TSR Sharing your infomation!

[Missbonbon]

I also want screenies, tomato you nutbag you 

I want to see the Thomas slime, will it come out of my monitor all gross like?
*takes out camera*

Like the ring? That movie wasn't scary, but the girl coming out of the TV kinda freaked me out a bit. Or was that one of the scary movie's I'm thinking of?

[giggy]

I also want screenies, tomato you nutbag you 

I want to see the Thomas slime, will it come out of my monitor all gross like?
*takes out camera*

Like the ring? That movie wasn't scary, but the girl coming out of the TV kinda freaked me out a bit. Or was that one of the scary movie's I'm thinking of?

does she tilt her head or not?

[iamawake]

I also want screenies, tomato you nutbag you 

I want to see the Thomas slime, will it come out of my monitor all gross like?
*takes out camera*

Like the ring? That movie wasn't scary, but the girl coming out of the TV kinda freaked me out a bit. Or was that one of the scary movie's I'm thinking of?

Yup, that was The Ring. Try watching the original version. If visual thrills are your thing you might think you didn't get your money's worth but the last 10 minutes make up for it. Still, I think the original's general atmosphere is what made it truly scary, the kind of movie that stays with you for days after you watched it.

[/topic derailment]

[Paleoanth]

Coconut has updated! Reading it right now:

http://coconut-tsr.livejournal.com/

[fway]

Call me crazy, but I DO think I know who this coconut person is, after reading the first post, but I'm not saying anything at all. My lips are sealed. All of this information is coming together for me. Although, I shouldn't be trying to figure out who it is, I know that their information is valuable.

[ooglafina]

What gave them the idea that the EULA changed? Were they hoping nobody would notice that it was the same and take their word for it because the mighty Thomas says it's different?

[Paleoanth]

What gave them the idea that the EULA changed? Were they hoping nobody would notice that it was the same and take their word for it because the mighty Thomas says it's different?

From earlier in this thread:

They claimed the new EULA wasnt ready in time to get it into BV but that it would be in all new EP's.  It never was.  It was posted on the main site in regards to the Content Manager and many assumed, falsely, that it was a universal New EULA!  They were wrong. 

There was truth in T$Rs claim over the new EULA (the new flavor was drafted after T$R came over to EA where they met a couple of EA top-honchos and agreed it), and the so-called Content Manager EULA was supposed to be put into all ep's (tho too late for BV).  But it vaporized into nothing.  EA either never bothered with communicating the EULA to the Maxoids, or they changed their equally-grabbing minds. 

Considering that the current EULA is a newer version than the Content Manager EULA and part of the changes included even stronger "noncommercial" statements, I find this hard to believe. Where exactly did you get this information? From Thomass?

Some Maxoids talked about it on the BBS, iirc. I know there was a discussion about it here.

Do you know what they said? Is the thread still there? I try to avoid the BBS... All those sheeple in one place gives me allergies.

The idea was that EA would be removing "non-commercial" from its EULA. Paysites were all disgustingly smug about it, while people here were a bit worried. One could probably find more information about what happened by searching PMBD, though that sounds like something of a pain, which is why I'm not doing it . (I've had enough of searching for stuff on JSTOR to tire out my search muscles for a while.)

As we can see, instead of giving paysites what they wanted, EA chose to actually make the smart business decision for once and pretend they cared about protecting their copyright.

As far as what I thought, The content manager EULA did have non-commercial taken out and I was assured that this was the new EULA.  It did seem that this was going to happen, as TSR always seemed to have a special relationship with EA/Maxis.  I am not the only one that thought the EULA was changing/had changed. 

[calalily]

Ha - you all beat me to coconut's update. Very interesting - all that speculation about who it is - both in the FA forum and on your journal tomato.

Creating in a vaccuum is tough, even with a fairly high self-image.  Sometimes a comment or a simple thank you was enough if I was having a bad day. 

This, I agree with. Creating is fine - I would probably still do a bit of it personally because it's relaxing. But uploading it into the abyss with no feedback is the worst. It can become demoralising - I mean if it's a whole lot of extra work on top of creating (because the creating gives you a feeling of achievement, plus playthings for your own game) for what is essentially no reason, then you start to wonder if you should bother at all.  A simple comment can mean a lot when it comes to doing the site stuff - I wouldn't be uploading my site at all but for a user sessiepook who left me a very nice message on what I thought would be my last upload.

Since my downloading is fairly selective now (so I don't rebuild the hoarde) I say thank you every single time.

[ooglafina]

What exactly does that mean by taking non-commercial out of the EULA? It still violates copyright law doesn't it?

[SoggyFox]

I personally think that if I were Coconut I'd go punch AudreyMay in the nose for accusing him or her of being Atwat.  Also, I think that most users ought to know they are considered sheep by the oh so friendly TSR folks, ripe for fleecing, but that's just me.  Yes, I use the term sheeple, but I always hope one day they will wake up and realize they are being taken advantage of, instead of trying to keep them a sheep forever.

And I don't know what in the hell EAxis is doing, condoning a site like TSR, when its not just -their- copyright on the line.  TSR violates all sorts of copyrights and trademarks and make money from it.

[missangelica]

MTS2 is cliqueish, they approve anything from people that belongs to their clique and reject from people who don´t belong to their clique, no matter the quality and no matter if are pay itens in the screenshots. If you post questions at the support area they will copy and paste their rules page and lock the thread. Been there, done that and got 4 threads locked and HP telling me to shuddup.

Since MTS2 is a free site - despite the fact that not-so-retired Delphy is always asking for donations, what put me in doubt if we really could consider completely free because a lot of people donate but the site is 50% of the time offline and have a slow slow traffic - I am not going to extend myself too much but I think these points should be considerated specially for those who donate to the site. I donated once myself but I will never made this mistake again, in fact I removed all my stuff from MTS2 because I don´t like what I see going on there.

I´m done.

There's so much bullshit in your post that I hardly know where to begin.

1)  People need to not put payshit in their screenshots in the first place!  This is not a new rule.  The mods don't have time to hold your hand through everything and shouldn't have to.  They're volunteers and don't get paid to put up with all that they do.  They also shouldn't be expected to know what all the payshit looks like.

In regards to 1, what dani is saying is that some paystuff in photos does get through, and there are still photos around the site with paystuff in them, especially with some popular creators.  It gets frustrating for someone who has half a vase in a picture that shouldn't be when there still pictures with paystuff prominently displayed, or they run into roadblocks over some stuff that has been free for a while.  I've seen pics well after the new rule with paystuff in it, and it was usually a talented creator.  And there are a lot of issues people have with MTS2, but I won't really go into it here, because we're pro-free and we don't talk about the quality of free stuff.  I do know why Dani gets angry about MTS2 like she does.

The rule has its problems and isn't as enforced as well as it could be, but it isn't my or your problem.  Why be upset about it?  Letting yourself get angry over a free website reeks of 12ness to me.

I have issues with MtS2 too, but at the end of the day, it's Delphy's site.  He chooses to do things differently than I would and that's okay.  I don't always agree with what Pescado and Nouk/Jessica decide to do either.  It's just the way it goes.

[Anouk]

Agree with the evil Jessica/Nouk mutation or die.

[HugeLunatic]

It concerns me that only Cadiva's first post contains the year.  The following posts from today do not.  And all the previous ones contained the year.  Also curious as to what is in posts 6-14.

[daniyagami]

This particular piece of information at Coconut´s update is priceless:
Cadiva says: "The probem with that Auds, is that what they are saying IS true."
I also loved how some of them think that Coconut could be Anita trying to get attention.

[SamanthaS]

It concerns me that only Cadiva's first post contains the year.  The following posts from today do not.  And all the previous ones contained the year.  Also curious as to what is in posts 6-14.

And posts 425-453 in the information sharing thread are missing as well which I found kinda odd.