KittyCatS! Community Forum

Hiya
was thinkin about breed with milk or cuddles..

now i'm cuddling kittens and beginning to have misterious disappearing in my land.. i know that is a SL trouble and not depend from KC but

each time i have my cat back i've lost the cuddle effect and he's far from the love % of the partner, so or i have to wait or i have to give to the retrieved one a love vitamin..
and most of the time i have my retrieved in the middle of my rl night so can't provide to adjust his gap with cuddles.

I know that our support is very cool and fast but.. )

would be really awesome have a sorta of ATM that allow the owner of the cat to request an automatic replacing of the missed cat.

the missed one, if found in world or in inventory after the redeliver should become a copy and should be replaced, like when Kitten send us the retrieved..

In this way we could give instantly other cuddles and avoid the gap from the cuddled and the missed one (that lost the cuddles..)

hope you will consider this
thank you in advance

I second this!

Kitty ATM all the way *swipes my card* =)

Great idea!

The problem is you're asking a logic system to prove the absence of a fact, which is impossible.

Any such system is doomed to failure due to rampant abuse.

Abuse will always be present (and probably is under the present system) but, at least, with a human (CSR) involved, the process is greatly slowed (making abuse far less appealing) and common-sense judgement can be applied by the human.

Well this system has already been used by at least one other breedable that i know of.
Any clone is automatically neutralized i think and has an unremovable red text above it as do KC copies, so abuse isn't really possible.

So i support, if it's possible to implement this could take a big load off Kitten's and KCR's shoulders too .

Don't get me wrong, I fully support the idea. I just don't think it's technically feasible to do it without increased risk of abuse.

I've been thinking on this and similar problems for a very, very long time. To date, I've not been able to eliminate false-positive duplicate specimen detection. One of the main reasons for that is the inability to prove the loss of the specimen.

The KittyCatS duplicate detection system is quite good, and has a low failure rate. I've never seen the specifics, but my feeling is they're about as good as it's possible to be, given the environment. The mere fact of this request, however, indicates that false results from the duplicate detection system is still considered a problem by some users.

Any such system depends upon the claim, from an end user, that a specimen is missing. The claim is, for the software designer, an unprovable, if not provably false, proposition. In fact, it's easy to mislead the system .. simply take the specimen into inventory and claim it's gone missing. The software system has no proof you're lying.

History has shown that false copies of Second Life breedables can, and have been, abused, bilking a huge number of players out of an amazingly large amount of money.

Given this any automated system would be able to be abused. The question is how easily can it be abused. And the solution is to make abuse "unprofitable." One obvious method, which is quite easy and inexpensive to implement is to forgo writing an automated system, slowing the process, and introducing human judgement. This is the solution KittyCatS currently uses.

I would go so far as to propose that a large part of KittyCatS success is, specifically, the human touch. And, I feel sorry for the staff when Second Life is acting up and they're being faced with an abnormally heavy work load. But reducing their workload at the expense of system integrity and security seems the wrong direction.

Of course, it's KittyCatS call whether the benefits outweigh the risks.