It's dumb. Cows don't look like sheep don't look like antelope.
It's dumb. Cows don't look like sheep don't look like antelope.
created: 02 December 15 at 01:48 AM (build: 10/1/2015 4:20 PM beta)
Wrecked Avent Site Administrator
And wolves don't look like foxes don't look like dogs. That's not what is being measured by categories. They're stereotypes intending to cover use categories. Since we don't particularly have a lot of cow/antelope/not-either-of-those, I don't see the distinction here being meaningful enough to warrant being split out.
Honestly we need to decide how exactly we separate the species. Is it through the rules of biology or whatever "is similar"? I mean we already have inconsistencies with the first way of doing it, such as "raptors" and "dolphins" with "sharks". There is also a thing where "Mustelid" is actually a family that includes otters as a subfamily. However otters get their own trait. It's not clear, because if we do things scientifically, then otters are included twice.
So it seems to be that "similarity" is the way to do it, in which case this trait is against that way of organizing species. So yeah, I guess it should be reorganized. Or other traits should be reorganized.
It potentially makes sense to create a separate ticket to discuss how we define species exactly, then attach all those to it as children. They're all connected and the solution is also the same.
Wrecked Avent Site Administrator
The problem is that we can't really handle them all that consistently. If we were to use species as its literal interpretation, we'd have hundreds if not thousands of potential categories. This results in it not really being all that useful for anyone, unless you combined like a dozen species categories in a search.
The way it has been going so far is to determine how popular something is and spread the categories based on popularity. I recognize it's not entirely fair, but I honestly don't see any good solution for this.
The way it has been going so far is to determine how popular something is and spread the categories based on popularity. I recognize it's not entirely fair, but I honestly don't see any good solution for this.
Well that's basically what I think it should be, and what it should be reworded into. I'm just not sure how to word it exactly. The problem is not that we spread categories based on popularity, the problem is that some categories are like that and some are not.
Got something to say?
Why don't you register and participate?
Litphoria has a unique community feedback system, where the community decides what profile options are available, and what order new features are developed.