Yarold - Fri Aug 21, 2009 10:20 pm Post subject: Way dynasties work Because other thread went to usuall accusations of everyone by everyone, i decided to open new one. Where your asked for solution to what is happening now - 'feeder' dynasties. I hope you will be as active as in other thread. Yarold working (no vacation this year) bluebell_rose - Fri Aug 21, 2009 10:29 pm I say feeder dynasties be banned and against the rules Jeanne - Fri Aug 21, 2009 10:34 pm Well Hi Stan a quiet corner to discuss like grown ups? I think forbidding those kind of dynasties is the only way to end the abuse if you don't you might see all dynasties moving their VIPs to a small dyn only allied to themselves or the dynasties they like to boost. Added: I just saw it has already spread. That's my opinion and I'd like to add once again a big thank you to you and all your MODs and ADMINS for the thankless job you and they keep doing for us despite all the personal attacks boots63 - Fri Aug 21, 2009 10:44 pm i 'm totally agree with jeanne , nothing to add only forbidding this dynasty Patrick, emp of la brute of pimousse in vacation Ferrari - Fri Aug 21, 2009 10:57 pm Mr yarold, possible solutions for feeding dynasty's. A solution can be : A dynasty can only exchange links after that dynasty has more than 3 allies in alliance. A solution can be : forbid more links as 4 or it must be 9 total different game links. A solution can be : forbid mark a link for only few seconds, give a minimum from 5 minutes. A solution can be : Make your own dynasty must be more expensive, like 1000 or 2000 credits, 200 credits is to easy to make some feed dynasty's Ferrari [ Added: Sat Aug 22, 2009 12:00 am ] Best solution will be, forbid this kind of exchange, for kindergarden they can look at pimpampet.com bluebell_rose - Fri Aug 21, 2009 11:06 pm
marga I totally disagree, on virtualadopts and lot of other pet sites, you usually have more than one pet growing at once and to get them all to grow fast, one usually links to a bunch of them at once rather than linking to a profile PaiGow - Fri Aug 21, 2009 11:23 pm Stop feeder dynasty funding ? Make the feeder members build credit by clicking the same as everyone else. If credit transfers are not allowed their credit balance will go negative and links disappear. Thank you for addressing this issue. Ferrari - Fri Aug 21, 2009 11:37 pm bluebell_rose In the past we had alwyas 3 links in profile, that was all. If this side not was here, you had nothing. footballer - Fri Aug 21, 2009 11:51 pm I agree; 1.Restrict feeder dynasty 2.Restrict display 10 links. DemonicJ - Fri Aug 21, 2009 11:51 pm
A really easy way to stop this nonsense is to stop transfers to members outside your dynasty. To stop the revolving door of members joining getting the credits then heading back to the feeder dynasty, put in a time delay between leaving & joining a dynasty of say 3 days.
This idea from Ferrari has real merit as well. HOwever I wouldnt go for a time limit rather a click limit. As for measuring dynasties performance, why not use total clicks given (over the whole alliance) / total clicks gained (over the whole alliance) *as at reset. This may also increase click exchanges as well. There was talk of changing allies during the day to also boost numbers which is why I say measured at reset. jassej - Sat Aug 22, 2009 12:19 am I agree that this must be forbidden. But Ferrari or PaiGow idea is not optimally. Sample, Maxy make ally with 3 dynasty, RMV, Net Freaks and Mob and dont will more ally because 3 enough. So than Maxy can decide on the first 3 places. This is than the same!! And whan is just 4 links pro member is enough. So whan I open dynasty and I and all my members show all links than should be forbiden make with somebody ally. Or ally is ok but just with a dynasty what too show all links. Than is the same for all and, I think, fair. DemonicJ - Sat Aug 22, 2009 12:36 am
Easy fixed if you think it must be forbidden, stop doing it Real maxi VIP had a number of various allies while it was in action (RMV, NF, Mob & moblets to the best of my memory) & the Emp of the dynasty at the time actively sought out new allies. Vito.b & OFY didnt which is why changes will now happen. Please keep the topic on subject which is "your asked for solution to what is happening now - 'feeder' dynasties" Dimitry - Sat Aug 22, 2009 12:47 am Just the same way as you do now to solve this problem, because if you want to think about a solution of this problem of what I read, you don't only make difficult for the people how play unfair. You also make it difficult for the people that doesn't play unfair. So my conclusion is, think of something that doesn't infect the "fair" player and only the "unfair" player. gr, Dimitry Wolverines - Sat Aug 22, 2009 3:09 am i said do away with the 10 links long ago......and you all basically jumped down my throat for saying that..now it isnt going your way and want to get rid of the 10 links...and TEO said how can you disable the 10 links now when some do use 10 link for legit reason like game clicks jassej - Sat Aug 22, 2009 11:25 am
DJ you do not understand this one. If Maxy would have made ally with UBC would OFY or VitoB not established. And if Maxy will continue to be allowed even VitoB. Since then the only possibility is too many extras to come if Maxy ally declines. And of course, may refuse ally Maxy Emperor, like any other, as well as Emperor VitoB. And this is not about how much ally makes a dynasty, but how much gets other dynasty extras. Or do you want me to say the discussion here is only because VitoB have 1 Allianz? Then I must say you look to other dynastys like FFH or Dragon with care, and many others. Each emperor must decide for themselves how much ally wants. You were also allied with Maxy and were happy with many extras , so why should I be holy and ally quit? I do not otherwise like you earlier, I am happy with many extras! So, forbiden yes but forbiden for all or for nobody. DemonicJ - Sat Aug 22, 2009 12:06 pm Current allies of real maxi VIP - none. Last two dynasties to end alliance with Real maxi VIP were The Moblets & Amazing, both ending the same day (btw thats 6 known allies for real maxi VIP not 3 as you mention). Only dynasty operating as a feeder is Vito.B. No alliance requests have been sent out from Vito.B & no Emps I talk to have been approched by Vito.B or the other feeder OFY FFH is a 2 member dynasty allied to Cave with big dragon also a 2 member dynasty. neither dynasty has any other allies. Who else is running feeders? Yes the mob was allied to real maxi VIP at the same time as 4 other dynasties, hardly see how that classifies as a single dynasty feeder though For the record leaving real maxi with 0 allies; 09/08/10 22:41:45 Tuleria ended aliance 09/08/10 22:03:32 Jeanne ended aliance 09/08/05 20:05:29 Ella ended aliance 09/07/31 20:51:06 barymore ended aliance 09/06/05 23:10:48 DemonicJ ended aliance 09/05/24 10:54:08 26Locutus26 ended aliance Back to topic, what are your thoughts on fixing feeder dynasties? jassej - Sat Aug 22, 2009 12:34 pm UBC ask Maxy for ally whan Maxy was active and have ally with 2 others dynasty!! "Sample, Maxy make ally with 3 dynasty, RMV, Net Freaks and Mob and dont will more ally because 3 enough. So than Maxy can decide on the first 3 places. This is than the same!!" "If Maxy would have made ally with UBC would OFY or VitoB not established. And if Maxy will continue to be allowed even VitoB. Since then the only possibility is too many extras to come if Maxy ally declines. " At moment is Maxy not active but tomorrow can be and whan they again dont will ally with me but make ally with you? That ok? Whan dynasty like Maxy is not forbiden than VitoB should too not be forbiden. Because whan they dont will ally with one dynasty than this dynasty must do something to click much like Maxy allies. And no matter is Maxy or XXX dynasty, all dynasty what show all links always must be forbiden. "Each emperor must decide for themselves how much ally wants. " And no matter we talking about VitoB emp or emp a others dynasty, whay VitoB emp can not make what all others emp can make? "So, forbiden yes but forbiden for all or for nobody." Now is not fair for you because we click much extras but you dont think, whan you have ally with Maxy, that not fair for dynasty what dont have credit for make ally with Maxy!? There a lot of dynastys. So I can just again write like befor... "So, forbiden yes but forbiden for all or for nobody." Ella - Sat Aug 22, 2009 12:50 pm I suggest there will be no 'feeder' dynasties allowed, in whatever form. There is to my opinion still another (temporary) feeder dynasty, although me is assured that it is 'different' then what we are discussing here. Sorry, i do not see the difference. So i hope we can detect and ban all forms of such dynasties. boots63 - Sat Aug 22, 2009 1:48 pm Jassej did you read or understand what demonic answer to you ????? if i understand all and i'm not stupid  ) at this time real maxi vip is ally with NOBODY and nobody = 0 alliance!!!!
i have a question how many credits did you send to 26locotuss or footballer per day ??? as i read you , you don't have credits to be ally with real maxi ,but now you have (in reference of mail send to me by 26locotus26)...... ofr yesterday aroud 2500credits that's rirht? Patrick, emperor of la brute in vacation (to help barymore) jassej - Sat Aug 22, 2009 1:58 pm
Boots my friend show whan have Dj end ally with Maxy and whan Barymore so tell me how much credit RMV give to Maxy? A lot!!!!! And whan now Maxy not active is, was active. So they dont active and no one others can make this. And whan tomorrow Maxy again active is, than is again ok for you? Not forbiden? No matter whan was this, a few dynastys have a lot of clicks and thanks Maxy and RMV have now so good average. I think this topic is that you, and each others, say if you for or against. Is it so difficult to say that without against me to writing? boots63 - Sat Aug 22, 2009 2:06 pm it's very difficult to read you dear jassej!!! and answer to barymore for real maxi not at me i'm not concerned by that!! and i say again (i think you have difficult heard or not your glasses) i 'm agains't that : Joined: 05 Feb 2009 Posts: 15 Posted: Today 23:44 i 'm totally agree with jeanne , nothing to add only forbidding this dynasty Patrick, emp of la brute of pimousse in vacation jassej - Sat Aug 22, 2009 2:07 pm Than we will the same. And I am against this, I was from first day against!! So who is problem? I think this topic must be much time befor but better now laik never!! barymore - Sat Aug 22, 2009 5:29 pm My answer to this new topic open by Yarold is perfectly clear : NO “FEEDER†DYNASTIES ALLOWED, even if they have several allies, mainly because it’s not loyal towards those who can’t afford to pay the credits back ! Real Maxi VIP dynasty was an experience proposed by Bruno73 and accepted for a while by several dynasties (RMV – Net Freaks – MMC Mob – The Moblets and Amazing) but quickly ended because too expansive, all the more a lot of our members didn’t accept to pay their contribution to grab the permanent links proposed ! Now I'm very sorry to say once more this Jassej : all what you are writting here is very difficult to understand and you should improve your english instead of using a translator ! You are very tiresome and you don't say the truth ! Never Bruno, emperor of Real Maxi VIP has refused to be allied with you...! YOU have never accepetd an alliance with him because you didn't want to pay back the permanent links of his dynasty ! As you can see presently, all the alliances with Real Maxi VIP have been broken since several weeks and this dynasty is no more active because nobody wish to spend anymore credits to buy links and increase artificially their scores and averages ! But since a few days, helped by your son “Sejjas†– a little pest as “Footballer†- and a many members of your dynasty excepted “Maxi†who was inactive since a long time, you have created first “O.F.Y†dynasty and then, as it was deleted, you have created“VitoB inc†– “forever†– same as UBC… first with the mention “to help negative accounts†, what a joke…then nothing to prevent any polemics ! Your action in this affair is clear : as since a lot of weeks your dynasty is not at a good rank for you and especially the first one you try by all possible means to compensate for your bad results by this “feeder†dynasty only allied with you ; THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE and disqualify all the actors of this masquerade ! That’s the reason I don’t send you any congratulation for your fake result yesterday ! I ask officially here to Yarold to clarify quickly this situation and then I will decide if it’s worth it to continue on this site ! Waiting for a final decision, with my best regards, Barymore – Emperor of RMV on vacation but still working in my own company this summer ! boots63 - Sat Aug 22, 2009 6:08 pm you don't answer to my question : "i have a question how many credits did you send to 26locotuss or footballer per day ??? as i read you , you don't have credits to be ally with real maxi ,but now you have (in reference of mail send to me by 26locotus26)...... ofr yesterday aroud 2500credits that's rirht? " for information here the mail send to me by 26locotus26 : Sender [V]26Locutus26 Recipient [V]lord-boots Subject ally Sent 09/08/22 09:57:34 You ask footballer for an ally, so if you need you must send me after reset a screnshot with our gained/given + the credits is the same how real maxi vip so i think you pay around 2 500 credits to 26locotus" today for all the clik that's rigth ??? when we read you, you're against that....and you refused to pay for alliance before with real maxi (i i'm agree with barymore i know that you refused to pay (like me in la brute) for making alliance with real maxi!) so i don't understand you when you crying about real maxi before talking about this satellite dynasty. in french we said "noyer le poisson" !! jassej - Sat Aug 22, 2009 6:52 pm
I agree 100%
That truth what you say, Bruno dont say no but we ask for ally whan Bruno was at RMV, Maxy was active and alliert with 2 other dynasty but our mail they dont answer!!
You was more than 2 month with Maxy allies, you reach your goal thanks Maxy, whay I not now?
Just like maxy, same RMV members
Yes that truth, I see I must play like others at top place whan I will be top. Is funny that this all Bruno and your idea is and whan you click a lot links was good but whan others click a lot links is not good! You forgeth, RMV was bad and you see that you must make ally with Maxy and you do it!!
That RMV first is, is fake so I'm not better or worse than you!!
I am not here to answer your question, ask barymor, he have more than 2 month ally with Maxy and know better like I how much costs so a ally.
 You see through internet if someone crying?
I was always against and I am now against!!!! And I wish that Stan change rules so I am sure none in the future does that. ps: sorry for my bad english Wolverines - Sat Aug 22, 2009 8:12 pm simple solution do away with transfers ....then those types of dynasty will have to click...that is the easiest way....also do away with buying credits or put a limit on how many can be bought by one person barymore - Sat Aug 22, 2009 9:53 pm Now Emperor Jassej, please to stop complaining and compare what is comparable : On one hand : Real Maxi VIP with first 3, then 4 members allied with 5 other dynasties (its members no more in RMV at this time because tired to click all along the day and every day) ! On the other hand : O.F.Y., then VitoB Inc "forever" with 7 members practically inactive and only allied with ONE dynasty : YOURS ! means 7 x 10 permanent links = 70 grabbed by about 50 UBC members = 3500 clicks more for your daily score (as yesterday) ! Do you think obviously the two situations are the same ? Now I've said what I have to and I'm not going to argue anymore. If you are satisfied by your action, I let you being happy by its result ! As for me I have a clear conscience and I have rebuilt RMV as a great team not with my money, as you said, but mainly by using human relationship which is essential for me on this site ! All te best for you Senad and take care ! Maurice DemonicJ - Sat Aug 22, 2009 10:49 pm
If your going to stop transfers, buying credits for people would also have to stop Yarold - Sat Aug 22, 2009 11:22 pm
Im officially against feeder dynasties. However i dont have any solution for that atm, so im asking for ideas of stopping that. So far your busy again fighting each other. "Ban feeder dynasties" sounds as general as "no mosquito allowed" If no solution will be worked out here then your leaving judgement in admins hands to delete or not any dynasty. DemonicJ - Sat Aug 22, 2009 11:28 pm Stop the transfer of credits. If there is no fuel their is no fire Wolverines - Sun Aug 23, 2009 1:13 am
DemonicJ - Sun Aug 23, 2009 1:18 am
Would also have to stop buying credits for someone as well MainCore - Sun Aug 23, 2009 1:27 am Post subject: Feeders This is a complex problem and no solution I have read so far is perfect. However Admins are more than able to quickly detect feeder dynasties while a more definite solution is found. Wolverines - Sun Aug 23, 2009 1:32 am i think the stopping of transfer and buying credits for someone might be the only real solution 1.. if the go negative then other dynasty wont want to ally with them as they wont be able to show link cause they negative 2.. they will have to click more to show that many links thus exchanging clicks with everyone..and i think that is the main reason for exchange..also making them ally with everyone instead of just 1 or 2 dynasty Alba - Sun Aug 23, 2009 2:10 am
I agree 100%. This is the best solution that i have seen here up to now. And i like the important sentence that you said, AND I THINK THAT IS THE MAIN REASON FOR EXCHANGE. Go Stan! This is good! PaiGow - Sun Aug 23, 2009 2:29 am Many contests reward winners via credit transfer. Within a dynasty maybe this is okay. Some contests span dynasty boundaries making inter-dynasty transfers a necessity. The big problem, as I see it, comes from members who continuously receive 2,3,4+ times as many clicks as they give. Should there be a limit on how many clicks a user may receive vs. how many given? Maybe such a limit is : MAX(4x user dynasty click average, number ally members) Not entirely fair since once that limit is reached others will not be able to click their link, but at 4x dynasty average the casual user would probably go negative credit anyway. Maybe once any limit is reached, only one link remains visible for others to click. Users with [negative credit, none, hidden] are already frowned upon, so can "limit reached". [added] Charge a fee to change dynasty... Joining a dynasty should be a commitment. Joining a new dynasty after quitting a dynasty should charge a penalty fee, maybe 1x dynasty click average for each day less than 5 days (1 day = 5x average fee; 5 days to join new dynasty there is no fee). If that makes you negative, then you must wait a few days before joining the new dynasty. However, rejoining the same dynasty after a hiatus charges no fee (some folks leave dynasty for a few days while on holiday/weekends and should not be penalized). [/added] Possible solutions begin to become complicated, both in concept and in code. Stan, if I can help with the coding, let me know. I'm sure I can pick it up rather quickly. Warm regards, Jeanne - Sun Aug 23, 2009 6:48 am
Like Paigow I don't like that idea it would stop all the fun contests 
I say look for the reason those dynasties emerged in the first place: The current rank system if the amount of clicks done didn't matter those feeder dynasties wouldn't be there. Change the rank-system
DemonicJ - Sun Aug 23, 2009 7:02 am
What is the solution in the change rank-system? DemonicJ - Sun Aug 23, 2009 7:05 am
They leave so not to damage dynasty averages because they arent there to click Jeanne - Sun Aug 23, 2009 7:19 am
If the number of clicks didn't matter there would be no point in having a feeder dynasty!! Is it my English? I don't mean the Shogun/Daimyo/Peasant rank I mean the Dynasty ranking. DemonicJ - Sun Aug 23, 2009 7:22 am
what would you replace it with? Jeanne - Sun Aug 23, 2009 7:27 am Alphabetical? - we would get a lot of dynasties named AAAAA - LOL seriously - I do have ideas for changing the ranking system to be more fair where all dynasties regardless off size have a chance to go for the coveted #1 - but all goes back to based on clicks - so yes you got me there but maybe someone here has ideas
DemonicJ - Sun Aug 23, 2009 7:37 am
Yes & clicks can be bought with credits. This why not allowing transfers or buying credits for others will work. It is a link exchange site, you want to be clicked you need to click, no transfers could actually promote more exchanges. May also help retain new members in dynasties. Currently they are pressured by their emps, or allied emps to remain positive at all times (read the short notes of all your allies). When the pressure gets too much they leave. Without transfers it would then be up to dynasty members to show more links more often to keep them positive, rather than have a non vip try to click 1000+ a day to stay positive (if they click main & history. I have guys clicking 500+ & still go neg with 1 link) Jeanne - Sun Aug 23, 2009 9:36 am Hmm the highest clicker among your 3 negative members did 226 not 500? but I think that is a different discussion 
The topic is HOW to stop feeder dynasties. I believe stopping the buying or transferring credits will again hurt the many because of a few abuser and might cause even more good members to leave tired of the restrictions. And I still trust our Admins to be able to spot a feeder dynasty from a legit one: Any dynasty with members showing all 10 links 24/7 and not clicking enough to finance it by themselves ..... deleted. DemonicJ - Sun Aug 23, 2009 10:12 am
"I have guys clicking 500+ & still go neg with 1 link" day is still young, give it time they will go neg. Admins are able to spot feeder dynasties, which is why this dynasty & OFY were deleted in the first place, but there is obviously some confusion as to what a blatant manipulation of clicks & credits to improve a dynasty's ranking is. Thats why we are asking for solutions. jassej - Sun Aug 23, 2009 4:12 pm
You can say your opinion and I do not? I dont think so!!
My answer is
So you can also make ally with VitoB! But let's say the VitoB do not want to ally with RMV, then your members can create a dynasty and make ally with RMV. This is the same what happened to the UBC, Maxy dont want ally with us and Footballer make O.F.Y...
Real Maxy Vip 4 members also 4 x 10 permanent links = 40 grabbed by 60 RMV members = 2400 x 60 days = 144000
But there were still more clicks because RMV and Maxy was allies more than two months!! I can remember these days, RMV, Net Freaks and Mob (Maxy allies) have jumped on MMC UBC and J4F ( not Maxy allies)!! No wonder the RMV was first at so many clicks! But I dont say that it is wrong. It is not against rules, and so it is ok. But and VidoB make nothing against rules!!
You have right, is not the same!! I see that I have be for a long time allied with VitoB if I want to click as much as RMV. And when I click so much as RMV (+- 150000) then will be the same!! My friend, I have nothing against Maxy, I have nothing against you or any ally with what had Maxy. But I do not give you, or any others members what was allies with Maxy to say how I make something wrong. Because basically it is deals with many links, and that help one dynasty very much, you do it befor and I now!! For all dynasty what never was allies with dynasty like Maxy or VitoB, I apologize here. But it is unfortunately so, others make this befor and I make now this because just so I am able to competition with ex allies from Maxy!
Thanks Maurice, you too!! Back to topic, I see all are against!! Why complicate with credit or with something else, Jay has shown that the Admin can delete such a dynasty!! So my proposal is very simple, delete all dynasty what show always 10 links but just when make ally with one others dynasty. If rules will be modified in a few days then I am ready to quit with VitoB ally now. engelina - Sun Aug 23, 2009 7:30 pm lets see.. a solution.. the no longer allowing credit transfer suggested in this topic sounds like a good solution, but would also ruin the contests some dynasty's like to keep.. how about not allowing transfers to other dynasty's, and limiting the amount that can be transferred between dynasty members to a certain number, like 400 credits? raise the amount of credits needed to start a dynasty migth work, not sure about that one. and at least add to the rules that feeder dynasty's are not allowed. that way, the admins can point to the rules and say its not allowed. and maybe have people having to wait until next reset to join another dynasty if they leave their dynasty? edited to add: i also saw someone mention to have less then ten link slots. that might help too, but might make things hard for people with some kids of pets.. then again, i know that you can replace the user-name in a drag-cave link without having to wait, so.. turdkey - Sun Aug 23, 2009 9:14 pm I believe the often nasty side of the Dynasty competition is harming Yarolds. With so many other alternatives around Yarolds needs to be a far friendlier place than it is becoming and that is the fault of the Emps and has nothing to sdo with Stan. You folks are making taking this far to personal and sometimes taking things way too far. Lighten up a bit and and have a laugh. If you analyse what actually we do here you would see it's all rather childish. Being a child is all about learning and having fun, meeting new people and making new friends. We adults often loose sight of the more important things in life. filmore - Sun Aug 23, 2009 10:00 pm You're all missing a point here. It's about getting clicks for whatever game you play that needs them, I scratch your back and just hope you scratch mine. . Competition between dynasties is really not important in my view. To be honest: I had one just one (adopted) mymmc city and after earning VIP status (the hard way) I created nine more to have something to show at HH, just to help the dynasty I'm in getting up along the line. Feeder dynasties are basically the same as I am, with my ten links shown at 'happy hours', don't you think? Another dark side of competitive dynasties: Threatening to drop you as an ally when you drop another ally... There's already enough war in the world, make this place a peaceful one! Wolverines - Mon Aug 24, 2009 12:52 am
then that would promote these people into certain dynasty to do this instead of feeder dynasty..about the only solution is to do away with transfer PaiGow - Mon Aug 24, 2009 1:27 am If this were a "not for profit"/no costs enterprise, then total elimination of credit transfer seems a good option. I feel that since there is required cost of services, sale of credits supplies a good, non-invasive source of revenue to cover operating costs. Folks hoarding credits make constant supply of new credits from purchase a necessity. The most efficient way to distribute these new credits, besides the infrequent lottery distribution(thank you Stan), is via credit transfer. Some dynasties pride themselves in ability to purchase large amounts of credits and distributing them to members so more links can be shown. What is the difference between this type of dynasty and a feeder dynasty? (Besides the obvious difference that one purchases its credits for cash from the supplier, while the other is reimbursed credits given from dynasties being fed.) Should both types of "feeders" be banned? DemonicJ - Mon Aug 24, 2009 6:24 am
The real difference is allies can share the extra links from that scenario. Since this post was created I have had the following complaints; A member leaving a dynasty & joining another on the promise of a big credit pay out * An alliance request between 2 big dynasties on the promise of credit reimbursement for the difference between given/gained paid daily (alliance was not formed due to that) * *neither claims have been verified by me, stories as told to me by others as it doesnt involve me or my members So I dont think anything but stopping credit transfers & buying credits for others will work. As for the in dynasty games for credits, well it is a link exchange site first & foremost. boots63 - Mon Aug 24, 2009 7:57 am humm jassej
you forget to said that real maxi don't want to make alliance with you (and with la brute too) because you didn't agree to pay like other dynasty and now you you pay credits to O.F.Y ???? so stop compare with real maxi , at your place i has send credit to real maxi to stay at top before sending now credits to O.F.y no??? it's very funny to read you i'm agree with demonic stop sending credit only for this dynasty likke real maxi and now o.f.y or the new one jassej - Mon Aug 24, 2009 8:06 am No, I nothing forget to said! Read everything what I have written and you will see that at start I dont will this but laiter I will ally with Maxy. And of course I wanted to give credit to Maxy for ally. So please do not be so annoying, read everything first and then write. supergeorge216 - Mon Aug 24, 2009 9:16 am jassej, although it takes a bit longer for me to understand your posts, I have no problems reading them. No matter how much I agree or disagree with your points, you are one evil person  . Evil like those villains on a cartoon that causes trouble, for the sake of causing trouble. jessej, It's compliment as it's tough to play devil's advocate! Changes come about because someone or a group of people exploit a flaw in the system.
I am 100% NOT in favor of removing credit purchases. I have no financial stake in this site, but it makes no sense from the site-owner's point of view to remove a donation source. I am 100% NOT in favor of removing transfers. When you compare Yarold's to another vanilla click site, you do not see this much involvement from the users. Personal experience has shown that when I visit non-Yarold sites, I click and leave. Many people so far have brought up the notion that contests/events would be destroyed with the lack of a transfer system and I wholeheartedly agree. It's human nature to perform and expect a prize/compensation for your hard work. The only prize we, as clickers, can offer is credits. There is no other motivating factor that can keep us clicking. Why do we strive for credits? To improve whatever game we are playing. To summarize the general populations mindset, we don't visit Yarold's because we want to become the #1 clicker/dynasty, we're here because of the game we want others to click. The transfer system offers a camaraderie system on the site and I believe it's a big, big mistake to remove it. === Back on topic. Personally, I would love feeder dynasties to remain. Looking towards the future, if Yarold were to expand its user base every year and dynasties were in excess, some dynasties can eventually become self-sufficient. But currently, that's impossible as there is a 400 alliance membership restriction preventing growth. I don't have any stats on the site, but now would be an appropriate time for a statistics major to study the historical growth data of Yarold. There are multiple purposes for such a task, but the main point I want to get across is to determine if it would be appropriate to increase the alliance membership by an appropriate amount in relation to the user base growth. Lots of positive and negatives would come about from this. Just briefly looking at one of each, the main negative is that this allows for a large dynasty to spin-off into a smaller one and potentially form a feeder dynasty. The main positive is that this allows smaller dynasties and larger dynasties growth. No one likes to stagnate. === I've blabbed on about keeping feeder dynasties, but I rather view them as satellite dynasties. Dynasties that have a main allegiance to their main dynasty, but are and should be free to run as they see fit. I don't mind if the main dynasty may have a major influence over their satellite dynasties as this adds some element of fun into the dynasty game and growth. === Solution to limit the advantage of these so-called feeder dynasties. It's a 3-step solution and all the steps have to be complete for it to be effective: 1) Limit transfers only to members of your own dynasty - The reason why feeder dynasties are thriving is that it can receive credits from an external source. 2) Members that leave a dynasty cannot rejoin another dynasty for 5 days - Once step 1 is achieved, one sneaky trick I can think of for how a feeder dynasty can continue to survive is if one member leaves it's dynasty and joins the main dynasty for a large credit transfer and return back to its dynasty to distribute the wealth. 3) Members that receive a transfer of credits will not immediately have their transfers added to their credit total, but will have to wait a grace period of 5 days for the transfer to complete. During this time, if they leave the dynasty, the transfer will automatically be canceled and the credits returned to the original owner. I know there are still multiple breakpoints in my solution, such as cycling through members in a dynasty to replenish a feeder dynasty (any ideas anyone?), but the purpose is to first have a quick solution in place as I believe this should not be difficult to code in comparison to a fail-proof idea, and second, make it a pain in the @$$ to fund feeder dynasties. EDIT: I had a brief read of what I had and the only complaint I have with myself is what about those transfers to those negative accounts on vacation/break and are valued members to the dynasty. I'm swaying towards adding a 4th rule to allow transfers to a member that has been with a dynasty for more than 6 weeks to receive a credit transfer automatically added to their credit total. Ferrari - Mon Aug 24, 2009 9:36 am
Woow I like your solution 
DemonicJ - Mon Aug 24, 2009 9:50 am
1. Dynasties have feeder accounts in them as well. 2. What if someone wants to leave for another dynasty for legitimate reasons? What about their dynasty average while theyare forced into this 5 day sit out period? 3. rules out your edit doesnt it? Another breakpoint, being able to buy credits for others?? EDIT; if they are valued & on a break and require transfers to keep them positive, is that not in itself creating a feeder account (for the duration of their absence)
I dont think anyone has asked for the purchasing of credits to be stopped jassej - Mon Aug 24, 2009 10:36 am
I do not play advocate, these are facts! I'm just someone that glad is be in yarold, I like competitive and I'm here because I want to win. It is evil than I am evil 
Of course, others want to be first too and so others have come to idea of a feeder dynasty make. If other playing so then I have to play it too. supergeorge216 - Mon Aug 24, 2009 11:14 am
This is not an irrelevant argument. I am addressing to a comment that suggested that purchases should be stopped. Please refer to page 2 for the other users' comment. I have made a statement and find it rather offensive that this had to be nitpicked before sufficient research was done on your part. For future reference, I will not defend/elaborate on what I feel to be a waste of my time and effort; this quote you have picked from me fits that category.
Do pay heed that the time restriction can be modified upon discussion. 5 days in my mind was a reasonable number. I do have a difference in view on how you worry about an individual's dynasty average and legitimacy to change dynasties. 1) Legitimacy of people leaving for another dynasty - The very moment this thread was created, there was already a bias that users that leave their dynasties are bad people and should be penalized (e.g. Leaving for a feeder dynasty). Time restrictions can be changed or a mod can police the movement of members. The latter is not preferred as this matter is much too subjective and leaves chance for corruption if the mod is a member of a dynasty. As the creation of dynasties already created a role-playing environment, individual actions should also have a similar element. It can be argued that the change of allegiance is frowned upon and deserves a penalty for such an action. Another way around the penalty is to buy your way into the new dynasty (2,000 is the bare minimum to buy-in: 5 days x 400 credits from a max alliance), but I am personally against this idea as you can float from dynasty to dynasty if you or your dynasty have a deep pocket of cash/credits. 2) Individual dynasty average - Users that reach a certain average can work their way back-up. This is a individual stat and is irrelevant to the task. It's one of those nice things to preserve, but do tell me the importance of this statistic? The one disadvantage I can see and why you mention about this is that potentially a lower dynasty average would lower the prospect of a person joining another dynasty, but there should be other factors to determine the value of a clicker (e.g. CARE, # of clicks, reputation) 3) Feeder/vacation accounts - I hate to address this as I feel this is beyond the scope of this topic. I believe I understand what you are trying to say in which dynasty members can communicate with each other on the timing of when to release their links, but still, it's another matter for another thread as I envision this sort of impact: If dynasty A is allied with dynasty B who has an account that is being fed credits, both dynasty A and B will have an opportunity to click the account - feeder accounts should have minimal impact in this situation as we are dealing with fairness. Our problem is if dynasty A is allied to dynasty B and dynasty B is feeding credits to an account that dynasty A cannot reach. This is deemed as an unfair competitive advantage. Good pick-up on the purchase of credits for others. That too should be restricted to internal dynasty members. The suggestion would be exactly the same as how transfers are restricted in my suggestion in step 3 (e.g. Purchases to another person won't show up until the 5 day grace period, otherwise the purchase of credits will go to the original purchaser). The way I see it is if you can purchase credits for another person, it would be the same as purchasing credits for yourself and transferring to another. Jeanne - Mon Aug 24, 2009 4:39 pm First I will say I am about to change my mind or having it changed for me - if the price for removing feeder dynasties is removing the transfer/buy credits option .... I say lets keep the feeder dynasties. Second to Jassej: You funding a feeder dynasty is not a new idea of yours brought on by the current situation you tried it 6 months ago (May 23rd) and don't try to deny it you know your son told me you would finance him showing all 10 links all day only for UBC. To (my) SuperGeorge I am not for a 5 day time out I believe this will to some degree stop members from changing dynasties as 1: their averages; some take great pride in having achieved a high average. 2: In those 5 days you can only click and be clicked on main which with the current situation means you will loose credits while you're out. The delay in transfers wont help much you can calculate how much credits will be needed to pay for clicks done in a feeder dynasty and pay in advance making sure there's always enough to keep the feeder dynasties links open it will only hurt the situations you mention where a dynasty member on vacation or a member who has mistakenly forgot to turn the extra links off after HH needs an immediate helping hand from the dynasty. Stan has said he is against the feeder dynasties so delete them and make a penalty rule: Any dynasty who engage with a feeder dynasty will have their average reset to 0 !!!! I believe that would stop anybody even thinking about feeder dynasties. jassej - Mon Aug 24, 2009 5:03 pm
Yes, if I good remember, 1 day 1 or 2 member. And this is not secret, read exactly Jay post from first side... But Maxy make this befor, so is not my idea!
I agrre that is not good change credit optoin. I am for, such dynasty to delete by admin. Jeanne - Mon Aug 24, 2009 8:19 pm Well Jassej you keep saying you are against the feeder dynasties and you only do this because others do .... WHO is doing it other than UBC? You are the only one having a feeder dynasty and may now be the reason for even more restrictions to this site. I urge you to close it down and get your members back in UBC to end all this now. Ferrari - Mon Aug 24, 2009 8:43 pm I agree with Jeanne, jassej just stop it, than we all are happy again. supergeorge216 - Mon Aug 24, 2009 9:31 pm I hate to be the one that bursts everyone's idealistic views on harmony, happiness and that everyone can come out of this a winner, but if the system mod is addressing this now, simply removing a feeder dynasty and a slap on the hand is not sufficient. I do agree that if any restrictions are in place, there will be a detrimental effect, either to the individual user or dynasty group. Do keep an open mind that this thread is not to please everyone and since such action has already been committed - and have been committed in the past - there is no turning back and it looks like something will be done at the expense of our priviledges. Who can predict 2 months from now if another dynasty, with zero knowledge of this thread, uses the same tactic again? === Jeanne, as a rebuttal to your concern to (1) dynasty averages and (2) members joining another dynasty will have to take a break after leaving a dynasty, it does not matter to me if one person's pride is hurt over the greater good of the site. I believe these two points are controllable by the user themselves. If you want to maintain your average, stay in the dynasty. If you don't want to have to take a break, stay in the dynasty. My frame of mind is to not prevent the movement of users, but to ensure that some penalty is in place to combat the issue of feeder dynasties. In addition, the whole problem stems from certain individuals abusing the system. A feeder dynasty is just a group of these bad individuals. So rather of thinking of feeder dynasties ruining our fun, it is the people that are involved in such action that has ruined the fun for us themselves. Going back to your response on the delay of transfers. Yes, I do agree that the credit usage can be calculated, but my proposition can work against a feeder dynasty as it would take an extraordinary amount of purchases or credit gathering to fund and work such a process through the system. 1) Time delay. Can the main dynasty afford to transfer a large sum of credits to another member/dynasty and stay positive before the transfer of credits is complete? 2) Gathering credits. If a dynasty is funding another dynasty, the most obvious thing to do is click, click, click and stop showing Happy Hour/extra links. This action will obviously make the other dynasty's angry and potentially force a break in alliance. If a large dynasty becomes a 1-link per member dynasty, what is stopping other dynasties from just using multiple smaller dynasties to cause the same effect? 3) Purchasing credits. This is possibly the only way I think of to fund a feeder dynasty properly in my proposal. But DemonicJ brought up a great point and persuaded me that purchases should work similarly to transfers. The positive from the point of funding feeder dynasties from buying credits is that the main dynasty can continue to function normally, but will have to purchase in large amounts to keep the feeder dynasties consistently fed. How economical will this be? If someone is rich enough to pull this off and 'maintain' this, I will give them #1 status. Stan should not be against this as he is getting funded for the time being and it is at that 'exact' moment when the feeder dynasty makes the main dynasty reach the top we propose either: (a) higher price for credit purchases or (b) some sort of profit-sharing model where Stan can divide up the purchases into credits for all us lessor dynasties. The purchaser of the credits still receives all their credits in full when they are buying to fund their feeder dynasty, but Stan can be giving and randomly give hard-working dynasties, as what I like to be referred to as a 'bonus,' for playing fair. This from a pure evil standpoint . I want to see a dynasty funded purely from cash reach the top. Once they reach the top by doing it in an unfair way, I would do everything in my power to see that they fall down hard and lose more than just their ranking in the process (e.g. In this case, the offending dynasty loses cash). Stan gains cash, feeder dynasty receives their credits, we all get funding from Stan's extra cash, and then pull the plug and the top dynasty falls. I haven't worked out all the specifics in my mind yet, but I love this idea more and more.
Disclaimer: Do pay heed that I remember enemies very well .
=== Jeanne, I do not understand how the ranking of dynasties work completely. I initially thought ranking was due to average clicks per day. Could you explain how if you take a dynasty average down to zero, dynasties would be prevented from feeder dynasties? My argument is if a dynasty is only worried about being #1 and using feeder dynasties, they are already sacrificing dynasty average for total clicks. Personally, I believe dynasty average only conveys if a dynasty is of high quality and efficiency. The reason why feeder dynasties are succeeding is because brute force can win you a high ranking. Which brings back to an earlier comment you made. Change the way in which dynasties are ranked. I can think of such ranking system: Split the dynasties into tiers depending on their dynasty average. Tier I = 100, tier 2 = 200, etc. The higher the tier, the more prestigious the dynasty is as the dynasty average evokes a sense of better clicks per member ratio. Within each tier, rather than base rankings on total clicks, take a ratio by dividing the dynasty average into the total clicks for the day (e.g. 21000 total clicks / 300 dynasty average = 70:1). The lower this ratio is, the higher you will be ranked as it attributes to power (total clicks) and efficiency (dynasty average). === Taking a step back, I would be interested if the Stan, the mod himself, explain to us specifically what is considered a feeder dynasty. Maybe there is something I missed as from my understanding of the system, I believe i have a sufficient, but not perfect plan that I am willing to compromise at the expense of the group. Jeanne - Mon Aug 24, 2009 10:28 pm I did mean the click average set to 0 since it is the click average that decides the rank order at present. The 5 day penalty: you yourself was in a dynasty that suddenly folded - is it fair that you and your fellow members should be forced to wait 5 days before joining a new dynasty? What about mergers how would that happen? For myself I can only say if it comes to where I can no longer play the dynasty game with contests and rewards I don't see what I should be doing here anymore - I came to find clicks for my minicity but as many others have pointed out - I only get a handful from this site - most from automated less effort and time consuming exchanges. jassej - Mon Aug 24, 2009 10:42 pm I do not know if my English is so bad or no one read my post? I still write now and not more because I like to click better than I write.
My answer is
Yes Jeanne, I know that you was just little time allies with Maxy but you was and I dont write to you that you should break ally. Marga you have right to say I should stop it, I am willing to do it immediately, but only after Stan says the change comes.
Because
Marga so what do you think is better, I break ally with VitoB and we forgeth all and are happy with clicking? And after, maybe, one month other dynasty make the same!!! Or is better now change rule and this never can somebody make again? supergeorge216 - Mon Aug 24, 2009 10:42 pm Jeanne, you make it sound like 5 days is 5 years . Rules are not meant to be negotiated once it's in place. In my case, if mergers happen, they wait the standard 5 days. If something unpredictable happens in a dynasty, such as a dynasty folding, those users will have to wait 5 days before being able to be accepted by a dynasty. I'm am not suggesting that mod's be used to bypass the rule as: (1) mod's getting unnecessary mail requests, (2) subjectivity of each situation.
=== When click average goes down to 0. It would only be a temporary thing then... Take the problem away by enforcing a rule and everyone has to play by it. I want to get away from fights like, "Why did you take my dynasty away?" Jeanne, your suggestion would go back to the realm of what I saw in the first page: Allow feeder dynasties to continue, but mod can nuke any feeder dynasties under their discretion. But rather than taking away dynasties, you're taking away ranking. Subjectivity is causing this problem to escalate. === I'm beginning to enjoy how reason/logic is starting to shine through .
Bruno73 - Mon Aug 24, 2009 11:40 pm I've just and only read the first page of this thread (too lazy to read the rest) but here are some thoughts of mine: - before ruling or forbidding "feeder dynasties" one must properly define what they are exactly, and this is far from obvious. - The number of allies is not a good criterion. (instead of one N-member feeder dynasty you can make N 1-member allied feeder dynasties...) - Forbidding transfers between non allied members is not a solution neither because a member could go into the source dynasty to get credits, then go to the satellite dynasty to be clicked. - I see no simple rules to avoid such tricks. - I see absolutely no difference between how Real Maxi VIP and O.F.Y. worked. I think they are the same and should have been treated the same way. - Jassej lies when claiming that Maxi refused to ally with UBC. The truth is that he just refused to transfer the necessary credits. So he complained (as usual) about Maxi and eventually did exactly the same with O.F.Y. (lol) - If you'd like Yarold to work more sanely, just count the clicks received as well as the clicks done, then feeder dynasties wouldn't be that useful anymore. (see this topic ) - Feeder dynasties appeared only because of Yarold's scoring system that counts only the clicks done, that is the rule to change, if any. Wolverines - Tue Aug 25, 2009 2:18 am
you are right that is why credit transfers and buying credits for someone other than yourself should be stopped all together.... Ella - Tue Aug 25, 2009 2:19 pm
Still accusations and still active thread 
What is happening now we all know. Solution: Apart from not allowing 'feeder' dynasties: Make a rule that a 'feeder' dynasty is forced to have, besides its 'Mother dynasty', at least 1 dynasty of the top 5 on the ranking list as their ally. Example: A and B are friendly towards each other. BUT still competitors. So, if A starts a feeder dyn, and is forced to ally to a top 5 dyn, they would pick B. The remaining 3 at the top can do the same. So for the top 5 dynasties the competition is active. I guess that feeder dynasties then will become less interesting. The same might count also for the smaller/lower ranked dynasties, but those are more relaxed and have no need for ingenius plans to reach the top at all cost. And i think that measurements whatever taken, will only harm them. So, still the best solution to my opinion is: do NOT allow feeder dynasties. supergeorge216 - Tue Aug 25, 2009 9:45 pm I am really surprised that the simplest of solutions was not even brought up. Whether it is due to greed or lack of trust, I don't know? But read on. === Let me summarize the thread so far: 1) We have voices from Moblets, MMC Mob, J4F and Net Freaks that do not accept the actions of feeder dynasties. 2) RMV is not currently allied with UBC, but has shown great displeasure in such actions. 3) I am not certain on LaBrutes' stance. === What if I told you that there is a way where the larger dynasties could solve this problem themselves and Stan would not have to put in more rules in place? Would you do it MMC Mob? Would you do it J4F? Would you do it NF? As I am suggesting this, I would work hard to get the Moblets on board (This will be the same answer for all the following qusetions). Now my second question would be, if you do want to hear this idea, are you willing to sacrifice some of your click totals? Would you do it MMC Mob? Would you do it J4F? Would you do it NF? === Potential solution to pressure feeder dynasties to be stopped: EDIT: I do apologize that the UBC has to be used as the main example as they are the current dynasty that is using feeder dynasties, but this is an extreme example in theory. If there is a yes to both of those questions, then the best way to solve feeder dynasties is to UNALLY the dynasty that is using feeder dynasties. In this case, unally UBC. This thread is full of hypocrites (I am one by association as we are allied to UBC) because everyone is saying, "DO NOT ALLOW FEEDER DYNASTIES TO CONTINUE." But by simply having an alliance with UBC, your actions are saying that, "IT IS OKAY FOR THEM TO USE FEEDER DYNASTIES." Why would this work? 1) Whoever is using feeder dynasties will not receive support from the larger dynasties. How many smaller dynasties actually participate in Happy Hour or show extra links? 2) From our point of view. It is much easier to find many small dynasties to replace UBC's 50 members than it is for UBC to replace nearly 200 allies. === Are the members of this site responsible enough to police themselves? RMV, Mob, J4F, and NF, as you 4 are the largest dynasties that have said you do not accept feeder dynasties, I encourage open communication right now and here in this thread. Show Stan that you can solve this yourself and work with UBC! If all the dynasties are unwilling to work together to fight against feeder dynasties, rules and restrictions will be put in place. The only people to blame would be yourselves. jassej - Tue Aug 25, 2009 10:50 pm
WOW It was not simple to ask: They will in future refrain from feeder dynasty? Would you do it MMC Mob? Would you do it J4F? Would you do it NF? Would you do it RMV? Would you do it MMC UBC? YES whan all others dynasty say too yes! Would you do it The Moblets? If answer is yes than I break ally with VitoB!! Moblets have ally with Maxy and I dont write to nowbody how should break ally with Moblets. And that is the same.
So, you see? And you do it befor the same, whay you dont write at forum how all should break ally with Moblets? Bruno thank you for honesty. supergeorge216 - Tue Aug 25, 2009 10:58 pm Exactly jessej!!! I am very impressed that you picked up on my idea very quickly and you proved another point:
It looks like there is ZERO trust among the larger dynasties. If all the dynasties could work together and solve the problems themselves, Stan would not have to create this thread! === Now I pose another question: jassej, leader of UBC, has already stated that he will STOP using feeder dynasties if all the larger dynasties agree and work together. It does not matter whether feeder dynasties appear in the future because if it does, UBC and whoever agrees to this pact will use force/pressure on the dynasty that is using a feeder to stop. Are the dynasties willing to do that? Wolverines - Wed Aug 26, 2009 1:14 am that wont work as a new dyansty could come along at anytime and start using a feeder again and become #1 dynasty....you saying that the other major dynasty wouldnt ally with them that is fine...we would be in this same spot in a couple of months either someone would go against their word or a new alliance would enlist 10 "feeder alliance" to become #1 and everyone would be mad again...just need to stop transfers and buying of credit for others bluebell_rose - Wed Aug 26, 2009 6:19 am that is true. A team could recruit lots of people from sites like adoptable pet sites, and offer to them, you'll raise their pets in exchange for being them being in a feeder dyn and clicking a few 100 each day not to raise the radar as long as they show 10 links 24/7 . And the dyn aiming to be top could just feed those dyns they made. sks - Wed Aug 26, 2009 12:40 pm i really don't understand why, when some problem occurs, there are always so many ppl asking for more restrictions...... it's always the same: someone finds a pass through the rules to help his dynasty, then some ppl jump up asking a forbidding of this and that and finally the rules are changed. even though the problem is always caused by a small group of members (and always and only members of dynasty/ies), changed rules "punish" thousands of members regardless they have ever been in a dynasty or not. so now we for example have to wait till reset with changing/adding/removing link(s) or to have limited space for links in profiles.... and now i see there are ppl here asking for even more mass punishment................ do you really think this is the right way? but to the topic: my suggestion is simple, just allow the links to be displayed only in the link exchange page. in my opinion it will fix problems with "feeder" dynasties (it is a little different to show 10 links all the day for 60 ppl or for 6.000 ppl, esp. when part of those 6k are "enemies") without more restrictions, changing rules or so. maybe even the old restrictions could have been removed then. also this will hurt (if) only members in dynasties, not all others having nothing to do with this.... and as a bonus this will fix also the problem with the link exchange section which is more and more useless. other possibility i see, is to end dynasty competition completely, letting the dynasties to be just the "discussion clubs for friends" or so... because dynasties just cause problems and hurt the exchange of links here at all. thanks for reading. Wolverines - Wed Aug 26, 2009 1:44 pm i really dont see a problem with so-called feeder dynasties...who is to say RMV is better than J4F or J4f is better than RMV? if you want it stopped credit transfer needs to go....if you dont then who cares who has the highest dynasty average or clicks per day....does that really matter emps if everyone in your dynasty is getting their clicks they need for their games or are you just concerned about being #1 dynasty and not concerned about your people clicks for their game? DemonicJ - Wed Aug 26, 2009 1:58 pm
Truth is most members in dynasties are playing the yarolds 'game' the links they show are not relevant to any games they actually play. Cut the transfers, cut the feeders & this may actually become a 'link' exchange site like it was in the begining Ella - Wed Aug 26, 2009 2:26 pm Back to supergeorge216 (and copying + adding answer Jassej's list): What if I told you that there is a way where the larger dynasties could solve this problem themselves and Stan would not have to put in more rules in place? Would you do it MMC Mob? Would you do it J4F? Would you do it NF? Yes Would you do it RMV? Would you do it MMC UBC? YES whan all others dynasty say too yes! Would you do it The Moblets?
I don't understand that question. DaBabes City - Wed Aug 26, 2009 2:35 pm
Jeanne - Wed Aug 26, 2009 10:22 pm And of course Moblets would too - we were never in the ranking race with only 20 members we allied Maxi to reach a personal goal with no meaning in any race but our own. Edit: I think SKS nailed it: All links will automatic show on main when "turned on" would help both main exchange and end feeder dynasties. Wolverines - Wed Aug 26, 2009 11:35 pm ya i like that idea only have 1 link that u can control with main/history/dynasty and the other 9 when turned on only turn on in the main and not dynasty only barymore - Thu Aug 27, 2009 3:13 am Besides this discussion about « feeder » dynasties that everyone seems don’t wish anymore, I have a suggestion about members limits. Since several weeks now, a lot of members of this site refuse to join a dynasty for many reasons, mainly : - too expansive in credits - too much time spent on the site to have a high daily score with several happy hours In fact too much pressure felt by these members, all the more they are often kicked quickly when their accounts are negative ! In the same time, some others try to join us many times but we can’t accept them because of both limits : 60 for a dynasty and 400 for an alliance and we are always juggling with these two limits ! So I suggest to increase them as before, when I joined my first dynasty, means 80 for a dynasty and may be 500 or 550 in an alliance ; that would be certainly an effective way to give a boost to this game and also reduce the interest of “feeder†dynasties ! Waiting now for a final decision from Yarold as soon as possible ! Barymore PaiGow - Thu Aug 27, 2009 7:09 am I like idea of any more than 1 link will be shown on "main", but how to manage when a user posts a different a "dynasty" link at different times of the day.
A user clicking at the same time every day can approach the dynasty+ally size number of clicks with ~30 minutes effort running IE on a decent computer/network. Problem lies when there are 30-40 hidden/negative/none links. Would any dynasty kick a member posting 380 click average and never going negative ? Jeanne - Thu Aug 27, 2009 9:45 am
Oh I meant all links show on main, the display in dynasty option should be removed - anything else would be unfair to those who has legitimate extra links. A bit of topic Maurice if I should comment I would say decrease alliance limit back to the 350 maybe even 300 again - as it is now there is no real movement in the competition since all the large dynasties can fit into each others alliances.
sks - Thu Aug 27, 2009 1:58 pm
yes this is what i suggest... link(s) should be displayed only in link exchange. thx jeanne
(o.t.: limits look to be set well at this time, change is not needed i think) barymore - Thu Aug 27, 2009 5:42 pm
No i don't think so Jeanne...the problem is there are not enough "big" dynasties 50/60 members on this site and too much "small" dynasties 5/20 members as if they are affraid to grow, while I consider much more interesting to manage a big dynasty than a small one ! And indeed it's true than actually the possibilities of alliances a very limited but i'm sure that if the member limits in the dynasties and alliances could be higher, it would increase the interest to be here on Yarold's ! Ella - Thu Aug 27, 2009 8:33 pm I think we are getting somewhere. Forgive me for asking to complete the 'feeder' dynasty thing first. We have still no official reply from MMC Mob, RMV and J4F. DaBabes City - Thu Aug 27, 2009 8:45 pm
Thank you, Ella. I believe we should hear from them before we complete our plans for our own satellite dynasty. As Russia and America learned several years ago, escalation can be expensive, but then, we are the Credit Card Crew, so why should we worry?
Ferrari - Thu Aug 27, 2009 10:04 pm What if I told you that there is a way where the larger dynasties could solve this problem themselves and Stan would not have to put in more rules in place? Would you do it MMC Mob? Would you do it J4F? Yes Would you do it NF? Yes Would you do it RMV? Would you do it MMC UBC? YES whan all others dynasty say too yes! Would you do it The Moblets? Of course a Yes for me, I dont like the feeder dynastys DaBabes City - Thu Aug 27, 2009 10:15 pm
Thank you, we too can agree on that. I believe satellite Dynasties are a questionable and unneeded tactic and if the rest of The Big Five agree to a pact we will set our own plans aside. If that doesn't happen soon, who knows what next week will bring?
jassej - Thu Aug 27, 2009 10:23 pm We missing answer from RMV and MMC Mob... DaBabes City - Thu Aug 27, 2009 10:54 pm I wound up being more or less the banker for the last satellite Dynasty we participated in, because my advisers felt it was worth trying. I spent well over 100000 of my own credits on the experiment. Would I do it again? Yes, if I have to do it to compete with Dynasties who fill their member limits with people who click 150-200 clicks then go negative! This time I will fund it myself, with my own people, or we can all agree no satellite Dynasties. [ Added: Thu Aug 27, 2009 4:56 pm ]
We will see, my Friend!
Wolverines - Fri Aug 28, 2009 1:36 am
guess you can do what you like....this is why transfer need to be taken out also i guess that means.... Would you do it NF? NO barymore - Fri Aug 28, 2009 1:49 am Sorry but I have already answered YES saturday 22/08 at 06:29am
and i will no more participate to this discussion ; I've much other things more interesting to do! I' m waiting what Yarold will finally decide to make my own decision to continue or not on this site. Barymore DaBabes City - Fri Aug 28, 2009 5:10 am
There are many uses for transfers. You may not know we have a number of times transferred credits to competitor Dynasties as a reward for not having any negatives or in a few cases to allies because our gained/given ratio was significantly different than theirs. As far as the feeder/satellite Dynasties we would prefer not to have to use them again. DemonicJ - Fri Aug 28, 2009 8:52 am
Todays big 5 are tomorrows little dynasties, so no, I will not agree to the pact especially after seeing so many other pacts/agreements/promises broken in here
now we have the chinese & Koreans. Validates my point
Totally agree Ella - Fri Aug 28, 2009 10:23 am
OK, there is where we have to involve Stan. We are talking about the top 5 dynasties, no matter if a little dynasty once get on top, it is always those 5. If the pact is broken, it will be reported to Stan and he will reset the avg/clicks/day of that dynastie(s) DemonicJ - Fri Aug 28, 2009 11:28 am
It hasnt always been those 5 at the top & I would bet the house on the fact that it always wont be those 5 at the top. Already about to see a new dynasty make the top 5. Best way to fix it is to stop the transfers Ella - Fri Aug 28, 2009 1:21 pm What i mean is THE top 5, we know who they are now, If that changes in future to other ones, THOSE other ones are the top 5. Like there is a COC for the Yarold's link exchange, do not make multiple accounts. Only one per person is allowed. (result = ban) Tthere could also be a COC for Yarold's dynasties. do not create feeder dynasties ( result = avg/clicks/day reset) Then we don't even need a pact. DaBabes City - Fri Aug 28, 2009 1:53 pm Many of us feel those transfers are one of our best tools here. I use them several times most days in keeping my noobies positive and training them. If you're refering to only banning them out of the dynasty that would still inhibit us from giving grants to allied dynasties for being negative-free or making up a difference in gained/givens as we have in the past. Either way, the transfer option encourages the purchase of credits, which I'm sure aids Stan in getting the bandwidth to keep this place running properly. Back to the satellite Dynasties, if a new Dynasty moves into the top five and decides to oppose us and use a satellite, there is nothing forcing us to ally with them is there? turdkey - Fri Aug 28, 2009 8:15 pm Banning transfers is a little draconian, IMHO anyway. I have often transferred to noobs outside my own dynasty if they are neg and I want the extra clicks. God knows it's hard enough being a noob at Yarolds in the first place. Surely we don't want Yarolds to be a nanny state either do we? Now transfer all your credits to me and I will show 10 links all day just don't ask for an alliance though, I am on holiday from the competitive aspect of this site. I still wouldn't refuse free credits and I'm not sure if I have mentioned this before but I do like free credits. I'd give them to noobs in negative credit 
DaBabes City - Fri Aug 28, 2009 11:06 pm
Wolverines - Fri Aug 28, 2009 11:29 pm and that is why we having this discussion now transfering credits to "feeders" turdkey - Fri Aug 28, 2009 11:38 pm ALLIES "In general, allies are people, groups, or nations that have joined together in an association for mutual benefit or to achieve some common purpose. In English usage, those who share a common goal and whose work toward that goal is complementary may be viewed as allies for various purposes even when no explicit agreement has been worked out between them." So they devil lays in trying to work out if it is deliberate collusion or the natural consequences of the alliance system Simple answer is to ban the ally system
DaBabes City - Sat Aug 29, 2009 3:21 am
I am laughing hysterically over here! You would rather we had six, eight, or ten negatives on our Dynasty than require and train our people to be positive? [ Added: Fri Aug 28, 2009 10:21 pm ]
No allies for anyone, erm? That would mean much fewer clicks, unless you allied everyone together. turdkey - Sat Aug 29, 2009 6:00 am
Well it would really open up the main page again and it has a certain logic if you truly wanted to help the noobs.
DaBabes City - Sat Aug 29, 2009 7:55 am
There are any number of people who are only here for the competition and socializing. Let's face it, there are other places one can gain as many or more clicks to their city in minutes, instead of hours. Ella - Sat Aug 29, 2009 11:29 am
To change the ally system
Yes, everyone allied, all links only on the main page, is more clicks.
Absolute!
Still competition and we keep the dynasty page with shortnotes . DemonicJ - Sat Aug 29, 2009 11:59 am If everyone was allied to everyone, there would be no point to having dynasties. Just a main page. Jeanne - Sat Aug 29, 2009 12:27 pm It seems like there will be no actions against the feeder dynasties only to spoil the game for the rest of us. How about showing some guts and all allies of UBC drop them until they end Vito.B? With only 20 members Moblets alone will have very little effect except if we buy a heap of credits and acts as feeder dyn for the rest of our allies to help them fight back UBC? Ella - Sat Aug 29, 2009 1:30 pm
But it is an option to avoid feeder dynasties. And doesn't it also gives the opportunity for small dynasties to click their way to the top 5?
yes, we seem to be in an impasse. Somehow i do not understand why it is that when in july/august 2008 the 2 feeder dynasties (of MMC Mob and RMV) were deleted and everything was peaceful again. This time we have to solve it ourselves. Amusing i find the fact that one of the creators of those 2 feeder dynasties has send mail around to unally UBC for having a feeder dynasty now. Everyone is supposed to be against UBC while they actually are using the idea of the sender, who got away with it at the time without much fuss because their feeder dynasty was immediately deleted . And i still am convinced that there still is a feeder dynasty around, in favour of the one who sent the mail. So, please Stan, let us no longer solve it ourselves and delete the feeder dynasties 
I might have to get myself a new identity and start a new life somewhere on this planet, but i had to ventilate, sorry. Ferrari - Sat Aug 29, 2009 2:30 pm Ella wrote: This time we have to solve it ourselves. Amusing i find the fact that one of the creators of those 2 feeder dynasties has send mail around to unally UBC for having a feeder dynasty now. Everyone is supposed to be against UBC while they actually are using the idea of the sender, who got away with it at the time without much fuss because their feeder dynasty was immediately deleted . And i still am convinced that there still is a feeder dynasty around, in favour of the one who sent the mail. On the moment you post this, I wanted to post the same, everyone talks about it, I thought by my self ''everyone is talking about it but no one post it on forum'' but you where faster than I am. Ella you have right, It is very amusing to see that. For us UBC is a very good allie, the best allie, and the longest allie, I will not end the alliance, but I am against the feeder dynasty's. I think, Jassej knows deep in his heart that we all have right, and end the alliance with the feeder dynasty himself. But the best option is that stan remove the feeder dynasty's (yes more as 1 like Ella said ) jassej - Sat Aug 29, 2009 3:20 pm MMC UBC end ally with VitoB yesterday!! I dont was online so I can not befor this wraiting. All top dynasty say yes.... Ella - Sat Aug 29, 2009 3:35 pm Thank you Jassej. But it is still a free market. 4 out of 5 top dynasties agree for a pact, nothing solved yet. Yarold - Tue Sep 01, 2009 6:04 am Imagine those from other thread have just received 1 warning per reply and continue. (next wont be that virtual) DaBabes City - Tue Sep 01, 2009 10:39 am
Thank you, Stan. So far as I can see the one stumbling block to our agreeing to policing our own dynasties re satellite dynasties is one Emperor. If he should choose to come on board we, or at least I, would consider it a done deal.
DemonicJ - Tue Sep 01, 2009 11:29 am
I remember a pact being made about not poaching members from oither dynasties as well, yet there is a member of your dynasty trying to poach my members. That is why I will not agree to a pact that involves you. jassej - Tue Sep 01, 2009 11:37 am
It is whether all agree or not. I said yes so I promised I will not have feeder dynasty. BUT only so long as others dynasty do not have a feeder dynasty. I tray to play fair but if not possible than is not my fould. DaBabes City - Tue Sep 01, 2009 2:55 pm
Jay, the last member of any consequence made the trip from your Dynasty to ours was your Kampaku, MUSHpark, and he is certainly a grown man, and well able to make his own decisions.
Of course, iFly has been most everywhere, but it's not like anyone has ever poached him, he is not half-baked yet, but he has been learning fast! [ Added: Tue Sep 01, 2009 9:28 am ] [quote="jassej"]
I agree, my Friend, and should we be forced to build such a Dynasty it will be the best funded and best managed ever and only available to our good Friends. It is sad we may be forced to go to such an expense, but some simply will not agree... bluebell_rose - Tue Sep 01, 2009 6:08 pm What about the message one of our members got from you guys to join them? hmmm? The only solution I can see is to ban transfers. Hydra has no ttransfers allowed, and I don't see this kind of drama DaBabes City - Tue Sep 01, 2009 6:27 pm
This is not Hydra. Speaking of drama, who are you posting to, and who or what is an "eili"? I hope it is not a child, and subject to kidnapping, hmmm? iFly - Tue Sep 01, 2009 6:36 pm First, the 'drama' isn't from transfers, bluebell_rose. Second, as DaBabes said, this is not Hydra. If you have a problem with this site, then you can leave. And third, did it occur to you that our dynasty did not know that one of our members 'poached'? Scooter, Eili is a member in the Mob who is the 'poached' member. bluebell_rose - Tue Sep 01, 2009 6:47 pm No transfers-> no feeders. Those neg members need to be fed to keep them postive so they be clicked. DaBabes City - Tue Sep 01, 2009 6:59 pm
Thank you for your response, iFly, I am not aware any of our members "poaching," one did mention she'd been in a casual conversation with a Mob member she regularly communicates with who took her comments the wrong way. As one of NET FREAKS! leaders I will say, we prefer joining members contact us first.
[ Added: Tue Sep 01, 2009 1:15 pm ]
Okay, does she deserve to be funded? If so, I will consider it. I transferred 15,000 credits to an Ally yesterday, because they had somehow gotten an enormous lead on us in gained/ givens. Was that stupid of me when we are "much larger and more powerful" than they? I considered it the honorable thing to do. footballer - Sat Sep 05, 2009 12:53 am Under the new scoring system, all dynasties can be feeder dynasty. The best Dynasty will be dynasty that is buying credits.. We advocated for this?
This system suits us? 
Roman - Tue Sep 08, 2009 9:54 am After thinking about it one day I came to the conclusion that there is only one way to stop (not fully but nearly) feeder Dynasties. It was already mentioned somewehere and Stan is already thinking about it - already posted somewhere: Make it so, that the lower amount - clicked links / received clicks - count for ranking. In my opinion, there is no other good way to solve the feeder Dynasties problem. And I think, that its not only solving the feeder problems its also the most fair way according to the fact that Yarolds still IS a Link EXCHANGE page. Top clickers can not live without link givers! Top link givers can not live without people that click their links! ^^ Thats it exactly! Try to be good in both ways of EXCHANGING links - which is again, exaclty what Yarolds is here for. Or to get to an example of sport: A Boxer who has perfect attack will never win when he has a bad defence. A top defence boxer will never win when he is not able to hit the other one. Soooo: The strength of a chain is its weakest link. .... where link can be clicked links or received clicks .... DemonicJ - Tue Sep 08, 2009 11:57 am
So what incentive do I have to share my credits I have built up? I click over 400 dynasty clicks a day but get clicked way more than that. Should I just show one link & make sure I only cliuck what gets clicked?? Hardly helps to turn this back into a link exchange does it? There are better ways to stop feeder dynasties & feeder accounts Roman - Tue Sep 08, 2009 1:42 pm
Of course its also correct what you wrote (I also am not a good clicker), but lets see it the perfect way: When you "only" click 400 Links of others but receive more you dont help the others enough to help them grow in their ghame. Perfect: So for a perfect link EXCHANGE it would be best if everyone clicks the same like he receives. Ok, will never happen, that EVERYONES gets the same as he gives but still, that would be perfect.
Tell me more please
Zidane - Tue Sep 08, 2009 3:06 pm
Visits for your link? And if the link is non-action, all visits automatically valid (not talking about people using more than one link ex site)? What more to want from link exchange site?
jassej - Tue Sep 08, 2009 8:19 pm Roman, difference between us is that you write about Yarold as EXCHANGE side and for me is Yarold game. Whan Yarold just a exchange side than I will leave (and I think many others) because I have my clicks for others side (Automatic visitor) faster and more. But Yarold is for me THAT GAME and whan somebody is better like I (or my dynasty) just because he show always all links than I have note fun. Because somebody can show always all links just whan buy credit. So he is not better, he just give more money for game. And that for you fun? I think in a game must be fun without money. Whan Yarold will be just a exchange side than is, of course, good this update. About feeder dynastys, just delete than, is very simple!! Roman - Wed Sep 09, 2009 7:43 am
Hello Jassej
For me its a game too else I wouldnt be here anymore. But Yarolds still also IS an exchange site.
Thats why I sugested to only count the LOWER amount. "Received clicks" OR "done clicks". So even if you show 10 links 24/7 and recieve million of clicks you still will only be ranked what you click yourself. Money is not that imoortant then anymore.
Nice idea. But with which rules? Who takes care of following the rules? Just deleting them? Hey, this one feeds soeone, lets delete the whole Dynasty? I already now know what happens, when Stan or Jay deletes the first Dynasty. Blamings all over Yarlds Forum ...... If there are definte rules, then its fine .... So help us, define some rules which can be followed by everyone. niinamaa - Wed Sep 09, 2009 1:18 pm
I agree with Roman but only in this case... This is the same as before the changes - counted "Dynasty clicks done" But lets look on the next situation: Non-VIP member showed 1 link in dynasty. He made 400 clicks in dynasty but received only 350... And those received 350 counts... He will be not motivated to click more in this case... Sorry, this topic is about "feeder" dynasties... It`s only casual remark... Ella - Wed Sep 09, 2009 3:36 pm
Nah, not deleting a whole dynasty! I would suggest to delete the person who is feeding this satellite dynasty. Admins can check that, can't they? Of course the next one in line of that dynasty might take over but that is no use, that person get deleted too. But if, Jassej, yes, the result is then this whole dynasty is at the end deleted
Bruno73 - Wed Sep 09, 2009 3:54 pm
All members (VIP or not) can be clicked in the Link Exchange (Main) page to balance their clicks done and received. So this new scoring system is fair to everyone (1-link or 10-link members). About 'feeder' dynasties: a very simple solution has already been suggested = do not ally with 'fed' dynasties if you don't like them. Zidane - Wed Sep 09, 2009 6:48 pm
If I can add my opinion: Second - not good. People want as much links as possible. I have many MMC that I found (not created, I prefer looking for cities with name alike to what I want and if the city is clearly abandoned, taking the city over) just for having extra links to show. To tell the truth, none of my cities was found by myself, I looked for cities with "search" function" and everytime found what I wanted to create - or the name was slightly different, so what use is to create another city when there is abandoned one with a good name?
So if it will be "each link has to be from different game" it will significantly reduce not only my extra links, but extra link of many players here. It is usually so that one plays a game and if s/he is asked to show extra links, s/he just creates another MMC/dragon/Mondozoo/anything, or s/he has more dragons or whatnot before asked to show extra links. You know - you like the game - you have more dragons or whatnot. Enough said I think
Forbidding marking a link for few seconds, because for example ten credits limit WILL last only a few seconds? It will reduce the link showing again. Before the update I showed ten links with five or six limit. After the update and at least ten limit I show less links with higher limit. Yes, more people catch that. What I did was "a few people catch more links" and what I do now is "more people catch less links". Both "systems" are good, indeed. But five minutes are too much I think. If limit, I say "one minute at least" or something like that. When there is a HH, five minutes can cost A LOT of credits - so it will significantly reduce the amount of links shown...but you have a point too. Too short limit will not stop feeder dynasties. Too high limit will reduce the number of links shown... More expensive making a dynasty? Yes, this is a good idea.
Yes, that is true. But we donated a member not once just to keeping him/her from being negative - we did not want to kick him/her from the dynasty because of negative numbers and the member started to click great after a few days - s/he just did not understand the system here or has some other work, you know. If there will be no transfers, newbies will have a harder time to remain in dynasties because it will be "you are negative - our allies hate negatives - sorry, kick, I can not send you any credits"... And yes, I am here because Yarold is a game for me. If I would want to just receive clicks, I will visit Utopia or Hydra. I like Yarold for the dynasty system and "you can do better, your dynasty can do better" and so on. But I do not give money for the game (sorry Stan) because I am not rich enough, you know. The VIP I had was bought for me, if someone wants to ask and now I have the "over 60k clicks" VIP. So I know I would probably never be the best clicker in the game because there will be some people buying credits. Sad, but so what? It is a game and I am here for fun
dimidola - Mon Sep 14, 2009 4:28 pm OK, I'm not very into dynasties and becoming the BEST or anything. I joined SWLE and my dynasty WDNC to get my game advance. I don't enjoy the new system because now we seem to have people twisting and turning things in order to get the highest scores.. Have they forgotten that their links are the game? Anyways, having a mybrute link, I must say that I'd really like it if the click didn't count unless it was worth it. And I'm pretty sure that people out there will close the tab as soon as they see the "your click has been counted" tab. So I'd say, keep your scores for the addicts, let them have trillions of scoring tables and have an option for the humble ones where the only score is the dynasty average and the link average (the oldschool system). Maybe there could be an option for the emperor of the dynasty to choose whether his dynasty will be this or that.. I don't know, it's hard to fix stuff and everyone's happy.. but... |
