tell the ambs what's going on as it happens. this right-hand/left-hand stuff is for the birds and is destroying what credibility Ron got for trying to restore it.
DeleteI just had an answer from Traci about a problem I had. I had made a new Halloween scene for my top cat and when I put her back into her winter scene (made 2 years ago) I could not get a picture. It seems that all the "dynamic items now back in the mart are causing this, I had two storm windows in the scene. When I took them out I got the picture. Now if they had put that information somewhere and said they were working on solving it, I would have been fine with it. But once again they do not tell anyone so hundreds of us who will be using all the dynamic Christmas items would not have gotten a picture and flocked to Support - or more likely just given up and said "damn foo sucks".
ReplyDeleteOnce more they have not bothered to let us know there are glitches in some of new Mart things and they are working on it right up front. I guess they think we won't notice? I know so many people that love to decorate - It is actually one of the few pleasures left in Foo when it works. Especially for the holidays. Most of these people will just bag it and then more people will leave. When in hell will they stop shooting themselves in the foot for cripes sake?
So if you are planning to put that train that goes around the Christmas tree or any of the cute action items in your scene do not plan on having a picture of it. Why do they have to make it so hard?
This comment has been removed by the author.
Deletethis glitch with Fotos has been pretty common knowledge for a while - for what it's worth, the problem with taking photos of dynamic items has been going on for at least 6 months or longer. the issue is with the Foto programming, rather than the items, new to the Mart or otherwise, and it is...being worked on.
Deletei had to redo Gold Rush (as the Pumpkin King)'s Halloween scene as i had a coffin in it (wish i could have used the previous year's version, Fotos worked then), and just now wasn't able to take AnJellicle's Christmas foto as she has a toy train tree in it, and it is NOT removable without making an enormous mess.
there have been growing problems with FotoStudio and scene fotos for some time, and at this point not even downloading the Unity Player helps much. here's hoping this fix is well up on their list.
^ Here's also hoping it won't take another 7 months to "fix" something. I've been getting the feeling lately like nothing is actually happening and that Dr. Ron came back with good intentions, but is now just making his money until he doesn't have enough people left to make it worth it. I really don't see Foo being around another year at the rate things are going. So basically what? We'll get 2 fixes per year at this rate (or maybe only one) and nothing new as there are more problems with the site than they have pets I swear.
Deleteif Ron - or anybody - is making anything on Foo at the moment i'll eat my keyboard...i'd be very surprised if currently it's not COSTING him/them money.
Deleteconsidering the mess that had been made of the code before, during, and post-Rivet, it didn't surprise me that it took while to get anywhere - and i honestly expected MORE glitches/crashes in the course of trying. they seem to be getting a handle on it, and how to get around the Rivet overlays to restore original code - now it's a matter of convincing them that it's better for ALL concerned to return as much as possible to the original style of play...and get them to LEVEL with us about what's going on.
we only bite when we're in the dark and can't see what's coming, after all.
^ I'd like to see you eat your keyboard lol
DeleteI'm very sad at the state of Foo. A 99 yr old woman's account was locked because of teenagers and a supposed glitch. The family has begged and plead upon deaf ears. She is dying and only wants to play with her pets. The family has done everything even offered money to no avail.
ReplyDeleteI am the granddaughter of that woman, as the situation became known to me I contacted support and gave them my 100% cooperation. I offered all my items, and even to buy fd and forfeit them. I also offered my other accounts as a wash. Anything. My grandma will die soon, never seeing her beloved foo pets again.
ReplyDeleteParrot and i are still trying...this would be ghastly under any circumstances, but under these circumstances and at this time of year it is tragic.
DeleteIm actually now considering returning to Foo... Now I'm asking myself, what in the world am I thinking? Is it even worth it?
ReplyDeleteI think we all agree we stay with Foo for out beloved pets. It hurts my soul that she can't have hers do to a huge misunderstanding I hate to think she will die without her beloved pets. I understand foo gets tired of people who exploit glitches but hers wasn't her fault
ReplyDeleteIt's too bad the only person at Foo who has any decision making power is Traci who does not hear the truth only what she wants to hear.
ReplyDeleteThe more it changes the more it stays the same.
ReplyDeletehoping for foopets to get better is a fool's hope, sadly :(
Wait, what happened with this woman's account that they won't let her get on? *Someone* on there is a PITA with a god complex. I dearly hope that she is able to get back to her account so that she can see her pets again. Good luck.
ReplyDeletethe short version is, an adult was away and had her daughter (who also has a Foo account) tending her pets. a friend of the daughter (also with a Foo account, i assume) said - look! i can show you how the glitch works!, or words to that effect, and proceeded to get a bunch of items using the mother's account. mom came home and has trying to unravel it since, mostly on grandmother's (another account) behalf. in the course of this, she had the daughter's friend demonstrate what she did for Traci's benefit - regrettably, on one of the original person's accounts, not her own.
Deletei have been a party to this via email and ultimately sent some copies to PL as she has authority to speak that i do not. while the net results truly bite, i CAN see why this looked rather strange to Traci to begin with.
What a shame. :( I hope you guys can make some progress in time for her to enjoy her pets again.
DeleteI miss that monthly 'Foo Petter' newsletter that was sent to our email addresses. At least it was up to date new about Foo from the management. I'd love a new pet too, but I reckon you could be fright when you say this site might be COSTING money right now, so a new pet might be too much to hope for.
ReplyDeleteKayla
well...it was better than the present system of Announcements-when-they-feel-like-it...and it WOULD bring DrRon back into view, at least in puppet form, but what I miss is the original "start" page that provided DAILY news and even featured pet and member activities.
Deleteanybody else remember when logging in did NOT send you straight into Play mode?