About Me

My photo
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.

20141222

Exit, Stage Left?

We've seen more change in a month or less than in the last three years, and it started out so hopefully... welcoming back the disenfranchised, restoring member-to-member sales, and getting rid of the bounty on FooSheltering pets. I was ecstatic.

Now...you can HAVE an unsubscribed account (or two, or ten : which I think was a mistake, they should be one to a customer) - but there isn't much you can do besides revisit and rebond your pets. User sales, breeding, and gifting are still not enabled for unsubscribed members, despite the fact that it is depriving the site of the income they could provide over and above what it receives from subscriptions (and this is a REALLY dumb time to deny them motivation to purchase FD packages, as this time of year many people who could not otherwise afford to spend receive gift cards). My cynical side is beginning to see the whole affair as a more subtle form of the emotional blackmail we used to get from Rivet to subscribe. I really hope I'm wrong.

After much bellowing and wailing from those who bred specifically to use their babies as cash cows (growl), AC/FooShelter buyback was reinstated - originally just for a month to accomodate those who already had litters on the way, but ultimately for keeps. GOD, I wish Dr. Ron hadn't caved on that one... it was one of the brightest rays of hope in the "new" Foo.

Despite gentle hints and pokes, we still have no word regarding the return of open fostering or discount subscription packages without FD/gem bonuses, but with the other subscription benefits.

The "new and different" pet finally made its debut and is simply a retread of a Rivet design... and an ugly one at that, though I suppose it has its charms. (I was rooting for the "hybrid" Pokeys featured on a FooMart item)
I had thought that introducing a new pet - and the furor it created - was intended to distract from the issue of opening sales/gifting/breeding to unsubscribed members, but it now appears that it was intended to usher in the restructuring of from-the-site pricing. No problem with that - I go back to the days when all but a few pets were 300FD a pop, and the "AC" pricing was way overdue for some kind of overhaul... but I was hoping it would take the form of a return to the original site sales vs. FooShelter (no more candycoating where disposed-of pets are going), and getting the whole shebang the *bleep* OFF of the play page. It has always bothered and annoyed me that in order to look for other pets, one of yours must be left standing and waiting. On the plus side, in the course of repricing the site pets, the buyback rate ratio has been dropped - breeders can still more or less break even, but it's less profitable than taking the time to find buyers.Score one for the good Doctor, who hates the very idea of AC buyback almost as much as we do.

The site needs income. We get that. We ALSO get that there are a lot of ways that income can be generated, from subscribed and unsubscribed members alike, that are not being utilized. Bringing back product endorsements, reworking FD packages* to better reflect the current site economy (and thus furthering their sales to ALL members), setting up more levels for subscription both above and below the existing ones, selling additional pet slots, and even RL merchandise like Tshirts/sportwear, plushies, and even a FooPets pet products brand, are all viable revenue sources to explore. There are probably dozens of others that I haven't even thought of.
THIS JUST IN - FD costs when purchased in packages have been HALVED. Go Ron!

If FooPets wants to make money, they need to be seen as WORTH money... and after a brave start, I'm not seeing it anymore. Dr. Ron, please - there's a better way.

31 comments:

  1. At this point I still don't see foo being at a place where I would want to give them money for clubfoo membership. If they brought some things back that I use to have 4 years ago like user to user sales and the ability to sell pets. also their is another thing I've noticed in the forums just now. Someone was saying they missed the "funny" and "cute" parts of what use to be part of feedback in the forums. I personal miss them also. then people in this forum said "oh people use those to hurt" and then they went on to rip on this person's grammar endlessly like that is any less hurtful. the person did have bad grammar but that's not the point, they were only using that as an excuse to rip on that person's ideas which could be seen as "Inciting" the new favorite term for bad people on Foopets. I've a big concern with this in the sense that things that can be seen as "Inciting" seems is interpreted broadly to the point that I think many people are just plain overly sensitive to the point of censorship! oh no please don't flag me "funny" or might go cry! come on people get a thicker skin than that! if people can't handle critiques then how are they going to handle life?!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ah yes...seems like in the matter of weeks we have reverted back to 2010 stage of Foopets. With ambassadors abusing they power, people getting suspended left and right for things they do not know are against the rules because all the rules stickies were removed for god knows why. Vagueness from the powers to be is driving me to the point of irritation and I honestly regret returning...once again.
    Dr.Ron has poofed and all those promises have vanished into thin air. So much about that....

    ReplyDelete
  3. Just witnessed a user being suspended for a rude thread....except... they did not make that thread and since first post was flagged inappropriate so many times...the original post vanished and the 2nd in the line was taken down as the culprit. This just flat out makes me furious.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ...I always found it hilarious if people jumped on "funny" for a post of mine - told me I was hitting a nerve, if nothing else. (if they really wanted to aggravate me, they should have used "cute", I'm highly allergic to it...) Political correctness has gotten way out of control, and not just on Foo. Second instance, Karlia - has anyone reported the rror to management? Not just Support, but PMing PL?

      Delete
  4. ::heavy sigh::
    Dr. Ron has been incommunicado for days, members' concerns go unaddressed, and PL comes into the forum with no answers or anything much besides "don't incite". Where do we go from here? What are your thoughts, Foop?

    ReplyDelete
  5. It's hard to say...it's pretty certain the site's not paying Ron's mortgage etc, so he must have taken a day job (and I can't blame him) - the reception he got for trying to restore the "original" FooPets probably didn't help either.

    I'm really hoping PL has a backchannel to him (as I suggested not only publicly but in private to them both), and can relay useful comments without his presence creating a riot. Pl has always been a peacemaker, and things were getting a bit vicious and personal, but moderation needs to be moderated sometimes too. I put up a request for open fostering, we'll see if anything comes of it. It's a (hopefully) neutral topic and something a lot of people would like to see back, maybe it will encourage Ron to get involved again.

    ReplyDelete
  6. -snorts- we don't need relayed comments we need the man to step up and grow a pair and address the damn site. Whether or not people are being mean to him people are leaving and it's turned into a grand exodus. If the site isn't paying his bills now, it's sure not going to pay his bills when it has to shut down cuz he was too scared to come out and make a post. PL has said he's working on the site full time still so if he's taken a day job I wonder when he has time to work at it? Unless PL is lying?

    ReplyDelete
  7. It seems Ron Hornbaker is too busy to care about putting things right @ Foopets: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ronhornbaker.

    Founder
    RésuméJoy
    August 2014 – Present (6 months)|San Francisco

    "Just a fun little side project I hacked together over a couple weekends."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. from what I understand, that entry is seriously out of date...LinkedIn (I'm on it) is not known for keeping current and/or checking with people before selecting which ifo bites to use. The interesting part - if accurate - is his present company ResumeJoy. the mystery day job?

      Delete
  8. Instead of the game, "Where's Waldo?" it's "Where's Dr. Ron?"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I truly wish I knew - we overlap here and there online, but I haven't heard from him directly, on or off site, in a long time.

      Delete
    2. I saw a thread yesterday where someone is supposing that Ron has just gone and left the site to PL until it goes under. The person mentioned Traci leaving, and it hit me - what a way to do a slow fade. Let your niece get out from under months before. This makes it look like she really did just leave to go to bigger and better things. Then start pumping out new stuff, U2U, price changes, a dog that doesn't totally work with everything, hire PL to keep things running, and just leave? I mean at this point, wouldn't Dr. Ron have said SOMETHING if he was still around? If your day job was falling apart merely because people were leaving because you decided not to speak, wouldn't you say anything to keep them happy and paying? But. He doesn't? That seems to me like he left and just put PL in charge while the ship goes down. The Ambassadors have been acting oddly, not at all like their normal selves. Instead of everyone being suspended, no one is.

      So is Dr. Ron just letting the site slide into oblivion and making what money he can in the interim? I don't want to think so, but the signs are there. He let his family get out, he made a bunch of changes to make it seem like he'd be around, and even let free players back hoping for added income, then he left. I mean really, I can't imagine a site owner not just saying "Welp I'm losing money for not talking, guess it's time I said something". I really don't want to see this as Foo slowly dying, but it seems to be the case.

      Delete
    3. If Ron decided to bail, the site would shut down. period. They would not throw good money (which they have little enough of) after bad to keep it running if he decided it wasn't workable. I'll be extremely surprised if the site is breaking even at the moment, it's certainly not making a profit.

      I have been thinking about posting something along these lines in the site forums, just not sure when or where but...bear in mind :

      Ron moved heaven and earth - and probably went into personal debt - to rescue the site from Rivet.

      For our sake - not his, it would have been far easier to debug when it wasn't running - he opened it even before he was legally in possession, so that members and their pets would have minimal downtime.

      As soon as he could free the time, he went to work to accomplish something that (supposedly) everyone wanted - the site back to where it was pre-Rivet. And he did an amazing job of it, and was in progress on more, until...

      Many CF members (a group of which I have been a member since before Rivet made it compulsory) pitched a royal fit over having their prerogatives infringed upon - even though technically they weren't, and aren't.

      Many regular/unsubscribed members (a group of which I am ALSO a member) pitched their OWN fits over not getting enough fast enough.

      All those who had gotten comfortable with raising pets as cash crops for resale to the site had an absolute bird over the prospect of having to actually find BUYERS in order to turn a profit rather than trading their babies in like coupons. (and I STILL feel AC buyback is THE worst and most destructive thing even done to this site)

      In effect, we took this man, who brought back what he thought would delight existing members and allow originals who could - or would - not pay for CF to return at last ...and slapped him right across the face.

      He responded to the first batch of protests, actually backed down and made some remodifications (many of which were sadly a step back from the return to original Foo ideals), and STILL the bellyaching and demands continued.

      Now he has apparently tucked his head in and is working on what he sees fit. And will tell us about it and/or launch it when he sees fit. He's a bigger man than I am...under similar conditions, I might well have told them all to stuff it, shut down the site, and started over.

      Delete
    4. LMAO if that's what you think, you keep on kissing his butt. I'll keep the swearing off of here out of respect to the younger kiddos that [might] read it. But seriously, he flung a few changes out that most people hated and you're just bowing down to the man because it's Ron and he wants the same thing you do. No AC sellback. You can kiss butt all you want to Canaan but Ron is not an infant. I've had way worse insults slung at me and still stood my ground in REAL LIFE. If he can't handle a site revolting against dumb changes then he should just give it up now. He changed a lot of stuff too fast and people were obviously upset about it for good reason. A lot of us wanted things pre-Rivet [myself included] but not in one day. For god's sake are you kidding me? Even when Traci was there she told us to sell to the AC so that applies to Ron as well. I'm sure he knew they were telling us that and if not then seriously where the hell was he? All he had to do was read the forums. Things we DON'T want Ron - the inbred dog that doesn't work with half the site's features, a raise IN ANY prices. I mean it's not rocket science. Or maybe it is. Maybe that's why Ron is either gone or in his foxhole and PL can't seem to get word 1 about the glitch that's going on. Neither one of them is doing anyone any favors by keeping mum's the word about it. Lets just say screw it and not say anything and ban everyone we can pin down even if they didn't do it. Or not? Maybe we should let everyone go even though they're overthrowing the work put into the economy. What was it all for? All the price raises why? If only to let people take any and all progress away by keeping their mouths shut. Yea that will help.

      Delete
    5. So have I - including here - and felt very little motivation to go on indulging the insulters...and as I specified, AC buyback is a pet peeve of my own and not the main issue. As many CF members inveighed against free memberships AT ALL as objected to the buyback suspension, and while that has died down it's still a factor, especially as it pertains to perks versus features.

      The breeding "glitch", as far as I know, has been around since pre-Rivet times - I have a cat from one of those supersized litters, and know of several others. It's not new...and I would expect the same policy toward it that prevailed then remains in force.

      Call it what pleases you - let's just say I don't like bullying. If the same diatribe had been directed against a member (much less an ambassador), it would have resulted in massive suspensions. Instead, Ron has chosen to ignore the rudeness and ingratitude - whatever the reception, he was attempting to restore what used to be a wonderful site to its original principles - and go about his work of recoding. It's regrettable that he made an initial attempt to pacify people with a new pet (scratched up out of spare parts as the only way to do so at this point), with such poor results, and I doubt he expected the economic rebalancing to be especially popular - it was simply necessary.

      Delete
    6. I've been lurking for a bit and just wanted to have my own say about this. I figured eventually the crap about the glitches would come here.

      A. It is an exploit. These are not the Legacy Glitch Litters we knew. You can make them happen on purpose. All you have to do is ask someone to wait with you, a common practice in the Breeding forum right? Except "Wait with me" threads are now blowing up the forum because of this. So you need you and someone else, or as ArcticMagick proved, one person can do it on their own with two devices. http://www.foopets.com/topics/show/2601165?forum_id=1000011&page=27 I can't for the life of me remember which page I posted about her on, but suffice it to say, she managed to glitch three litters. All you have to do is have at least two people (or two devices), viewing the litters at the same time and refreshing the few minutes until they're born, or seconds, heck I don't know. But I watched two people on that thread do it with one of Sophie's litters. What happens is the first person to view them initiates a regular birth of pups/kits say 5 for example. The first person who refreshes adds on another 4 or 5, then the same for each person after that. Which is why a lot of the glitch litters were specifically the number 14 pups/kits. Because 4 would be born, two people would refresh for 5 more pets each or 5 would be born and one refresh would count as 5 and the other 4.

      See the difference is - back in the day the glitch numbers were random. Some people got 8, 23, some people got 49. It was just a random occurrence. Now people are *causing* this to happen. So we're seeing lots of litters of 8, 9, and 14. 8 or 9 would be two people or two devices, 14 would be three. So yes, this is very much an exploit. I could not say that on site at the risk of losing my account - even though countless others have already said how in the forums - including the one I just linked you to. That's why we saw so many glitch litters at once. Back in the day, you used to see *maybe* one or two a month. This is every litter that either someone trolls or someone uses the exploit on. Heck, after those two people glitched one of Sophie's litters - there was a third person glitching too because she got 14 - whomever that third person was decided to prove a point and glitched the next 5 or 6 litters that came out, all but one of which were Sophie's. That's not random.

      Continued in next post.

      Delete
    7. B. As for the bullying. Hang out in Chit-Chat for a bit, and you'll see how much members are bullying other members with no repercussions. Two people just deleted their account today because people decided that their car accident was fake, and the one person who was out of the hospital's update thread about his sister (who was in a coma and fighting for her life the other day) was inundated with people saying that the person was lying, the car crash was fake, and that the "two people" were actually one person doing it for pets and/or other. So the guy changed his name, but apparently the bullying started again today with people saying the same thing - so both deleted their accounts, just gone. And what happened to the instigators? Well... nothing. People are being warned to "be nice" and "not incite" or "not bully", threads are locked, but no one is being suspended when they do bully. However if you say something snarky, even just "whatever" to an Fa, bam suspension. Or if you omg say something that in any way sounds like you're encouraging people to go off-site, bam suspension. My friend said only "Maybe we should just talk somewhere else". She had no specific place in mind, but because of the whole Cyska obsession, they assumed she was telling people to go there and they suspended her. She never said Cyska, she never hinted at even going to anywhere in specific, in fact, *I* assumed she meant Facebook which is allowed. I tell people to FB me all the time. Or hey, what about the Yoda dog? People are being warned that they could be suspended for saying anything negative about it. So apparently Ron *does* care or that wouldn't be okay. But bullying of actual PEOPLE goes unpunished despite the huge thread PL made about the subject. I saw another very sweet member get bullied to tears by a group on there over nothing today. She made a thread talking about herself and one of her flaws, and a group of people took it in their head that she was talking about them, so they ganged up on her. She shut off her forums for at least a day, if not more. This girl, who I won't name because I'm afraid one of that group may read this and decide to blame her for what I'm saying, has *never* been mean to anyone on Foo that I have ever seen. She's always very kind, polite, sweet, and in general a kid that loves everyone and wants just to be liked. There is *no* excuse for letting people do that, and yet suspending people for talking negatively about a pixel for Pete's sake. I mean... that's priorities being twisted. They'll defend Yoda with suspensions, but not children who have done nothing but be present in Chat. I'm serious too, you can go there almost any day of the week and see nothing but bullying and awfulness to each other, and all the Fa's say is - "be nice". But no one, even repeat offenders, are ever suspended. It's time they started caring for the members as much as they care about Yoda, Cyska, or themselves. Because they sure will suspend people if you step out of line for those reasons.

      Continued again - sorry, you know how I am lol.

      Delete
    8. I can't say if Ron is there or not, I'm starting to think no, but who knows? I know the two things I posted about for sure though because I was there when Sophie's litters were glitched - I didn't look until at least 5 minutes after they were born because I'm hoping they have a way to see whose IP is looking at litters and when, and then serial glitchers will be punished - hopefully. But after the first few minutes I think, it's safe to look without glitching it up more, and I did. All those litters, plus one innocent bystander, were glitched by a troll who saw my thread and unfortunately decided to have some fun with the Fa to make a point. I can guess who it was, but really, it could be anyone. And I know about the bullying because I'm in Chat a lot. I know you don't often go to certain spots on the site, but you really should. You should get the full Foo experience these days... if you did I think you'd be far less optimistic.

      I wanted *so bad* for Ron to be the savior of the site. But to a point, I agree with Anon37. He needs to man up and post, even if it's just a locked Announcement that no one can post on to poke at him... although again, I agree, had he heeded members' opinions in the first place, or heeded their feelings, it would not be so bad now. As for AC sellback, I still advocate for same prices across the board - if a 5/5 give 55fds, etc. But I understand the need for the lower prices for sold back pets. However, members being able to make huge litters kind of negates all that as Anon37 said. Sorry this is my last post lol.

      Delete
    9. I can't speak for Ron - or the site - and hope I am not taken as doing so. Anything here, in posts or comments, is strictly my PERSONAL take on the matter.

      Az, thank you for clarifying the breeding issue, I had no real idea what was or was not involved. For myself, anything that inhibits overbreeding, especially simply for a quick buck, sounds like a good idea, but we've had enough here of sheep being hung with the goats so yes, there should be SOME conclusive word from someone.

      As far as people putting forward a sad story... if they ask, or even hint, that they should receive gifts as consolation, my bogus detector tends to go off...I have no idea what are the actual facts in the case you cite, and am not addressing it specifically, but both accounts deleting simultaneously seems a bit suspicious...if Ron is entitled to stop chatting when people grow vicious (this takes nothing away from those who posted with legitimate issues and is not meant to), then I would expect what sound like they were meant to be adults to handle things a bit more maturely. All I can think of is the "horrow bios" I used to see pets lumbered with by those who knew little or nothing of actual cruelty in the real world...

      I have returned to my old practice of spending very little time in the Forums, and appreciate any pertinent info people pass me here or via PM - I do follow up on most of it. If the policy on bullying has become as biased as you say, I'm surprised at PL and it may well be time to email Ron...on a number of matters.

      Delete
  9. Np on the clarification, I suppose it's *possible* that the old glitch litters were able to be effected by other players, but wouldn't there have been more of them? If there's one thing I realized on Foo, is someone finds an exploit, they share the wealth and tell their friends, who tell their friends, etc. So if they are the same, the old glitch litters are the best kept secret exploit on Foo lol.

    Those players did not ask for pets. A couple of people were doing a re-homing in the girl's honor, but the pets were to go to other players, not to her. Yes, it's very possibly a scam to get people to give gifts and/or pets, but what if it's not? A lot of people who were friends with these two just wanted updates but the update thread was crowded out with people yelling "liar". It's a brother and sister, so the accounts were deleted by one or the other, probably the brother. They messaged me about the bullying and just wanted to be left alone. One of them was a blue star with pets... I don't see someone just deleting all that work, but I could be wrong yeah. They just according to them wanted no more stress, which if they were in that scenario and people were calling them liars and fakes, I can understand just deleting to get away from the negativity. And no, they're kids. Albeit driving age, but still kids.

    I have I think a couple of threads where people asked for their threads to be glitched and it happened bookmarked, I can check if you're interested. As far as the bullying, I can only say that I can refer you when I see it if the threads are not deleted. Most times they are just locked though. Watch them start deleting them now. :P

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, and anything off-color anyone notices that should be looked into, please let me know so I can try to follow up on it.

      Deleting an account - when negative messagers can be blocked, if simply ignoring them is insufficient - seems an extreme reaction, but everyone deals with stress in their own way, I suppose...a shame that those who did care did not think to mark the naysayers "inappropriate". My sympathies to them, so many DO make up sob stories for whatever reason that genuine ones are often treated shabbily.

      The original breeding glitch worked almost exactly the way you describe, with one or more people refreshing the incipient litter - I had asked a couple at the time as I was curious. My megalitter abbie's breeding page shows the litter as consisting of 5 : as I recall it was actually over 28, lol. At the time, you had to go find your own buyers, there was no AC buyback...that may have been a factor in its less frequent use.

      Delete
  10. I`ve recently returned to Foo with a free account and though I`m disappointed with certain restrictions I`m very happy to see my pets again.I remember what Foo Management was like and have no expectations that it would be better now. I`m more than happy to play with my pets,decorate scenes and chat with old friends.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. nice to hear from someone else who sees the glass as half full...it really hasn't been that long since the return to original play mode and ideals was begun, it's worth bearing with.

      Delete
  11. Well some of the feedback comments are amusing,at least to me.To all you ultra stat breeders who are seeing your breed stats fall and complain about lost revenue: bwahaha. Poor babies. Karma is a bitch.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How exactly is Karma a bitch for trying to better breed stats? I mean honestly wth?

      If you're referring to people that just breed to AC, fine, I get why that's an issue for some people even though they're pixels and all, but what about the breeders who breed for better stats to keep or to find homes for? They do actually exist...

      Delete
  12. And I was a very conscientious breeder...until Foo unleashed the Ultra and Uber Stats thank you very much. Then the attitude that some of us received was "aww too bad ,so sad, not ,hehehe". Do not assume I would sell to the AC. I say Karma (or perhaps its Nemesis) because now some of you are now getting an inkling of what we felt then.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Stat breeding ALWAYS had a potential to boomerang - this was the main reason I didn't take a strong stand against the ultra/uberstats, I knew they had their own built-in payback...if you want to improve overall stats you breed closely-compatible animals and then continue with their best offspring - just like a RL breeder.

      "Serious" breeders should never have fallen for the superstats, given the potential for them to throw as low as they were high. If you are trying to improve the base stock, there are no shortcuts. That's not karma - it's genetics.

      What pleases me the most - condsidering the response to Ron returning to the original no-site-buyback, and (damn it) having to back down - is that breeders can STILL break even, but can no longer turn a profit at the expense of their pets.

      As far as rehoming "unsalable" pets without recourse to the AC/FooShelter...if and when ALL accounts - not just CF - can buy/sell/trade, member shelters will be able to function once more, and there will be a ready market for less-then-perfect pets, paying far more than the AC/FooShelter.
      As it stands - and I have a shelter that has run continuously since 1999 - I wouldn't place a pet under present conditions if I could - I've had to pull too many back out of the AC/FooShelter.

      Delete
    2. My apologies anonymous, usually it's people who are upset about AC sellback, I shouldn't have assumed, and I really am sorry.

      I was a conscientious breeder when we had the Featured Pets for 300fds, and I remember how hard I had to work to get a good pairing, and then how hard I worked to find perfect homes who wouldn't abandon to the AC.

      I am just one that enjoys the Uber stats because it gives you something new to strive for - bettering the breed. My friend has worked at this since Ubers came out and just had the first 93% pit bull either on the site or bred, I forget, but it's a huge accomplishment for her, and she's so happy. She figured out one day that over 50% of the uber bred pit bull population was due to her breedings/pairings, and that is a huge accomplishment. It does suck though that you can now offer prices ten times lower than the current AC and still no one will buy your pets... unless of course, you undercut the price you would get to AC them, then people buy them and AC them themselves to get the extra 5 or whatever FDs. So basically, you can sell to people for cheaper than you'd sell to the AC and still have them AC, spend months trying to sell them with no results, or just AC them. So I get that part because I miss it when people used to breed that way and people wanted your pets to love.

      And actually Canaan, there's still potential to turn a bit of profit. Just not a high one, and it's usually used back into the system to rebreed, so it ends up being just the same.

      Delete
    3. essentially my point - the AC has not been eliminated as a recourse, just is no longer an automatic cash cow, which I don't think it ever should have been...but then member sales should never have been removed in the first place.

      Delete
  13. Azkani no harm no foul.HUGS. Believe me I remember those days too.And I remember the aftermath.It sucks really. Just last night I witnesed someone I had respected for years sell her less desirable pets to the AC.Mind you these pets are higher stated than mine were and no one wanted them.I am done with stats. My big concern now is the price of Mart items. Oy vey!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This puzzles me, as offspring do not count against your pet total - which has been raised to 60 now - and as the Sams no longer exist they needn't even take any time or care if that's an issue.

      Breeding for stat improvement is a worthy goal. It also carries the inevitable problem of less-than-ideal offspring in any given litter. What DOES strike me as odd is that these people look at breeding primarily for resale, as you should be keeping (or trading with other breeders) the best stock for future generations...and those who shop strictly for stats can almost always find a better animal via link-searching than a breeder has for sale.

      What I miss are the days when the majority (at least of people I knew) were not concerned with stats or oddity of one kind or another, but values their pets for personal reasons unconnected with arbitrary differences assigned by site chance.

      Delete