You're welcome.  True, that's a good possibility... and I originally was thinking so until I saw the positioning of parts of the UV maps.  Unfortunately, there's really no true way to be sure if she/"qingming" did or not unless we see how the original poser mesh itself was done UV-wise.  Either way, like Sherry and gayle mentioned, it's against Poser's TOU, modified or not. 

This post is probably full of useless info, but I just thought some people would like to have physical evidence on the similarities between those too meshes in general.

So I poked around a bit with a few things, and downloaded one of Rose's free meshes that has the feet on them.  (the one with the stockings and red/purple/etc. nightgowns here, and the male mesh with the purple shirt on pg 19...  )  Apparently, I also ran across a "thanks" text file in the male file, though it's not the thanks we might be expecting.  (as copied:  "Thank qingming for the foot.") So if those feet on that particular mesh are what she's also using on the pay files, I'd have to say they're definitely similar to BlooM's, and most-likely edited to make them look like they're different.  The reason I say this...

 

When you enlarge the pictures, you'll see Rose's "borrowed" foot on the left and BlooM's conversion on the right.  Notice the extreme difference in the amount of details, but the same shapes that both have.  Whoever "qingming" is, they could've easily used any sort of poly reducer in a meshing program to make it look like that, just like it can be done in Blender:

   

I just left the default settings for that program's poly reducer, and surprise-surprise, it almost looks like we have a rip-off.  Now all that needs to be done is to fiddle around with the UV maps a bit.



The left UV is Rose's, the middle is BlooM's, and the right is both overlapped.  If these were two completely different feet conversions, wouldn't the UV's for the toes and the top of the feet not line up, seeing as the original poser mesh probably had a much different positioning than both?  Clearly those highlighted areas are spot on if you look at the UVs in any 3D meshing program.

I'm pretty much ready to call foul on this one.   

   I had went ahead and PM'ed him a little while ago still... but glad you did that anyways.  I sure wouldn't feel right if he didn't know this was happening or not. 

I checked around also... looks like his policy sticky has gone AWOL since he got his own section, but I do remember him having a link directly to it in his signature sometime before the changes. 

I guess it's best to ask him directly about it now.  So yeah, Paden, you should drop him the line if you haven't already.   (didn't get a chance to PM him earlier about it because I had to leave shortly after I posted here... but I'm probably going to end up doing so now either way)  I'm pretty sure he won't be too happy about that fact, either, especially considering all of the hard work he's done in the community.  I know I wouldn't be. 

Seeing as Rose's lengths to make money no longer surprises me, I do have to add one thing that raises questions... it also looks like she's selling meshes with BlooM's sexy feet added on with no credits from what I can see.  Not sure about his policy on those meshes and pay sites using them, but I do know he did ask for credit on any parts of his work used at one point.  I'd say that's a cheap move of piggy-backing on her part if those are indeed the feet meshes he made.   

It's still coming up for me, Titan.  Cleared my cache and everything, so it's still up.   

ETA:  I see it's working for you, too. 

Devilfish already mentioned that, Bad_Kitty, just a page or so back.   

I think I remember seeing this site when it was first starting to come up a few months back.  It broke my browser, first of all, and when the site did finally decide to work, there was no possible way to even navigate around, much less download anything from there.  At least we all know the reason why now.  Obviously she meant to sell everything previewed on that site in the first place (which is free on TSR for the time being from what I'm hearing).  Can't say it's unbelievable for someone to do that, because it's too commonplace now days.  I just hope the issue of "borrowed" content on that site gets settled, one way or another.

I usually try my best not to say any bad stuff about other people's custom content, but I'm confused by what Sunair apparently has created there.  What is that anyways?  A set decorative boxes?  Trash can?  It most certainly can't be a toilet.   

... I'm deeply offended by what's on that page now, and at whomever the racist pig is that had the nerve to sabotage it.  If anything, I hope they find them for sure.  (even though sadly, there's not much they can do to justify it.  The damage has been done, and I'm sure the person who did it is too satisfied with their "handiwork" to care if they get caught or not.) 

I didn't know Sparkle, but having lurked around here a long time, whenever I saw her posts they made her seem like the fun sort to have conversation with.  Sad that this racist attack had to happen to her.  And sadly, she's not alone when it comes to stuff of this nature.  This is one that's public, but certainly not the only one.  A lot of things of this nature have been happening behind the scenes with other simmers, too.   

*raises hand*

I'm also there and added you, Paleoanth.  Same name, more underscores: _light_angel_

Thomas' arrogant response truly sickens me.  Karma will have its way with him eventually... 

   Now that you bring that last part up, I have to wonder how many as well.  

It's too true that they screwed over a lot of people with SecuRom and have already alienated a vast amount of people due to their ignorance over the issue.  But since they're in denial that SecuRom isn't doing people that much harm and is the "lesser evil", I still say they're too scared to do take a firm position in it now, even with the smaller amount of people involved.  They just don't want to loose their "sheep" that seemingly have more money than others.  Instead, they take another route around the whole paysite v. free site issue and start selling their own content, sending some mixed signals to the consumer base once again.  On one hand, some people believe that the bold move EA pulled in making the Sims 2 Store was a sign that they support what paysites are doing and like the idea so much that they had to try it out for themselves.  On the other hand, some could see it as EA deciding that they're sick of seeing paysites steal their profits and want to send a sign of what's to come in the future of the Sims franchise concerning distribution of custom content.  Both sides can't really tell for sure what the higher-ups at EA are thinking but we all know the greater view of it.  Over all, like you and dani said above, pure greed in the works on either version that you look at.  No matter what the case, they just wantz our moniez.  

Meh, that's just part of how I see it.  I used to wish they'd give everyone a clear signal on where they stand, but now days I don't really care as much... they've screwed up enough for me to stop buying anything from them, so whatever happens from here on out concerning their bad business sense isn't going to draw one bit of sympathy from me.


As for Paleo's PMs:  I caught those last night, and I'm glad I read them when I did.  It wasn't even two minutes later after I closed out the browser that everything was gone.  Sucks about your LJ being suspended that quickly, though I'm glad you'll get around to reposting the info.  It's a little awkward seeing how obsessive you-know-who was about this place, and how low she was willing to stoop just to try and make others just as miserable as she is.  Sure signs of what happens when a game goes far beyond the borders of imagination and reality...    

They don't want to try.... they'd be alienating one part of their customer base, and they'd loose money if they ever decided to get a backbone and start taking sides.

I find their "letter" to Mediafire quite ludicrous, especially since the terms of use they linked to is actually the EA Online Privacy Policy/TOU.  (Which has since been updated since August of this year... like it'd really matter either way.  It's a difference between an the actual site ToU and the actual game EULA.)

What they said EA stated:


What EA (*Online*) says concerning that exact passage now, as of August 22nd, 2008:


Unless they can prove they're an official third party liscensor, even their little back-up "loophole" has phailed them.  Go team!

Wow... in all honesty, reading the majority of the drama-inducing "super secret personal info swapping" thread made me feel a little ill.  I'm not as surprised about it, since I've read the accusations last year about it, but to see the hard proof and the people who took thrill in the bannings and posting of people's info over lousy pixels being shared (even with proper credits, and no matter how little the info is shared)  is just purely repulsive.  No wonder some other gaming communities see the Sims 2 online community as a joke.  We have so many nuts around that take the whole experience,  try to make it more of a hierarchy of fools who think they have the God-given right to sell virtual content for a game they never participated in making, and (attempt to) silence all who don't agree with them.  I'm probably going to blow my thinly-veiled cover for saying this, as I do say this a lot of the time when things about the Sims get to serious, but these people really need to get off of their high horses... The Sims 2 is just a friggin' game!  They should have more to worry about than people sharing game content files that they believe should be "purchased"... but then again, as a true testament to what I've followed up in the comical and intriguing "Atwat" saga and others like it, I must be expecting a little too much from these people, right?  Anytime they think that posting someone's full name and e-mail equates to making up for their content being shared with everyone else, there's a definite logic problem...

Of course, I'm not saying anything new.  It's just something I'll never get about people like those at TSR and other paysites with the same mentality.  They just enjoy making a game more exclusive and petty than what it's supposed to be, and as much as I love the Sims, the line has to be drawn somewhere. Unfortunately, people like Tom and his crew will keep on, never admitting that they're wrong for pulling this sort of crap, and will always point the blaming finger in the other direction.  Greed never ceases to amaze me.   

I've always thought the same thing about that issue,Tsarina.  Unfortunately, common sense is not everyone's forté.  Even if they do read it twice, they'll probably keep at it anyways and think they'll slip under the radar.