Half of a ward being owned by one person

[Lakhesys]

Even now in Coeurl you can find at least 20 open plots, as of last night.

[CatStarwind]

That's because when you've been asked multiple times to cite specifics about the problem (ie: how many houses would be freed up if the loophole was closed) you deflect, insult, or just ignore the question. Stop pretending you want to have a serious conversation when you're on a crusade, with zero regard for how much or how little it will help.

It is not deflection when it isn't even relevant to begin with. I'm not sure where you think I've been insulting either. While still not explicitly "moving the goal post" this and posts like it are simply noise at best, mudding the waters at worst. Even if zero houses would be freed up it still doesn't negate the fact that a loophole is being exploited and abused.

[PintyMcEars]

Clearly.


I do wonder what it's called when you circumvent a restriction. Especially when done to a severe degree.

bro, you got a problem

[PredatoryCatgirl]

Even if zero houses would be freed up it still doesn't negate the fact that a loophole is being exploited and abused.

There it is. You finally admit it. Even if no one is helped you still want to punish people because its a rule. You are literally missing the entire reason rules exist in the first place.

[CatStarwind]

You are literally missing the entire reason rules exist in the first place.

So for what reason then do you believe the following rule exists?

[PredatoryCatgirl]

So for what reason then do you believe the following rule exists?

To stop house hording and free up more plots. And yet you've just said that even if it doesn't serve that purpose, it should still be followed. You are literally saying a rule should be followed because its a rule. I won't go into all the historical examples of why that's a bad idea, but it is.

That basically destroyed any hope that you're able to be reasoned with, so I'm out.

[CatStarwind]

To stop house hording and free up more plots.

Indeed.

And yet you've just said that even if it doesn't serve that purpose, it should still be followed.

Well, does it serve that purpose or doesn't it?

[CatStarwind]

Here, let me answer my own question since it's apparently a tough one:

Probably because the intent of the system has never changed. They want players limited to ownership of one personal and one FC house so more players and FCs have the opportunity to own a house.

They failed to find a way to program that limitation into the game without breaking other game play related to FCs and so had to remove the restriction from the game's programming.

[Troxbark]

I won't go into all the historical examples of why that's a bad idea, but it is.

Oh please do, gives us your examples of games that's made rules that should not have been followed.

Game rules, right? Because I trust that you're not going to try and bring up some stupid irl shit that's irrelevant to this very specific conversation.

[ZiraZ]

There it is. You finally admit it. Even if no one is helped you still want to punish people because its a rule. You are literally missing the entire reason rules exist in the first place.

Closing loops right now = future wards and housing districts will allow for more unique players to own a home, and it will be a positive change for the grand majority of people.
I don't think people here are expecting SE to go on a holy crusade to remove shell FCs and multi house owners, that would all get grandfathered just like it always has when new housing rules are implemented and enforced.