Yeah, I understand that. I hope the changes help you out! And I'm looking forward to seeing the new stuff you do too :)

I shouldn't but I will keep an eye out for ocs for sale

Adoptables as a concept always confused me, so allow me to ask: why not put these old OCs in the public domain? Do you also need the money? Are you afraid no one would use them if they're in the public domain because they didn't sacrifice anything for them? IDK, I just kind of fight it weird.

A) Yes, because I also need money. There is a lot of time, money, and effort put into art. Adopts can be a form of income.
B) Honestly, not at all interested in the idea of public domain. Not just for the reason above, but because of the personal connection to characters.
I'd rather not having just anybody doing whatever they want to with these characters. Hence why I'd prefer they go to trustworthy ownership.
The idea of character ownership is not just so they get art or attention, it's to have creative control of who the character is and what they do.
Hence, why adopts exist.

B doesn't align with my personal beliefs, but I guess I understand.

From what I've seen, it most often has to do with practices for the potential/intended future of the relevant work.
It's kind of an example of something that, when treated a particular way, results in a particular perception. Characters created and put out for public access tend to be in the form of an "open species".
An "adopt" is generally a character that is intended to be under the sole ownership of a single individual at a time. If a character is set as essentially public property, it can no longer be a particular person's character. Because of this, any work that is even somewhat intended to be a single-owner thing Must remain under the ownership of a single person at all times, regardless of whether the work is being actively used.

When something like a character is made with the intention of being public-use, people will generally make "use" of the character relative to their own interests ~ customizing, adjusting, and generally making it better for what they want. This results in many different but similar variants of the original artwork. Due to the context of what generally falls into the category of "furry art", this tends to play out in the form of an "open species".

Overall, Character Adopts and related things are essentially a form of security and/or future proofing for the receiver and any subsequent receivers of the character. That, and of course a means of compensating the initial artist for the time spent on the work.
It is actually rather similar in purpose to a car title ~ albeit A LOT smaller in scale.

Well when you buy a dog you don't give it to anyone, OCs are mostly the same it's where the "adopt" concept come from, ok they are not living creatures but we have mostly the same feeling toward them, and putting an OC you love in public means that you might found it in kinks you absolutly don't want the character to be into and this would be very heart breaking. Maybe for you characters are just tools but for lot of peoples they are way more.

I mean, I wouldn't say I consider them "tools" per se, but as someone who's always been interested in the public domain and fandom stuff (including Undertale AU stuff), I personally don't see much of A problem with there being multiple interpretations of "the same character". I can definitely understand why someone who put so much thought and effort into designing and flushing out a character would be invested in making sure the character does adrift into unintended directions, even though that's not where my personal values lie.