TSR Sharing your infomation!

[Solander]

I really don't want to say "Two wrongs don't make a right," but sorry, Solander, it's coming across like you're more in sympathy to TSR than to us. 

Concerning sharing the pictures of his house, you are absolutely right. In this specific case, my sympathy is definetely on the side of TSR. Concerning other topics like sharing private data between pay sites, my sympathy is definately on your side, as this is absolutely inacceptable. Whatever motivation lies behind it, you can't share private data at your own discretion.

[Anouk]

Is this just a case of 'you're doing it too!', or what? Because if it is, there's at least 3 or 4 people explaning how this is comparing apples to oranges.

[Paleoanth]

Concerning sharing the pictures of his house, you are absolutely right. In this specific case, my sympathy is definetely on the side of TSR.

Actually, if someone here did post the actual address, phone number or personal email addy of Thomas, I would be on his side too, for that one thing.  If someone hacked into TSR, I would be on TSR's side in that particular instance. So, I do understand your position, I just don't agree that the house pics cross that line.

[Solander]

Is this just a case of 'you're doing it too!', or what?

No, definetely not. I just wanted to note that i don't agree with the publishing of those pictures. I did say with not a single word "now you are like TSR" or something like this. I just intended to say that one should always stop for a second and consider, wether it is ok or not to publish something. If you come to the result, that this is perfectly ok for you, well, do it. And i did not condemn anyone for publishing the pictures. I just did say, that in MY opinion, this is not ok. And i did not claim my point of view to be the only right one.

[Devilfish]

Concerning sharing the pictures of his house, you are absolutely right. In this specific case, my sympathy is definetely on the side of TSR. Concerning other topics like sharing private data between pay sites, my sympathy is definately on your side, as this is absolutely inacceptable. Whatever motivation lies behind it, you can't share private data at your own discretion

You need to SERIOUSLY reconcider your defenition of private data. Because, well...

My new car.

Are all these people in danger of being gangraped by phishing bots or something? If I point to one of those pictures and say, "Look, that's the type of car I'd like", would I be morally wrong? Has Google turned to the devil and started distributing private data on an epic scale?

No. Just no. This is where I draw the line. A picture of a house is NOT private data. Hell, it's barely even data at all.

And I'm bugged by the fact that all this is coming from a guy with a picture saying "This is me" as his avie as well.

[SoggyFox]

I respect your opinions, Solander, especially since they are well stated, but I do disagree.

Case in point.  Let's say there was a scandal involving JR from EA [ not that there is one to my knowledge ].  It turns out he's embezzling millions of dollars and using that money for a castle in europe, instead of the money going into development of games, like it ought to be.  [Again, this is entirely hypothetical.]  Would it be right to post pictures of what he's really spending the money on in a newspaper article to expose the scandal?  I think it would be.

This is no different.  Thomass is running a company, at least he's the front man.  He's spending money that -most- people think is going towards server costs on a -second- house.  Hell, there are still people out there who don't know FAs get paid.  TSR is a business.  Anything that is business related is fair game, if the company is being mis-run - at least to my mind.

And again, its not like we're sharing his personal information, his address, his wife's name, his phone number, the names of his horses, etc.

Besides, the SOB is preying on children who probably don't have a lot of money, certainly not enough for two houses, horses and other luxuries.

[Paleoanth]

Actually, how about Google, who posts pictures and addresses of people unbeknownst to them?  I can find my brother's house, look at his neighborhood, get his address and everything.  He did not post that picture anywhere.  Google took their stupid cameras out and did it. 

[Solander]

You need to SERIOUSLY reconcider your defenition of private data. Because, well...

My new car.

Are all these people in danger of being gangraped by phishing bots or something? If I point to one of those pictures and say, "Look, that's the type of car I'd like", would I be morally wrong? Has Google turned to the devil and started distributing private data on an epic scale?

No. Just no. This is where I draw the line. A picture of a house is NOT private data. Hell, it's barely even data at all.

And I'm bugged by the fact that all this is coming from a guy with a picture saying "This is me" as his avie as well.

As i did post somewhere above, all information available on the net about me, including the picture, is information which I did choose to publish and to be available for everyone. Anything else would not be ok for me to be published by anyone.

I did note that your guys definition of private data completely differs from mine, but this does not mean i have to change my definition, as less as i do press you to change yours.

Actually, how about Google, who posts pictures and addresses of people unbeknownst to them?  I can find my brother's house, look at his neighborhood, get his address and everything.  He did not post that picture anywhere.  Google took their stupid cameras out and did it. 

That's a pretty good example. In my eyes, it's not ok to make pictures of my house and publish them on the net without my approval. They just do it and as they are powerful enough, they won't have to fear much oposition, but that does definetely match my "published something private" definition.

[Devilfish]

Solander, there's nothing more I can say really, because I've said everything I wanted to say twice already. This discussion is all over the place and I probably feel like I talking to a brick wall as much as you do. I hope you enjoy the dataproof bunker. The resident Pescado can be difficult at times, so bring enough cheese and you should be fine.

[Immortelle]

Okay heres how things stand from an accounting perspective (this is all basic stuff).  TSR is legally regarded as being an entity seperate to Thomas. Money made is called Revenue, costs incurred are called Expenses, anything owned by the business is called an Asset, Owner's Equity is defined as the Owner's Interest in the business.  Thomas is legally entitled to withdraw a percentage of money from the business for his own use.  But only a percentage.  He is not entitled to all of the organisations Assets.  If Thomas chooses to use his property as the place from which he conducts his businesses, for taxation purposes, then legally the house becomes an Asset belonging to TSR, and it is no longer seen as merely being his private residency

[Scurvy Cat]

On the house issue, I think of more on the order of what happened to Jim and Tammy Fae Baker.  They preached loudly about what good CHristians they were and how they were doing all this great charitable work.  Turns out almost all the money was going into their pockets.  When the shit hit the fan we saw pictures of their expensive houses, cars, tennis courts and even an air conditioned dog house because people needed to see for themselves how they had been lied to.

In TSR's case we're constantly told that they're taking in this money solely si they can keep offering us "quality" downloads.  People should know that it's not--it's going to support the lifestyles of a few greedy people.

That said, I do find the constant harping on Atwa's obsession with Thomas if very off-putting.  Atwa is clearly mentally ill and making fun of her is about as tasteful as her making fun of whoever it is with a brain tumor.  If she actually does something significant--like banning everyone who's name starts with 'b' or demoting someone to SA because they said her skirt was too short, fine.  But I don't see that pointing and laughing at her mental problems either gets us anywhere and it lowers us to her level.  

[Missbonbon]

Well, I did mainly focus on the pictures, as I consider them to be "private area". And i just don't like the idea of the internet making good old privacy becoming more and more relative. The fact, that you post something at a forum does not mean you agree to have it republished somewhere else. This does not apply to public postings, but to private forums like the FA forum at TSR. I consider it to be a "private" area as any other protected area of the internet, which is only available to a selected group of individuals.

Coconut said that he didn't post it in the super sekrit part of the forum already. He wanted people to know he was getting a new house. Basically by what your saying, is that if I post something in a private area, shouldn't be reposted. But what about the people who had their information shared? Did they not deserve to know that Thomas was telling complete strangers over the internet!? Do you not think they wanted that? No. When you sign up for Paypal and TSR you agree to a little bit of legal information that your private details will be kept private. He didn't do that. I don't understand why it's such a big deal that coconut posted pictures of a house he posted himself. She didn't give out addresses or anything.

But in the second the information isn't ontopic anymore, it is a no-no concerning publication at another place. In my opinion, this includes personal problems of a person in private life (maybe some FA needed the help of an psychiatrist because of an "exlusive" thread here), anything he or she does when not sitting in front of the PC or what he/she buys, sells or creates when not being acting in behalf or working for a specific site.

Example: Assume, i am in a conflict with a bank manager who sold me some lehman brothers certificates and bought a nice car with this money. I now would claim the right for me to inform whatever person about the really bad advise of the bank and the bank manager, could publish the letters of my laywer etc. etc. But i would never publish pictures of the car like "look what he bought with my money", as this is not related to the deal "i bought worthless stuff from someone and try to take him to court".

To echo what Palo said, if this community made you go get psychiatric help, it wasn't the community that made you. It's like those people that argue that video games and heavy metal are the roots of all evil. They don't put the idea of killing someone in children's heads. In some cases they may amplify it, but that's because of irresponsible parents not paying attention to their children.

Secondly, if you took said bank manager to court, you better bet they would ask what he spent that money on. And require picture proof.

Well, the threads in this forum tend to become offtopic from time to time as far as i did notice And the topic of Thomas intending to use another person's illness is offtopic, too, if you restrict this thread on the original "TSR sharing your information" title.

Did you even read the entire thread? Because if you did, on the very first page you would realize that is not what this thread started off being. The original topic of this thread is someone named Pavs over a SimsCave was threatened by Sussi to have his information shared if he posted her newest set at SimsCave. Then along down the road coconut came in and enlightened us that TSR is still sharing customers information, after they had been denying it. To reduce thread clutter I renamed the thread. So if you want to get picky about the original thread, TSR is definitely not involved in it.

Yep, we are. I am not proselytizing (evangelizing?!?!!? well, acting as a missionary  ) and pressing anyone to adopt my position. Just wanted to make clear that from my point of view, some things go too far. If anyone agrees, that's fine for me, if not, well, i can't force you, so that's ok, too.

It's okay to say things are going to far. I will say this though,  we are here to bring down TSR and their wrong doings. I do agree we go to far sometimes, and I choose not to participate in that conversation, but that's why most pirates here try to agree on what goes to far. Like picking on someone's appearance to me is going to far, because they can't help that. Picking on their attitude is not.

[Anouk]

In the end, Solander, anyone here would find it distasteful to post pictures of someone's home just for the hell of it. However as TSR is publically claiming to need money from subs for site costs only, the pictures of the homes count as evidence against that. That's all there is to it. While we value your opinion, discussing it will not really change anything except the length and focus of this thread. Especially after private information being posted, we think things through, you don't have to worry about that. People are very aware.

Time to let it go and focus on what we were talking about earlier. Wich is, TSR's antics

[Darqstar]

I really don't want to say "Two wrongs don't make a right," but sorry, Solander, it's coming across like you're more in sympathy to TSR than to us. 

Concerning sharing the pictures of his house, you are absolutely right. In this specific case, my sympathy is definetely on the side of TSR. Concerning other topics like sharing private data between pay sites, my sympathy is definately on your side, as this is absolutely inacceptable. Whatever motivation lies behind it, you can't share private data at your own discretion.

Showing pictures of a house is not private data!  I know this, because I used to put pictures of houses in my journal from around here, because we've got some amazing houses.  The police asked me to stop, but were very clear that I was under absolutely NO obligation to do so, they were just asking me, because one idiot complained that they saw me taking a picture.   I could have taken the picture and said, "This is the house at ______street in Mytown Mystate Mycountry," and I still would have been right.  A house is available for anyone to look at, anyone who walks by.  A total stranger can take pictures of a house and put them up on the net.  "Look at these beautiful houses!"   Otherwise, anyone who took vacation shots, or shots of anything, that might have been taken that show a house would be violating someone's privacy.  

And even bigger than the law, on no place did Thomas write, "Please don't share these, guys."  He gleefully wrote, "look at my house!"  Yes, you can argue "private forum" until you're blue in the face, but you know and I know and anyone with more than one braincell knows that just because it's a private forum, doesn't mean information won't be shared.  Especially if it's casual information.

If I walk up to you while we're alone in a room and say, "See?  Here's a picture of my cat, isn't he cute?  You can keep this picture, I have copies."  I know damned well that you might show it to the next person you see.  Even thought the room was private, I never said that the information I'm giving you was private, I never said that the picture I gave you was sensitive information.  Clearly, I didn't care enough about people seeing my cat to tell you.  

Would it be different if one of the FA's who kisses his ass had shared it?  "Hey, look at the house my friend and boss Thomas is having built, lovely, isn't it?"  And what's to stop that?  He is obviously proud of the house, and several FA's were talking about how terrific they thought it was.   If someone starts complimenting something you're showing pictures of, pictures you don't want to get around, you have to say something.  He didn't.  Obviously, he didn't care.  

And no, I do not think that coconut sharing pictures of his house in any way, shape, or form, now excuses TSR from what they've done.  And again, a house is not private data.  If it was, then we'd all have to cover our houses when we went out.  If it was, every time someone took a picture they'd have to go to all of the surrounding houses and businesses that might be in the pictures and ask their permission.

[Missbonbon]

Well then... anyone know the resemblence?

http://www.thesimsresource.com/downloads/details/category/sims2-clothing-female-adult-everyday/title/Lets%20Party%20-%201/id/842853/

http://shock-shame.com/pics/tf/tf_JLpinkrabbittee.jpg

Oh how about this one?

http://www.thesimsresource.com/members/amylee22/downloads/details/category/sims2-clothing-female-adult-everyday/title/Lets%20Party%20-%204/id/842856/

http://shock-shame.com/pics/tf/tf_JLvampireteewithpinkconverse.jpg

Yep, that's right. Practically the same. Oh and Vivian's lovely TOU.

Outfits/ make-up/ genetics /accessories
1. You are free to do whatever you want with them in your PERSONAL USE.
Personal use means that you won’t grab my textures and use them in your own works and then upload them as they are yours.
This of course includes the shoes textures, cause I’m tired of seeing my shoes in other sites/forums with no credit at all.
2. You can include them in sims you will share/upload, but only if they are free sites and please credit, or at least name the site o_0
3. You can use them for your stories, videos, pictures, contest and whatever you do. No need to give credit but if you want I won’t refuse XD