Attached Link: http://www.animotions.com

"-We acted hastily in the lock out of digital merchants in the merchant forum. The issue was more about conduct in the forum and we should have created a merchant code of conduct instead of removing merchants. Although it does not help the situation currently with those removed, we do offer our apologies for the implementation of this process." I would really like an explanation of exactly what in my merchants forum conduct warranted this act. The implication (here for the public to see) is that my conduct was in some manner unprofessional or disruptive. I can't speak for the other locked out merchants, but I truly resent that implication. No warnings were ever issued. No "code" beyond the normal TOS was ever stated. What provision in the new "code of conduct" you speak of did I violate before it was ever instituted? What could Bill Bay possibly have done. I don't believe he ever even posted in that forum? What did LadySilverMage do? "If digital merchants are known or become known competitors, then we may ask those to sign a contract regarding this." And why should competing merchants be singled out to sign a special "contract"? Shouldn't the code apply equally to all merchants? Shouldn't the contract be signed by everyone? And Jack makes a good point. This Code of Conduct should be made public so that potential vendors can read and understand it before making the decision to sell at RMP. Also, not quite sure I understand why only digital merchants are allowed into the merchants forum. Vendors of shippable products are merchants as well and could benefit from the forum as much as digital merchants. I do thank you for taking the time to look at your policies, but I still have grave reservations about the way this was/is being handled.