And again.. new paysite.

[SuperChicChick]

I was about to post about this. Arghhh, what a piece of shit that owner is for making everything so expensive, another Carla in the rise! Is she looney or something for charging $1.50 for each outfit? God. But at least her stuff is good quality unlike Carla who looks like she hired a team of kindergardners to make her clothes.

[Célimène]

Deductive reasoning!

Not exactly. More likely wishful thinking based on your favoured conclusion.

I know that you didn't actually read my post because you have noted that I said, "The ONLY way site owners can obtain remuneration from work is when their work benefits someone else willing and able to pay for that benefit."

I looked over the downloads at Sugary Sims and noted the page views numbered 2030. More importantly, I noted the sloppy amateurish quality of those downloads.

Most likely the subscription page didn't get removed due to community outrage, but rather lack of interest.

Meaning if no one wanted to pay for them. And clearly no one wants them for free. It's a zero cost to the site owner to take down the subscription page.

I suspect her recent announcement has little to do with a few snarky guestbook entries. Better to save face and generate a bit of community good spirit by appearing magnanimous in announcing it's removal.

[Ghanima Atreides]

Same old Abercrombie shit...which is available on a million free sites including MTS. I mean, what's the point, in opening a paysite that offers the same stuff others have for free? I'd think they'd be out of business real quick but apparently there are some uninformed (or just dumb) who pay for it...but still...I doubt she'll be making a profit regardless. Her stuff is THE most easily found style out there.

[missangelica]

I'm surprised by the response of the quality of the downloads.. ranging from "pure shit" to "worth downloading if free".  Clearly we need a quality filter to save some people from themselves!

[Ghanima Atreides]

Personally I think it's average; it's not fugly, not Carla Niven fugly for example, or texture filled (the two are almost synonyms XD), but it's so common it actually makes it worse.  :lol:

[Cody]

Why do you guys see fit to attack every pay site's quality? Arguments are more persuasive if they're presented in a mature way - sans personal attacks and name-calling. I happen to think these skins, while wildly over-priced, are of good quality. At least, some of them are photo-skinned, but still HQ. If I didn't know that it was wrong to charge for CC and had the money to waste, I'd download this stuff. I'd be willing to be that she'd have quite a following if the site was free. [Just so you know, I wasn't defending the principle of pay sites, only this site owner as a person.]

[Doursim]

Why do you guys see fit to attack every pay site's quality? ... [Just so you know, I wasn't defending the principle of pay sites, only this site owner as a person.]

Why are you admonishing about one thing, and then defending yourself with a totally different concept?

1.  Why is it "not alright" to make comments about the quality of the downloads?   You wanna point that rule out to me?  
2.  I havn't read though this entire thread, but I didn't see anyone attacking the owner personally.

[Cody]

Attacking someone's work is transitively attacking them. I didn't mean that you can't point out when something is low quality, but this is not bad. It's not that original, but it still looks nice. And, how exactly did I switch concepts by saying that I was defending the creator but not pay sites in general?

[Aquamarine]

It isn't. Their work is not indicative of their character, therefore we're not attacking them, specifically. It's that kind of thinking that makes people unable to take criticism.

[Kid]

Attacking someone's work is transitively attacking them. I didn't mean that you can't point out when something is low quality, but this is not bad. It's not that original, but it still looks nice. And, how exactly did I switch concepts by saying that I was defending the creator but not pay sites in general?

She's a business now so noticing and commenting on the quality of the product(s) being sold isn't an attack on the creator, it's just good fiscal reasoning. If they call her a lowlife, greedy paysite bitch (like they did in her guestbook) then it would be a personal attack.

Also, quality is completely subjective unless you have a collective agreement  of what "quality" is, which we do not.

[Diamond_bollocks]

The stuff isn't actually that bad, but it's just so stingy of them to charge for it, it's not mega awesome or anything.

Do some "creators" need financial motivation to create skins to share? It's not hard.

[Quinctia]

Deductive reasoning!

Not exactly. More likely wishful thinking based on your favoured conclusion.

I don't really have much stock in whatever happens.

But in terms of what happened with the Sugar Sims deal, there were nearly-live responses on the front page of the website that were directly from the guestbook comments, so the person running the site was at least pretending to pay attention.  v:)v

I will admit here that my reasoning is flawed if you're not one to take much stock in Skinner's behavioral theories...that if a person does an action that nets them a favorable response, they'll repeat that action.

Those of you arguing about quality...has anyone actually seen any of this in action yet?  I mean, it could have visible seams and stuff, for all we know.  Rose and Peggy have nice enough still shots for their hairs, but there are flaws in the meshes and the reds are all really weird colors.

That link does have an identical nightie though, so maybe all the stuff is stolen, anyway...hmm...

[piratebitch]

Ok, I have seen Carla Niven's stuff, and I have to agree.  It looks like shit.  I do however like some of the stuff off of Zadie's Site.  I also agree that since clothing like that is available for free on lots of free sites, I wouldn't pay for it.  So...her site must be destroyed.   :twisted:

[snadradeocconer]

Rumors have been stated that Zadie is really Emilie from BoutiqueEmilie.

[Helena]

So that is why Boutique Emily was closed down?  Just for making a paysite to get a lot of money? pffff
Btw zadie's previews really look the same as Emilie ones.

+
While being Boutique Emilie - she had a quite nice reputation. But now this Zadiesims has the worst reputation that can ever be.