until last night. Now, I don't really have a desire to continue to play much. I was already have a really anxious day yesterday IRL, but the ONE thing I was looking forward to (makeup designs) was suddenly and abruptly ruined. And I just cant help but think there was just other motives behind it.
Who gets to "decide" on design rules? Clearly, this was not Sin 's decision and the "design mod" stated it was "discussed between other mods".... well WHO? Who got to decide on this new and sudden rule? Was it someone who also creates designs? Was it someone who also participates in the shop game? I guess we will never know. However, seems like a huge conflict of interest to me.
"Rules and restrictions" should be consistent. There is no consistency, especially within the design rules. And at the end of the day- why is the hill someone wants to die on about makeup that makes the atrocious base skin look 500% better? Kinda weird. I guess we would rather see the same 20 designs in shops week after week, because that is what it has turned in to. We won't even get into how allowing 40 one-stock items has also caused a HUGE issue with shops ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Looking over the designs and shops today, we see full outfits classified as "accessories", interesting. We see a "clothing" design that encompasses clothes, shoes, and 5 accessories all bundled into 1 (which apparently is not against the rules, maybe because it benefits certain people?). Consistency. Either allow designs to "overflow" into 2 categories: EX clothes accessory, clothes shoes, shoes accessory, eyes lips, glasses lips, etc..... OR no overlap at all. Consistency.
I had high hopes for Kovaze, but time and time again feedback and suggestions from myself and many others goes unacknowledged. After awhile, it becomes apparent that there is only a few who really "matter", and those few almost always have ulterior motives. I am seeing no difference in moderation here that I saw on Tengaged since 2010. Users that actively use a website and its features, should not moderate their peers.