Search found 43 matches

I don't care my last ban (deserved and appreciated), I care my post locked (censorship).

I think there is someone who is judge and jury here.

Ban me, lock me, don't worry I'll let you run and manage your little dictatorship.

Thanks again, I won't lose my time any further.

PS: Yes I have mistaken sites for clicks with a site only for fun.

Here is a suggestion.

Imagine you can change your IP during the day. Then you could virtually click all the same links again (clicks for games will count).

Why not allowing this in Yarold?

I mean, if you could click say twice some of the same links - using 2 different IPs - then you would gain more credits, then you could show more links in return, and so on, so that all the community will get a benefit from it.

What about scoring?

Same as now.

What about rankings and contests?

If there is a Multi-IP mode AND a Single-IP mode in the Profile Options, then one could simply double the contests: some for the Multi users/dynasties, some for the Single users/dynasties.

No there would not be 2 Yarold instead of one. Between them all users would still be able to click each other's links, or to ally with each other.

What will happen?

For Single-IP users, Yarold will not change, except there will be more links to click from the Multi-IP users (who may click you back more too, etc.).

For Multi-IP users, more IPs, more fun! AND MORE CLICKS = good for Yarold activity

Twice more contests = twice more chances to win = more interest in playing Yarold

Could be organized a poll to know how many members can use more than 1 IP during the same day? (and are interested in being able to click the same links more than once)

Thanks for reading until the end

Again no argument given...

Maybe "nothing is working" in your dynasty, but in Real Mini Village everything is working very well!

Btw it was not my dream, I preferred the SumAvg system - easier to calculate, simpler to understand - but there were many complaints against it.

Graphics updated here.

[ Added: Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:24 am ]

"Limit for donations have been reached this month, it will be reset at 1st day of next month."

It appears that this limit is not individual but over all Yarold members.

This means that if a few members buy everything up to that limit at the beginning of the month, then at the end there is nothing left to buy (like a VIP status for instance) for the others.

This doesn't look fair to me. Limit should be individual.

Late answer(s)...

Quote:

LOL Marga - you should ask Bruno since the system is his idea, thank you for showing him that it is not just plain to understand for everyone :razz:

Some are blond, some don't want to understand, and some both...

Quote:

Some members come here with 1 minicity link. Others come with 5 Valenths links. To make an even exchange the minicity link holder should make 4 fake links? Is that fair to ask of anybody just to fulfill your dream of an even exchange rate?

No, each Valenth link is simply going to be clicked 5 times less than the MMC link.

Quote:

All those receiving more clicks than they click, to balance, would have to show less links!! Those that can click more than they receive, still havent changed (the credit hoarders).

They are now encouraged to change. The old system, based only on the clicks done, did not encourage at all link showing. So I really don't see why there would be less and less links shown now and I don't share this feeling.

By the way, remember that the SumAvg (Done+Received) scoring system has been rejected because it would have made money rule. Now, with the MinAvg system, indeed crazy clickers are not rewarded if they are not crazy showers too.

Quote:

Marga: The score system say you only get score for the lowest number of your clicks done/received - so if you show more than you click you are loosing credits but yes feeding your dynasty and allies

Not only feeding the others but also balancing your dynasty clicks, that is showing links that your members don't show...

Quote:

Therefore, even though I have the credits to support more links, why should I show more links than I can click? I'm still waiting on an answer for that one.

Nobody asks you to show more links than you can click, unless you want to have your links clicked more and that you buy credits for that, or as I just wrote if you want to balance your dynasty clicks. Again remember we have switched from SumAvg to MinAvg to prevent credits buyers to be ranked at the top.

Less and less links shown and less and less clicks on Yarold? I don't think so and I would like some facts (dis)proving this.
(RMV SumAvg is about 80000 and I'm pretty sure we didn't click and were clicked that much before the update)
(Jeanne's SumAvg is about 3500 and I bet it was not that high before)

Quote:

Exactly like VIPs, non-VIPs can show some extra links from time to time, simply by adding/deleting them from their account...

So they can receive as many clicks as they want.

The new scoring system says: "be clicked as much as you click".

It is easy to understand for anyone.

Either you care and try, or you don't care and you can build up credits and complete less link exchanges. That is your right too. But sorry you cannot anymore build up credits AND be ranked at the top. Just because this kind of behaviour is against link exchange. It is moreover cheap and selfish ("I wanna click tons of links but I won't show mine").

As you gave no further argument, I maintain that the size argument is pointless regarding the clicks balance (i.e. the subject of this topic). Each member is individually concerned. Dynasties are concerned too, whatever their size, if they feel concerned about it.

Regarding the competition, the new scoring system is not to blame as it didn't affect much the rankings, did it?

Now if you'd like a competition where all dynasties have the same chance, why not but this would be the death of the large dynasties and for sure nobody would accept and train newbies anymore. Is that what you want?

Regarding my graphics, nobody forces you to watch them. You're talking about having fun, but you're talking about competition too. Graphics are for those interested and having fun in the competition.

With the new scoring system balancing clicks done and received has become a new issue for individual members as well as for dynasties in order to raise their MinAvg.

Ideally there should be as many clicks received than done. More clicks done and the Min(imum) is then equal to the number of clicks received. More clicks received and the Min is then equal to the number of clicks done.

Here are graphics for the top 16 dynasties showing the daily difference between total clicks received and done. Positive value means too many clicks received while negative value means not enough clicks received.

Quote:

Bruno, you write RMV show most of the links, RMV is the best ...
But the best has necessary to make monopoly?
Fear has the best, perhaps?
I think RMV did not necessitate a monopoly to make, or?

RMV and La Brute have no intention to make a monopoly and to dictate the other dynasties what they have to do. We just ask not to be told what we have to do.

DaBabes first said "the last forum who provoked us into dropping them 'for that reason' (negative links) has since lost from a presumptive number #2 to #6" then "I could stay here and throw our support behind your competitors".

So I wonder who is provoking the other into forming a coalition against the other.

If Net Freaks! plans to do everything against RMV, they have to expect a reaction, that's all what I meant.

Quote:

Our 50 members have near matched your 60, haven't we?

Actually, we are now 120.

If you think you can replace RMV by 60 never negative allied or dynasty members, go for it! You just risk they won't show you as many extra links as we do...

Quote:

7. Wouldn't it have been far simpler to have answered Ella politely and say, "Yes, Ella, we will work on our negatives?" We would have sent back smiley faces and thanks.

I answered your mail by recalling our gained/given data, which are currently:

Allied NET FREAKS! dynasty (562946 gained 551982 given )

That means RMV showed Net Freaks! 10964 more links than conversely.

That also means your request to "work on our negatives" is totally pointless. (I repeat myself: 10 negatives are only 10 unclickable or already clicked links, while we show you WAY MORE extra links)

Start working on showing us more links (we don't need your credits we need your links), then maybe we will pay attention to your wishes.

Until then I call them interference. (or whim or caprice)

I don't second all the negative comments made on these two volunteer mods who are Sora/iFly and Hippies_Son.

Age doesn't matter, ability does.

I don't know Hippies_Son but it seems he did exactly what Roman did already once by mistake. (tell me if I'm wrong) And I don't remember that Roman had been lynched for having deleted numerous short notes. Why are you so harsh now?

As it was said, mistakes are human. Not to realize his/her own mistake is more to blame though, I agree.

Regarding Keith/Sora/iFly, I'm surprised to hear he is only 13, but for good. No doubt he is more clever than most of the 13 year old boys that you got to know.

Yes he can be annoying and yes he has been banned several times from some IRC channels (including from #rmv by myself), maybe because he is used to say what he thinks... Gifted kids often have the same relationship problems.

He did no harm as a Mod so far, he just started. So please give him a chance to prove his ability and don't judge him before he did anything, thank you in advance.

Quote:

Yes, and the last forum who provoked us into dropping them 'for that reason' (negative links) has since lost from a presumptive number #2 to #6...

You might try to drop RMV, then La Brute would drop you, then we would see who would be #6 :razz:

More seriously, what happens when some Net member becomes negative? He/she is refunded. I prefer to show 100 more extra links of mine than transferring 100Â¢ to have a bad clicker's link clicked. Note that in both cases the alliance can get the links/clicks, so why do you complain?

Moreover, when you claim that a negative could be replaced by a better member, that is just a dream: such a better member doesn't really exist. (otherwise you'd be 60 good members in your dynasty, wouldn't you?) There will be some negatives anyway, you cannot get rid of them, unless you feed them again and again... (that because it's not a zero sum game = unless you buy some credits you cannot be clicked as much as you click ; as a consequence there must be some negatives all the time ; an alliance of 400 positive members is an utopia)

Quote:

Do you ever give any thought to where your member's credits come from?

You don't need credits to become a top dynasty (otherwise you'd be #1 already), you need link showers - members who make credits circulate, not members who build up a virtual - and useless - treasure. The more links are shown, the more links are clicked, the more links are shown again and so on. That is more important than "staying positive" - which discourages link showing and encourages credits saving - and that is the way to success. (That was already the case with the old scoring system and is even more effective now with the new one.)

Quote:

Our negatives? Not your business!

I prefer to have 10 negatives than 50 credits blockers.

By the way, dear friend Maurice's (the guy below the Kampaku in the list) clumsy mistake has been fixed.