Actually, yeah, it was one hell of a post. I read it last night, then read it again this morning. I had the same thought both times: "I bet this guy's smart enough to wish he hadn't made "ignorant" the last word in his post."

I'm wondering if this tool might have one application here. Now this is coming from a beginner when it comes to the operation of LLs and TGPs, but, if someone has their own TGP, particularly a private one, wouln't this program make it a bit easier to populate it with galleries built from your own pool of photography? Maybe with free sites too, it could build some matched pairs of galleries that would then need a good free site shell built around them.

Since you'd be both submitters and reviewer, you could make sure not to flood yourself with unusable galleries/sites. And if it really did save time and do good work, that would just leave more time free for working on other projects. But like I said, that part of the business is new to me, so anyone please feel free to point out what I'm missing here.

NOTE: I'm another one who writes page code in a text-editor because I don't like how the automated 'helper' programs build things for me. So I'd be more likely to keep making things by hand, one at a time. But I'm still interested in finding better ways to do things, if there actually are any.

Ok I still stand by my first post :)

I like tools. I really like them! I make my own for petes sake because I like them so much. I've written scripts/apps to read a sites logo file, pulls out the primary colors from it, makes page colors and graphics elements of similar colors for me. Plus adds my images, text links, banners, keywords, alt text and links them all to my fake TGP and hub sites. Thats just how damn lazy I am :D I havent used it in a long time because of 2257. And I havent used it to create sites or galleries for submitting, although with the functionality and versatility (no static templates, all dynamic) I bet I could.

The one thing is simple. There is no good reason given (still IMHO, and I know opinions vary slightly!) to have the ability to pull content from a server other than the one on which the script resides, or your own hard drive.

Even I'm not that lazy, all I need to do is upload them while I go pee. I think it's is ripe for abuse, and the more we can reduce that, the better off we are as an industry. It's simple IMHO, and could not be more clear cut.

As a side note, I was contacted this morning about a gallery that is violating our TOS, and stealing someones copyrighted images :( What someone did was copy one of our FHG's, and replace the content with a solo models content and submitted it to TGP's.

Now I have to contact the affiliate and tell them to remove those images or I will terminate them. I'm telling you, I hate that part of my job, but people do it all the time. "We" (adult industry) do not need more people having easy access to that kind of theft, and that was all in my first post as well.

No I'm not saying they used your tool, I'm saying it's what we dont want to make easier for people to do.

We holds similar views on these issues |thumb

I think we agree too. I directed my reply primarily to you because I wanted to address the opinions you presented, even though you are not being the actual purveyor thereof, and wanted to minimize the amount of offense taken as a result of my post.

Both my experience and Doctor Sticky's experience with adult webmasters has consistently indicated that they are lazy. Incredibly, mind-bogglingly lazy, with few exceptions. I think that's why they get into adult; it's the most money for the least work. Of course, we have not frequented these forums, and it's quite possible that this is where the non-lazy adult webmasters hang out. If that's the case, maybe we should spend some more time here! But I know people who create sites and then hire someone else to do the 1 hour of work per day necessary to run it.

This is why we don't think this script will ruin the industry. If there is a webmaster who works his ass off to build as many galleries as he can and submit them to dozens of sites, then that guy is motivated enough to learn a programming language and write his own script to automate it. In fact, the few non-lazy webmasters I've met are the ones that are least interested in our script because they already built the tools that do exactly what they need. And a lazy webmaster is just looking for the easiest way to make the bare minimum number of galleries that his visitors expect. He's not going to buy the script so that his 2 hours per day are more productive -- he's going to buy it to turn 2 hours into 30 minutes. I don't believe that any of our customers have built more than a few galleries per day and I don't expect that to change.

See above. I appreciate your opinion and I'm glad we can have a civil discussion. Unfortunately we see the same people two different ways, and I believe there are good reasons for the feature, so I'm not sure we'll see eye to eye.
If you do see someone using content from your FHGs without authorization in their own template, and you think Arylia might have been used, you can contact us and we will give him the same threat you will: stop violating our terms or lose your license.

I will PM you with more information about this.