Recover the cards in inactive accounts

(JB) #14

I am really sad that this keeps coming up.

Inactive or not - these are our prints - and the rarity of them is what helps them hold value outside of our emotional attachments.

Regardless if I log on every day or once a year - these are mine. I have invested my time and my money and whether I had these prints in my house, or a digital closet, they are mine.

No one has any right to tell me how often I have to come visit my prints in order to keep them.

I know there are sets that are sold out - and that is how it goes. You can try to trade for them - or admire from afar - but you cannot just decide what is an allowable time for me to keep my property.

Inactive accounts are just that - inactive - and that is their choice.

What neonmob could do is allow users to set up something like facebook has - that in the event of your confirmed passing - that you could will your account to another.

(Jaegis) #15

Yep, like I said people keep looking at this the wrong way. Instead of going for inactive accounts, make it so that if you’re planning on not using your account anymore (or you use the give up account option) you can do something like “add any number of the cards in your collection to people on your friends list” or maybe “give a card to an active seeker of that set who needs it”. Inactivity is such a touchy subject since inactivity -> resuming activity can last from a week to a decade or even longer, depending on the person

(Hardyhero) #16

None of prints are yours.
You just have the rights to keep in your collection.
You don’t have any kind of property over any kind of material here.
You can check this here:
Even using money, you didn’t buy the property.
You bought the credits. What you will do with your credits is on you.
But you didn’t buy the prints/cards.
As any digital service around the world, NeonMob can cancel any account or the entire service when they want or need.
Also, they can anytime change the rules and terms of service.
They don’t have any obligation to maintain any account it deems illegal or they think are harming others.
There are rules.
If they put on rules that inactive accounts will be deleted after 6 months (for example), this is the rule and everybody have to deal with it.
Is simple this way.
Put this on rules, alert everybody and its solved.
Do not want your judgment values is equal to the judgment of values around the world.
What you think is right may not be to another.
There are many other people under different moral rules of right and wrong around the world.
Some are here.
For example, where I live, if you are in a situation that knows that the goal is community and still insists hinder or harm, you should look elsewhere to satisfy your particular desires.
For a collection game, there needs to be community engagement.
Pick up cards and leave the game or create fake profiles to catch more cards are equally harmful.
This is about everybody. This is about the community and the game.
Its not about what is yours (because nothing is yours).

(JB) #17

Yes, I do! I have a right to keep my collection. Thank you.

And where collecting all the prints in a set can be seen as a game, to others it can be a collection to view and admire. The sole point of this site is not a game. This is also a place where artists can sell their art. And where us collectors can experience things we may not have otherwise.

I have a right to keep my collection. I have spent time and money on it, and it shouldn’t have a time limit.

(Hardyhero) #18

Do you have any collection incomplete?
I get very frustrated and discouraged with incomplete collection.
If all my collections are incomplete, I give up to participate in the site.
For me, it makes no sense to have an incomplete collection.
If I give up to participate, I take several cards away and let to buy the arts.
Basically: keep my collections complete and I keep buying.
You can argue that the site is to help artists but with no money, no business.
The engine to maintain the system, is money.
There is an artistic question.
The platform is community and marketing.
Artists benefit from this base.
If the base crumble, the “game” is over.
Understand that I’m not disagreeing with you. I agree with these points.
We disagree with the way to keep the system fair.
Although I have read many suggestions in my opinion the only way to permanently solve this “problem” is erasing the inactive user account.
How this will be done and what are the criteria, we may think.
But the final action is this.
I do not see any onus for artists.
On the contrary.
Only those who really cares and admire the arts is that they will.
Try to imagine how many arts unfortunately were “thrown in the trash” and are in inactive accounts.
Now that’s disrespectful to the artists.

(JB) #19

It seems like we will not find common ground here. First off, yes I have struggled with incomplete sets and worked for a long time trading with others to complete them, some even taking me over a year.

Not all care to complete collections, there are some sets that I only like one print from, but I choose not to collect them since I prefer complete sets. Not all share my view and there are some collectors that will only collect prints with cats, regardless of the set.

The point is, some of us do not see this as simply a game where the goal is to complete sets. I like to support the art I like, and when it is sold out, many users make more sets! This is where their revenue can continue.

The point isn’t just to “catch em all” but also encourage the artists you discover here by collecting their work.

From someone who has been on this site for quite some time, collection and artist support has been the spirit of the game. Not completing sets for the sake of completing them, and trying to force those that have the prints you want to hand them over if they haven’t logged on in “X” amount of time.

If you must complete every set you have, then perhaps you should just trade away the ones you can’t so others can complete their sets? With the print counts uneven throughout all sets, there will always be someone that cannot complete their set, regardless if users are active or not.

Stop trying to force others to give up what they collected just because you do not feel they log on often enough.

About inactive NM users
(Jaegis) #20

I fundamentally disagree with what you’re saying that “nothing is yours” when it comes to neonmob. Obviously the fact is that neonmob still owns everything, they can do basically anything they want with your account, and the credits you bought are not actually money. However, this is the same for many digital things. Can I not call any weapons, armor or other items I gain from a game like World of Warcraft “mine” because I didn’t pay for them, it was a drop from a boss? What about League of Legends, are skins not mine because they came from a loot crate and I worked my way to permanently earn them rather than buying them? Both of these examples can also do what they want with their respective players’ accounts. It’s still my account, my items and these things are “mine.” Not because I used credits or money to get them, but because I was lucky enough and persistent enough to get them. Using credits or paying makes it even more valuable, because at that point you invested money into it. Are you going to say that Riot Points, the League version of neonmob credits are what I get rather than the actual items themselves? Ownership of something matters to a lot of people because of the value placed on the item, which is why many in game items or even accounts are sold for real life money. Just because it’s digital doesn’t mean it’s not ours. In games, and even more so neonmob, people collect or get cosmetic items for the experience, the feeling of pride you get from having something unique that not many others may have. That experience, literally “sentimental value” is in our collections. But for those who go even beyond that, who physically invest something in the game, they have even more of a right to owning it, so don’t dismiss their claims just because they paid for something non-physical. They paid for their collection and that’s that.

(Hardyhero) #21

Is not to force if they don’t log for a time.
Is to rescue if they don’t reactivate the account each year, for example.
Or this or you will stimulate the creation of multiple accounts, for those who want to complete the collection will not get.

I agree with you.
When I said about the property was to show that NeonMob has the “legal right” to do what they want, because legally is not our property (the cards).

Anyway, deleting the accounts or not, something was to have been done a long time ago.

(JB) #22

Like I said, we will not agree. Life happens, and heaven forbid something unfortunate happen to anyone and they cannot log in for six months - maybe they are in the hospital. Do they need to be so concerned with their account that they have to remember to tell a family member to log on so they don’t loose their stuff. Look, if the admins thought closing inactive accounts was a useful policy, it likely would already be in the terms of service - and you failed to even get the bigger point

Regardless of active users or not - not everyone will finish every set.

When sets have XR at 800 and commons at 2,000 there will only be up to 800 users that will ever complete this set, leaving others to only wish for completion. I get that you feel the way you do, and I am sure there are those that will agree with either side of this argument, but when you have a policy to close accounts, you also have to have one that can recover them if they are closed in error.

If someone’s account was closed in error, how do they recover their prints, especially if someone else was then able to collect them since they went back to the poll? Do they get taken away from someone else? This is a slippery slope, which is why this policy is likely not in place.

You aren’t “rescuing” prints, you are attempting to reappropriate them and in an unfair manner. If these were physical cards, you wouldn’t come to my house and say “you haven’t looked at these in six months, hand them over”. Same principle. And where the admins could easily take them all away - that is not good for business, since who would want to invest real money in something that isn’t guaranteed to be there 2 minutes, 2 days or 2 years from now.

(Le french Steak) #23

If I may, Credits are not real either, and you used the Credits -which is a form of currency- to buy cards. So make your mind about whether we own both the credits and the cards, or own neither of them. Should we also recover credits from inactive accounts ?
Anyway, even real life money is yet to become entirely digital with no physical remains, and I do hope that I will still be allowed to keep my property over non-material real money forever…

(Tragion) #24

Reactivating your account each year is insane. The site is about 4 years old so I really don’t see any problem with currently inactive users. I think the problem has to do with people who have 5-11 copies of the same card and refuse to traid. They aren’t helping anyone at all and only harm the artist. I think the site should limit the amount of copies of a card you have and force you to trade one of your x5 cards of a pack before getting another pack from that set.

(JB) #25

This can backfire if pack odds are really different for rarities, as well as finding people to trade with. Some people will always have more commons than XRs based on print counts and pack odds. And this could block others from even completing sets if they pull a bunch of commons in their early packs. I have 1 set, where I have 20 prints of one common - just really back pack pulls - but that isn’t my fault. I was just trying to get the last print I needed to finish my set.

And yes, it sucks when others don’t trade - but forcing them to is not practical either.

We should have a method to donate cards we don’t want or need if we can’t find people to trade them to. Otherwise - that is why we have trading and messaging - so we can work with fellow collectors to trade for the prints we need, or at least try to.

(Tragion) #26

That’s true. It would be nice if their was a card pool system. I just find it annoying when I see a USER (not just beric the sites bad traid bot) ask me for a card they have 11 copies of.

(Nordly) #27

I have a blanket policy of declining trades when they already own the print (unless I am purging a set and they are helping me out by taking prints they already own).

(Nordly) #28

I agree with all you said, and thank you for continuing to respond to these threads.

(Nordly) #29

This is a much better idea, because it puts the agency in the collector’s hands.

(Nordly) #30

Your second sentence flat out contradicts your first statement, and you’re playing around with words to make it sound better than it really is. “Rescue” basically means that the cards get taken out from someone’s account, and given to someone else who deserves it more (however that worthiness is determined). And by attaching a condition of re-activation to it, then yes, you are forcing people to give up their cards if they don’t login for x time.

Or here’s another idea: if you care about a series (and the artist) so much that you want to the full series, how about using credits to open more packs, and support the artist at the same time. Remember, the artist does not get any commission from free packs, so if you really want to support your artist, please open packs using credits.

(Hardyhero) #31

Now you have a point.

Unfortunately this is not possible :frowning:
When the service is over, you lose all digital items.
This happens a lot mainly in online games.
When many people stop playing, the servers are turned off.
This disables the game.
I have Microsoft games that had the servers closed. How are multiplayer games, they no longer work.

[quote=“tragion, post:24, topic:2043, full:true”]
Reactivating your account each year is insane.[/quote]

Why insane? Is just once a year. “click here to keep you account activated”. Is simply one click by year.

I like the idea but I’m not sure how to make it “fair”.
Also, maybe think about forbidden buy new cards of a completed collection.


Yes. There is nothing wrong with it if they put on the terms of site. The same way, I have to accept the terms of service to start to use the site. The logic is the same.

Agree. But this will not solve the problem of concentration of cards in inactive accounts.

What we have here are extremes.
I really think we can improve this system and make better rules to harm fewer people possible.
Or we just wait the devs say “no, the website is this way with this rules, if you don’t like it, you are free to leave”.

Very good example:

(Le french Steak) #32

I think you missed the point.
This was about whether you can own non-material rights, not the fatality of a server shutdown.
(Technically if the servers were to shut down you wouldn’t take one’s ownership away, you’d simply cut their mean of accessing their content. A server can still technically reboot.)

(Tragion) #33

No one’s gonna be a member of a site that asks you to reactivate your account each year. Infact i’d actually delete my account if that happened. it makes the community seam gated and pompous.

I also posted that as a way of spit balling. I don’t actually like most parts of the idea. I just proposed it cause I’ve dealt with the types of people you’re talking about and wanted to see if anyone else could build upon it. I actually liked silvermelowdy’s response (Hope I didn’t butcher it) of having a card pool.