My first thought was "it looks like an octopus."  Now that I'm looking at it more closely, maybe not, but it's hideous, whatever it is.  The size of that head is absurd.

It's pretty sad when an ancient mesh (I remember having that mesh by Guppy in my game in, what, 2005?) actually looks better than the fug Peggy is putting out for free these days.

I know what coconut said, but it still seems strange to me that Thomass would link to the booty and coconut's blog.  I can see Thomass doing something like pretending someone is hacking T$R so he can blame it on the pirates, but why would he promote the booty and coconut's blog?  It's easy to put a bunch of swear words and hints about pirates up without directly linking people, and it would have had the same result without actually giving a direct link the booty/coconut.  It's all speculation, I guess, but it doesn't sound like something Thomass would do.

On another note, t's taken me ages to catch up on coconut's blog, since I haven't had much time for the internet lately, and I was almost speechless when I finished the last several updates last night.  Even if paysites weren't illegal, T$R would still deserve to be destroyed, for being reprehensible in every way possible.

I think DOT's "shape" picture is one of the original mesh (the others are the recolors).  How she hasn't learned to call it a mesh as opposed to a shape after all this time in the community, I don't know.

I'm guessing something was lost in translation here--what the heck is "I expect" supposed to mean?

Kelly Clarkson?  Are you kidding me?  I never would have guessed that in a million years.   As far as likeness goes, that's probably the worst celebrity sim I've ever seen.  Even Chaz and Jirka's usual photoskinned fug generally have a tiny bit of resemblance to the actual person.

Does anyone else think that any super special creating tool EA could give to T$R would likely be worse than a player-created one?  It could give T$R a lead in the beginning, but I doubt it would last long--the free community has the best modders, coders, and creators, and I bet it'd soon catch up.  Isn't it the free community that fixes EA's glitchy game?  I can't imagine TS2 in the hands of T$R alone.

What ad service can Thomass be using if he "accidentally" gets ads for dating services on his family friendly site?  I go to sites that aren't considered family friendly, and I've never seen a gay dating service ad anywhere on them.  The loads of people reporting them makes it obvious that it wasn't just one "oops."

TSR's horrible layout and useless search function are why I never downloaded anything from TSR back when I had no idea about the paysite debate, so I've always been somewhat thankful for it.  This new one isn't much better--the old one was busy, and this one is even more confusing.  It hurts my head a little.

But I too giggled at the WTF expression on that sim's face.    That's certainly an improvement.

It's Evucci.  Get it?  Evi + Gucci = Evucci. She's a clever one, that Evi.

I never understand why Evi photoshops her pictures to hell.  It's not like it's hard to get a simple preview picture in-game without having to edit anything.  That gray stuff looks like what was the background before she decided to paste in the red velvet (the fuck?)--it's visible behind the girls' heads as well, especially the second one.  The cats don't make any sense either.  I hate to say it, but the photoshop is fifty times worse than the clothes, which are ugly enough as is.

It does look like the third one is trying to sniff bubble soap.  I had a friend who did that when I was in elementary school (she wasn't exactly the brightest person I've ever met), and all she got was a headache.  So she went back to sniffing glue and permanent markers.  C'mon, Evi, at least advocate the good stuff.

Yep, Google tells me that it is.  It's on Cardrew's Palatial Heights site, next to the TS2 version.

WTF is that?  I know a lot of that stuff is old, but why would someone pay for uglified Maxis sims, even when the game first came out and most CC was bad?  It's not exactly hard to do that yourself.

I'd never seen that site before, and I was probably better off not seeing it.   It's a goldmine of fug.

Courtesy of Peggy:


When I first saw this, I thought it was made out of a rotting, squished banana.  Now I'm not so sure.   Apparently it's a lamp.

I've been wondering for a while: what is that winged orange thing?  Is it really a flying orange? And if it is, why would someone make a cartoon of a flying orange?  I'm perplexed.

What do you mean, Photoshop?  Those pictures look totally real!

Here's a teen outfit every parent would like to see his or her child wear.

My opinion doesn't count for much (I wasn't exactly a prolific poster at InSIM), but I think the organization of the forum matters more than the software.  vB may be the shiny, expensive software that a lot of people are used to using, but it's still a nightmare if it's organized as badly as Kathy and Eric had it organized.  If Pescado and/or Delphy can use SMF and make the new InSIM easier to use (easier to find downloads, etc), then paying a lot for vBulletin seems like a waste to me.

Blech at LDG.  She says she doesn't want to get involved in community politics, and yet allowing her content to become pay isn't neutral--it's completely pro-paysite.  She just stuck herself right in the middle of it all.

And bringing in the whole "everything happens for a reason" crap into it?  Give me a break.  This isn't some great philosophical debate.  It's simple: selling content=illegal.  That's all there is to it.