FHG copying submitters must die

[Useless]

I get a ton of submissions from lazy-ass fuckers who don't build galleries at all. They merely download FHGs, make a spot for recips, then upload them to their server. I cannot even explain how tired I am of weeding through that shit. Is gallery building a long lost art and I just haven't caught on? I can't even imagine pulling that crap.

Sons-a-bitches...

[Greenguy]

Why build it when the sponsor does it for you?

Why hand submit when the auto-submitter does it for you?

Why get hosting when the sponsor will give you that for free?

Lazy fucks!

[Ramster]

The reason there are soooooooo many private, partner and paid accounts.

[cd34]

<sarcasm>
UW,

If you could, please design 2 Freesites every day and list them on your linklist. Please make them priority listings near the top of your daily results. And don't try to go crappy on the quality, I'll know.

Also, I'll send my address for you to sign up to the sponsors so that they can get the checks sent right over to me.

Thanks.
</sarcasm>

years ago I joked with a program and said:

You know, Webmasters are starting to think we should create the galleries, create the content, create the TGPs, create the traffic, get the SE position and send them a check.

That day seems to be fast approaching.

Their new sales pitch: "Thinking about the porn business, send us your address, your check is waiting"

hahaha. This message brought to you by Unobtanicash

[bunky2u]

Is that sort of atitude from webmasters worldwide, or is it mostly found in North America? I think that Canada must have some of the laziest people, and being Canadain I CAN say that. I see people who just wait for the government to hand them money so they can go play bingo and then go to the food bank because they lost all their money.

Very few people of my generation seem to really want to work for their money. I make galleries that are simple that some may even consider them ugly.

example: http://www.strippedgalleries.net/gal...11/ginnah.html

I do use software to build the gallery, but I edit it afterwards to include ICRA meta and whatnot.

I may be new in this biz, but I do know that nothing comes easy in real life, why should it be any different with an online one?

bunky2u

[Nickname]

I build my own gallerys, im sure many do, but there are always gonna be lazy people who will try and pull something like that......some tgp's accually dont seem to mind

[Useless]

Originally Posted by Nickname

I build my own gallerys, im sure many do, but there are always gonna be lazy people who will try and pull something like that......some tgp's accually dont seem to mind

I'm at a point where I can't even tell anymore if someone has completely copied a FHG or just borrowed some graphics from the sponsor. My final decision on questionable galleries comes down to whether I 'need' something in that category and how good the description is. If it's lesbian or teen - it's gone.

[Greenguy]

If you saw some of mine, there'd be no doubt in your mind that they were not "professionally" made

[Ramster]

It is hard to tell what is hosted and hat is not. I for example make most of my galleries but I do buy some templates too which of course tend to look like sponsor galleries due to their quality.

bunky2u
That gallery is fine but...it is fairly wide. A lot of places might reject if it does not fit in a 800 wide screen. Maybe put it all in a table 760 wide.

[modF]

I pretty much buy all of my galleries, I am like a child in photoshop. I once thought about using a FHG or two, but so many of them have been used for a decent amount of time.

[GeorgeTH]

How can you even tell?

There must be around 10 - 20,000 sponsor templates around! I couldn't keep a fraction of them in my (biological) memory... Plus so many people are actually making templates which look similar, either as webmasters or to sell...

Personally I find around 70% of these templates lazy and overdone!
- Lazy because everything is one graphic run thru an image slicer, and then you end up in some cases with a uniform background being sliced into individual pieces for each thumb, which slows down loading!
- Lazy and overdone because quite often you see almost standard text as a graphic, which could have been easily CSS text; CSS text makes the template more flexible (you can change the text for each gallery), se friendly, and faster to load.
- Overdone because I'm quite often wondering if people buy more from a flashy full-page graphical gallery with over-compressed videocaps, or rather from a simple gallery with semi-decent images, where they can get a good impression of what to expect inside the member section.

Personally: if a gallery is over 50 (max.65) kb in total (that's graphics and HTML, not the thumbnails) then I think it's a good one! Some of these new flashy templates have graphics of 200+kb plus large HTML tables due to the complicated image slicing...

[Kinky]

Originally Posted by Greenguy

If you saw some of mine, there'd be no doubt in your mind that they were not "professionally" made

still using frontpage express? (dammit where is that hide behind the couch smiley??) sorry completely kidding around GG... just remembered (or maybe made up) from a thread long ago that you use to use it... and somebody "borrowed" my frontpage disk and i had to fuckin' reformat and download fpexpress because it is the only free download of FP I could find (where is the couch that that little SOB is behind?) (EDIT:and i'm drunk so forgive me |cool| ) although my post does have a small point as too many people use WYSIWYG editors to COPY and PASTE and submit copied galleries to save time

[Greenguy]

I did use Front Page Express for a long time, but when Windows went to 2000 they stopped making it I can remember calling them & asking how I could get a copy of it as I pretty much assumed it's still be there with I updated - LOL

I use Namo now, which at the time was pretty much the same, but has gotten much more gooder over the years.

[frankthetank]

Originally Posted by GeorgeTH

- Overdone because I'm quite often wondering if people buy more from a flashy full-page graphical gallery with over-compressed videocaps, or rather from a simple gallery with semi-decent images, where they can get a good impression of what to expect inside the member section.

I got a listing on thehun´s with the ugliest gallery I ever built (wondering why he never lists my bought ones...). This gallery converts better than most other galleries I´m running. So I decided to build more shitty designed ones myself.

[Verbal]

Originally Posted by frankthetank

So I decided to build more shitty designed ones myself.

LOL... that's awesome. I really don't think most surfers give two shits about quality of the design, and I know lots of webmasters who do better with circa 1996 looking galleries. Good content = good sales.
|gaycheer|

[pcum]

Most of the time I design my galleries myself, simple but thats okay I think....
example;

http://www.realitycum.com/cam-a-sutra01/index.html

But sometimes when I have less time a combine it, little of myself little of the sponsor...
example;

http://www.realitycum.com/bigcocksex01/index.html