In game marriage ideas

[Samnang.1879]

> @"Danikat.8537" said:

> It's surprising (to me) how different players reactions are to the same systems in different games. My other MMO has had player marriage since launch and I've never seen any of these concerns raised, either as something that might happen or which has happened. The only complaint I've seen is that there's no divorce system so if your character is married to one controlled by someone who quit the game you can't remarry.

>

> But quite a few people on that game's forum are currently up in arms about the imminent introduction of cash shop gifting - they're adamant it will only be used by people selling cash shop items to other players in return for gold and it's opening the flood gates to legalised gold selling which will ruin the economy and the game. I never saw any complaints about that when GW2 got gem store gifting, and I've never heard of it happening.

 

thing is this implementation doesn't affect anyone whatsoever and it's completely an optional thing... ppl are twisting themselves into a pretzel and coming up with really absurd explanations about why it's bad>

 

@"Blocki.4931" said:

> My god.. it's a game it's for fun. The few people on these forums that only ever see negative sides about everything are more annoying than in any other game I've seen yet..

>

> People play their characters, they identify with them, they play them out as people. Doesn't matter if the game offers systems ingame for that or not, people will play that idea out anyway. That's the RP part in MMORPG. Bringing up predators for GW2 sounds like you'd also protect your kid from the evil murder simulator fortnite or even better: protect from the predators in fortnite.

>

> Either way, as I said in that other thread I'd like such an option, especially from a game mechanic perspective.

 

this is so true... like always ppl come in suggestion threads being negative. i remember seeing an old underwater expansion suggestion thread... and ppl were like "omgggggg anet not gonna spend resources on underwater" now we're on the verge of underwater expansion... lol...> @"kurfu.5623" said:

 

> You don't get to dictate how people respond when you post in an open forum.

>

> That said, your suggestion is not something that appeals to me, and I don't think it would be a constructive use of developer resources.

>

>

 

i didn't dictate i merely made a suggestion and said i don't like reading negative comments. if i were dictating i would tell everyone who disagreed to get the f out. :/

 

 

> @"Maikimaik.1974" said:

> > @"Samnang.1879" said:

> > - Dowry, the one proposing should pay the other player a dowry

>

> WHAT? Dowries are literally destroying peoples lives in developing countries, and you're seriously suggesting it to be implemented into a game?

>

>

 

for game immersion so it goes with the lore... GW2 is like ancient medieval or whatever right...

[Maikimaik.1974]

> @"Samnang.1879" said:

 

> thing is this implementation doesn't affect anyone whatsoever and it's completely an optional thing... ppl are twisting themselves into a pretzel and coming up with really absurd explanations about why it's bad>

 

It's not optional if it gives you a bonus.

 

> for game immersion so it goes with the lore... GW2 is like ancient medieval or whatever right...

 

It isn't. Not even remotely.

 

 

[TheQuickFox.3826]

No thanks. If it exists there should be purely cosmetical and bring no in-game benefit whatsoever.

Imagine the drama where tech support would have to go through with all the divorces and divisions of property and all the scam marriages just to take someones valuables. No ty.

 

/notsigned

[artemis.6781]

Kitten no.

[GrubySzymek.1362]

> @"Danikat.8537" said:

> It's surprising (to me) how different players reactions are to the same systems in different games. My other MMO has had player marriage since launch and I've never seen any of these concerns raised, either as something that might happen or which has happened. The only complaint I've seen is that there's no divorce system so if your character is married to one controlled by someone who quit the game you can't remarry.

>

> But quite a few people on that game's forum are currently up in arms about the imminent introduction of cash shop gifting - they're adamant it will only be used by people selling cash shop items to other players in return for gold and it's opening the flood gates to legalised gold selling which will ruin the economy and the game. I never saw any complaints about that when GW2 got gem store gifting, and I've never heard of it happening.

 

In both cases answer is the same - it's been there from the start. They had marriage system, we had gold selling. Changing status quo always stir up communities.

 

Nevertheless I find real life relationship alternatives in video games silly and pathetic.

 

[Samnang.1879]

> @"Maikimaik.1974" said:

 

> It's not optional if it gives you a bonus.

 

> It isn't. Not even remotely.

 

 

it's a very very very very small bonus... it's like hte bonus u get from a high level guild that nobody even bothers to get except me and a few ppl who care

[Thelgar.7214]

You should have to fight in an arena to determine who gets custody of the minis.

[Samnang.1879]

> @"Kheldorn.5123" said:

> > @"Danikat.8537" said:

> > It's surprising (to me) how different players reactions are to the same systems in different games. My other MMO has had player marriage since launch and I've never seen any of these concerns raised, either as something that might happen or which has happened. The only complaint I've seen is that there's no divorce system so if your character is married to one controlled by someone who quit the game you can't remarry.

> >

> > But quite a few people on that game's forum are currently up in arms about the imminent introduction of cash shop gifting - they're adamant it will only be used by people selling cash shop items to other players in return for gold and it's opening the flood gates to legalised gold selling which will ruin the economy and the game. I never saw any complaints about that when GW2 got gem store gifting, and I've never heard of it happening.

>

> In both cases answer is the same - it's been there from the start. They had marriage system, we had gold selling. Changing status quo always stir up communities.

>

> Nevertheless I find real life relationship alternatives in video games silly and pathetic.

>

 

its just something nice to think about... the chance of anet making this is 0.000000000000000000001% and im not holding my breath. but i have to get it out of my chest... it's something i'd like to have. imagine you're on a mount exploring a random map and u randomly see a wedding ceremony... how cool would that be??

 

and like couples can send out invitation, and get ppl to play music at their ceremony etc... share food buffs, play mini games.

 

 

like does no body here get excited when they see a wedding in real life? i mean i do... and i want to check out the bride's dress and stuff... but nvm... i guess ppl are diff from me..

[GrubySzymek.1362]

> @"Samnang.1879" said:

> > @"Kheldorn.5123" said:

> > > @"Danikat.8537" said:

> > > It's surprising (to me) how different players reactions are to the same systems in different games. My other MMO has had player marriage since launch and I've never seen any of these concerns raised, either as something that might happen or which has happened. The only complaint I've seen is that there's no divorce system so if your character is married to one controlled by someone who quit the game you can't remarry.

> > >

> > > But quite a few people on that game's forum are currently up in arms about the imminent introduction of cash shop gifting - they're adamant it will only be used by people selling cash shop items to other players in return for gold and it's opening the flood gates to legalised gold selling which will ruin the economy and the game. I never saw any complaints about that when GW2 got gem store gifting, and I've never heard of it happening.

> >

> > In both cases answer is the same - it's been there from the start. They had marriage system, we had gold selling. Changing status quo always stir up communities.

> >

> > Nevertheless I find real life relationship alternatives in video games silly and pathetic.

> >

>

> its just something nice to think about... the chance of anet making this is 0.000000000000000000001% and im not holding my breath. but i have to get it out of my chest... it

 

That's okay, forums is the place where you can voice your wishes and concerns. However, at the same time, other players can voice their disagreement.

[Samnang.1879]

> @"Kheldorn.5123" said:

> > @"Samnang.1879" said:

> > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said:

> > > It will use dev resources that could be used on build temp... yeah right... on anything else. So yes, it will affect everyone in a long run and will be a huge waste of time.

> >

> > ?? i don't understand this kind of sentiment. yes it will take resources, but given how many ppl are into in-game marriage

>

> How many exactly?

 

53+

 

Proof:

 

[https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/13787/if-in-game-marriage-is-introduced-do-u-have-anybody-in-mind/p1](https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/13787/if-in-game-marriage-is-introduced-do-u-have-anybody-in-mind/p1 "https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/13787/if-in-game-marriage-is-introduced-do-u-have-anybody-in-mind/p1")

[Steve The Cynic.3217]

> @"Samnang.1879" said:

> > @"Maikimaik.1974" said:

>

> > It's not optional if it gives you a bonus.

>

> > It isn't. Not even remotely.

>

>

> it's a very very very very small bonus... it's like hte bonus u get from a high level guild that nobody even bothers to get except me and a few ppl who care

 

The bonuses that top-end theorycrafters and their acolytes argue about are very small, too, but woe betide you if you don't have that last two percent on Power and you get in their raid group...

 

OK, anyway. Some practical questions of the "how would it work" type:

* How would this work with the relatively weak boundary between characters on the same account in GW2? Does my account marry your account? (The friend system already works like that...)

* Is the remark about dowry to be taken seriously? Observation: in some culture, the bride's family pays dowry to the groom's family, while in others, it is a "bride-price" and is paid the other way, but still family-to-family. Who would actually pay the dowry/bride price, and to whom? And what about same-sex marriages?

* I have the same question for divorce as well. I understand the necessity for a way to break off an in-game marriage, but I don't think it should go beyond "we agree to end this thing", plus an option for "she has abandoned me and not logged in for three months, end of marriage". That is, the "married" state / link is removed from the characters (or accounts, see above) and that is absolutely all there is to it.

* How does it handle questions of same-sex versus opposite-sex marriage?

* What about inter-species marriage?

 

On "lore-compatibility":

* It's clear that humans and asura have a concept of marriage(1). What about norn? Charr? I would also say that it's reasonably clear that sylvari don't show any signs of such a thing. (Life-bond, for sure, but not marriage as such.)

* There are examples of same-sex relationships, notably but not exclusively among the sylvari. What about the other species? Does Tyria even *have* same-sex marriage?

* I see examples of very close friendships across Tyrian species boundaries, but I don't see anything beyond that.

 

Final question: what is wrong with leaving it in the realm of RP rather than an in-game mechanic?

 

(1) There are numerous references to husbands and wives among the humans, and I know of at least one married couple among the asura: Tonn and Ceera. For the norn and the charr, it is much less clear. The 20th / 21st century "nuclear family" is certainly alien to both norn and charr.

[Goettel.4389]

+100% agony for sure.

[Samnang.1879]

> @"Steve The Cynic.3217" said:

> * How would this work with the relatively weak boundary between characters on the same account in GW2? Does my account marry your account? (The friend system already works like that...)

 

your main marries the other person's main

 

> * Is the remark about dowry to be taken seriously? Observation: in some culture, the bride's family pays dowry to the groom's family, while in others, it is a "bride-price" and is paid the other way, but still family-to-family. Who would actually pay the dowry/bride price, and to whom? And what about same-sex marriages?

 

?? already said in opening post... the person who proposes pay the dowry to the proposee

 

> * I have the same question for divorce as well. I understand the necessity for a way to break off an in-game marriage, but I don't think it should go beyond "we agree to end this thing", plus an option for "she has abandoned me and not logged in for three months, end of marriage". That is, the "married" state / link is removed from the characters (or accounts, see above) and that is absolutely all there is to it.

 

what is the question?

 

> * How does it handle questions of same-sex versus opposite-sex marriage?

 

??? i don't understand this question. what is the diff between same sex and straight marriage?

 

> * What about inter-species marriage?

 

no difference.

 

> On "lore-compatibility":

> * It's clear that humans and asura have a concept of marriage(1). What about norn? Charr? I would also say that it's reasonably clear that sylvari don't show any signs of such a thing. (Life-bond, for sure, but not marriage as such.)

 

Well this is my charr's male wedding outfit... so i assume all races have a wedding ceremony...

 

![](https://i.imgur.com/Bhh6oxX.jpg"")

 

> * There are examples of same-sex relationships, notably but not exclusively among the sylvari. What about the other species? Does Tyria even *have* same-sex marriage?

> * I see examples of very close friendships across Tyrian species boundaries, but I don't see anything beyond that.

 

i see tyria as similar to sweden norway etc... very forward... it has a female Queen and Black commanders... so in a way it's 1000+ years ahead of current USA. so of course same-sex marriage is not an issue in Tyria. (infer)

 

> Final question: what is wrong with leaving it in the realm of RP rather than an in-game mechanic?

>

 

well firstly i don't RP... i don't see how having in-game marriage is RP-ing though? It's like having a guild... it doesn't mean you RP. and finally, i never seen an RPer in the game... but then again i dont read chats... like where are they? there are tons on this forum, but i never meet them in fractals or whatever

 

[lokh.2695]

Nope, I'm fine. Thanks for trying so hard.

[kharmin.7683]

> @"Samnang.1879" said:

 

>

> its just something nice to think about... the chance of anet making this is 0.000000000000000000001% and im not holding my breath. but i have to get it out of my chest... it's something i'd like to have. imagine you're on a mount exploring a random map and u randomly see a wedding ceremony... how cool would that be??

>

> and like couples can send out invitation, and get ppl to play music at their ceremony etc... share food buffs, play mini games.

>

Can't players already do these things? I think Danikat made some excellent suggestions which use current in-game resources. I would just leave it at that for those who want to do such things.

 

 

[Samnang.1879]

> @"kharmin.7683" said:

> > @"Samnang.1879" said:

>

> >

> > its just something nice to think about... the chance of anet making this is 0.000000000000000000001% and im not holding my breath. but i have to get it out of my chest... it's something i'd like to have. imagine you're on a mount exploring a random map and u randomly see a wedding ceremony... how cool would that be??

> >

> > and like couples can send out invitation, and get ppl to play music at their ceremony etc... share food buffs, play mini games.

> >

> Can't players already do these things? I think Danikat made some excellent suggestions which use current in-game resources. I would just leave it at that for those who want to do such things.

>

>

 

well the system i'm suggesting is not RP... but of course RPers would love this. but it's not the same. for one thing, in game marriage, it should be between close friends or real life couple who wants it... it's not about "pretending" or "role playing"... u shouldn't just get married to anybody u can find on the streets if u know what i mean. it should be with someone u can trust, hence the penalty for divorcing.

 

whereas RP u can RP with anybody on the streets... u dont need commitment or attachment... and theres no benefits from the game

[kharmin.7683]

> @"Samnang.1879" said:

> > @"kharmin.7683" said:

> > > @"Samnang.1879" said:

> >

> > >

> > > its just something nice to think about... the chance of anet making this is 0.000000000000000000001% and im not holding my breath. but i have to get it out of my chest... it's something i'd like to have. imagine you're on a mount exploring a random map and u randomly see a wedding ceremony... how cool would that be??

> > >

> > > and like couples can send out invitation, and get ppl to play music at their ceremony etc... share food buffs, play mini games.

> > >

> > Can't players already do these things? I think Danikat made some excellent suggestions which use current in-game resources. I would just leave it at that for those who want to do such things.

> >

> >

>

> well the system i'm suggesting is not RP... but of course RPers would love this. but it's not the same. for one thing, in game marriage, it should be between close friends or real life couple who wants it... it's not about "pretending" or "role playing"... u shouldn't just get married to anybody u can find on the streets if u know what i mean. it should be with someone u can trust, hence the penalty for divorcing.

 

If it's not for RP, then it seems you are only advocating this for the bonuses.

[artemis.6781]

> @"kharmin.7683" said:

> > @"Samnang.1879" said:

> > > @"kharmin.7683" said:

> > > > @"Samnang.1879" said:

> > >

> > > >

> > > > its just something nice to think about... the chance of anet making this is 0.000000000000000000001% and im not holding my breath. but i have to get it out of my chest... it's something i'd like to have. imagine you're on a mount exploring a random map and u randomly see a wedding ceremony... how cool would that be??

> > > >

> > > > and like couples can send out invitation, and get ppl to play music at their ceremony etc... share food buffs, play mini games.

> > > >

> > > Can't players already do these things? I think Danikat made some excellent suggestions which use current in-game resources. I would just leave it at that for those who want to do such things.

> > >

> > >

> >

> > well the system i'm suggesting is not RP... but of course RPers would love this. but it's not the same. for one thing, in game marriage, it should be between close friends or real life couple who wants it... it's not about "pretending" or "role playing"... u shouldn't just get married to anybody u can find on the streets if u know what i mean. it should be with someone u can trust, hence the penalty for divorcing.

>

> If it's not for RP, then it seems you are only advocating this for the bonuses.

 

Bingo! I'll just marry my alt acct for the bonuses.

[Samnang.1879]

> @"kharmin.7683" said:

> > @"Samnang.1879" said:

> > > @"kharmin.7683" said:

> > > > @"Samnang.1879" said:

> > >

> > > >

> > > > its just something nice to think about... the chance of anet making this is 0.000000000000000000001% and im not holding my breath. but i have to get it out of my chest... it's something i'd like to have. imagine you're on a mount exploring a random map and u randomly see a wedding ceremony... how cool would that be??

> > > >

> > > > and like couples can send out invitation, and get ppl to play music at their ceremony etc... share food buffs, play mini games.

> > > >

> > > Can't players already do these things? I think Danikat made some excellent suggestions which use current in-game resources. I would just leave it at that for those who want to do such things.

> > >

> > >

> >

> > well the system i'm suggesting is not RP... but of course RPers would love this. but it's not the same. for one thing, in game marriage, it should be between close friends or real life couple who wants it... it's not about "pretending" or "role playing"... u shouldn't just get married to anybody u can find on the streets if u know what i mean. it should be with someone u can trust, hence the penalty for divorcing.

>

> If it's not for RP, then it seems you are only advocating this for the bonuses.

 

keep in mind, that both married players and unmarried players get bonuses... so u dont have to force urself to get married...

 

it's why i find it absurd when ppl say i should go play 2nd life... i dont want to role play marriage... like if i find a player who i like, then i want to marry that person in the game. i also want to get invited to weddings by friends/guildmates who are a couple in real life, it would be so much fun.

 

[Steve The Cynic.3217]

> @"Samnang.1879" said:

> > @"Steve The Cynic.3217" said:

> > * How would this work with the relatively weak boundary between characters on the same account in GW2? Does my account marry your account? (The friend system already works like that...)

>

> your main marries the other person's main

 

I don't have a "main" character. I have "the character I'm concentrating on now", but that changes often enough that none of them could be called a "main".

 

> > * Is the remark about dowry to be taken seriously? Observation: in some culture, the bride's family pays dowry to the groom's family, while in others, it is a "bride-price" and is paid the other way, but still family-to-family. Who would actually pay the dowry/bride price, and to whom? And what about same-sex marriages?

>

> ?? already said in opening post... the person who proposes pay the dowry to the proposee

 

I don't think that's a good idea, unless the fee is minimal and the amount is dictated by the game. What purpose would it serve?

 

> > * I have the same question for divorce as well. I understand the necessity for a way to break off an in-game marriage, but I don't think it should go beyond "we agree to end this thing", plus an option for "she has abandoned me and not logged in for three months, end of marriage". That is, the "married" state / link is removed from the characters (or accounts, see above) and that is absolutely all there is to it.

>

> what is the question?

 

"Is the remark about divorce to be taken seriously?" Not the question of there *being* a divorce mechanism (there should be), but the money thing.

 

> > * How does it handle questions of same-sex versus opposite-sex marriage?

>

> ??? i don't understand this question. what is the diff between same sex and straight marriage?

 

Earthly history suggests that while there's no practical difference (outside some mechanical things about children), there's a great deal of "acceptance" difference. And I was thinking more of whether you see it as something the game would allow.

 

> > * What about inter-species marriage?

>

> no difference.

>

> > On "lore-compatibility":

> > * It's clear that humans and asura have a concept of marriage(1). What about norn? Charr? I would also say that it's reasonably clear that sylvari don't show any signs of such a thing. (Life-bond, for sure, but not marriage as such.)

>

> Well this is my charr's male wedding outfit... so i assume all races have a wedding ceremony...

 

Assuming things isn't always a good idea. They had to make the outfit look like *something* when worn by a charr, but that doesn't mean that *in the lore* the charr marry.

 

> > * There are examples of same-sex relationships, notably but not exclusively among the sylvari. What about the other species? Does Tyria even *have* same-sex marriage?

> > * I see examples of very close friendships across Tyrian species boundaries, but I don't see anything beyond that.

>

> i see tyria as similar to sweden norway etc... very forward... it has a female Queen and Black commanders... so in a way it's 1000+ years ahead of current USA. so of course same-sex marriage is not an issue in Tyria. (infer)

 

All queens are female, by definition. England has had both kings and queens across the centuries, and some of those queens were pretty close to being tyrants, so "It has a queen" doesn't mean anything about a place being "forward". I'd also suggest that the black commanders thing is mostly a reflection of there being more important differences than skin colour to worry about, and that the historical drives for our world's treatment of blacks (and others) do not exist in Tyria.

 

> > Final question: what is wrong with leaving it in the realm of RP rather than an in-game mechanic?

> >

>

> well firstly i don't RP... i don't see how having in-game marriage is RP-ing though? It's like having a guild... it doesn't mean you RP. and finally, i never seen an RPer in the game... but then again i dont read chats... like where are they? there are tons on this forum, but i never meet them in fractals or whatever

 

OK, perhaps a poor choice of wording on my part. What I meant was why not leave character-to-character marriage as a playing-a-role thing between the players? Let them create their own ceremonies and act them out, without the game's designers getting involved. (And yes, that's a form of RP, in that you are using the game's mechanisms and environments to tell your own stories.)

 

And yes, there *are* RPers in this game. No, of course you don't find them RPing in fractals. You find them in the big cities, especially DR. You go looking for chairs to sit in for the chair-sitting achievement, and you find that all of the chairs in 90% of the pubs in DR are full of RPers just sitting, or talking about stuff as if they are really there in the game's world. I've also seen them in the inn in Shaemoor, and walking around that part of Queensdale, and other places. (And by "walking", I mean actually walking when not accompanying the cargo bull to Claypool.)

 

Conclusion: I wouldn't say that I *oppose* this suggestion as such, but I would say that there are probably more valuable things they could spend development time and resources on. That is, things that would, relative to the cost of development, add more to the game.

[Brother.1504]

Appreciate the enthusiasm. Instead of an expansion RP marriage feature, why not just add something to the Valentine’s Day event? Less Dev resources and the RP community still gets their wedding cake.

[Samnang.1879]

> @"Steve The Cynic.3217" said:

> I don't have a "main" character. I have "the character I'm concentrating on now", but that changes often enough that none of them could be called a "main".

 

me neither, i used to have an engineer main before Hot was released... but now i love all classes. but i consider my engi a main cuz it has 100% map and story completion... so u just have to pick a main based on what u find important

 

> I don't think that's a good idea, unless the fee is minimal and the amount is dictated by the game. What purpose would it serve?

 

it can be anything from 1copper to chak egg sac depending on how much u love the person and want to impress them

 

> "Is the remark about divorce to be taken seriously?" Not the question of there *being* a divorce mechanism (there should be), but the money thing.

 

why wouldn't it be serious? it's a ying yang... for there to be white, there must be black, for there to be hot, there must be cold, marriage needs divorce... nobody can foresee the future.

 

> Earthly history suggests that while there's no practical difference (outside some mechanical things about children), there's a great deal of "acceptance" difference. And I was thinking more of whether you see it as something the game would allow.

 

of course... the game doesn't focus on social justice/injustice issues.

 

> Assuming things isn't always a good idea. They had to make the outfit look like *something* when worn by a charr, but that doesn't mean that *in the lore* the charr marry.

 

i dont understand... i played the charr storyline, and i had a father...?

 

> All queens are female, by definition. England has had both kings and queens across the centuries, and some of those queens were pretty close to being tyrants, so "It has a queen" doesn't mean anything about a place being "forward". I'd also suggest that the black commanders thing is mostly a reflection of there being more important differences than skin colour to worry about, and that the historical drives for our world's treatment of blacks (and others) do not exist in Tyria.

 

yeah i meant female RULER

if there are no inequality issues, why is same-sex an issue...?

 

 

 

[RoseofGilead.8907]

> @"Samnang.1879" said:

> > Assuming things isn't always a good idea. They had to make the outfit look like *something* when worn by a charr, but that doesn't mean that *in the lore* the charr marry.

>

> i dont understand... i played the charr storyline, and i had a father...?

>

 

Doesn't mean the father was married to the mother. Personally, I think Charr likely do have some sort of ceremony where two Charr choose to become partners and all that, though.

[GrubySzymek.1362]

> @"Samnang.1879" said:

> > @"Kheldorn.5123" said:

> > > @"Samnang.1879" said:

> > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said:

> > > > It will use dev resources that could be used on build temp... yeah right... on anything else. So yes, it will affect everyone in a long run and will be a huge waste of time.

> > >

> > > ?? i don't understand this kind of sentiment. yes it will take resources, but given how many ppl are into in-game marriage

> >

> > How many exactly?

>

> 53+

>

> Proof:

>

> [https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/13787/if-in-game-marriage-is-introduced-do-u-have-anybody-in-mind/p1](https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/13787/if-in-game-marriage-is-introduced-do-u-have-anybody-in-mind/p1 "https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/13787/if-in-game-marriage-is-introduced-do-u-have-anybody-in-mind/p1")

 

If I was running the company, I wouldn't bother making such feature for 60 people.

[TheOrlyFactor.8341]

> @"Babylonn.5027" said:

> No, just no. That is most ridiculous and stupid idea i have read in while.

 

+1 for no.