Quote - Morkonon, I understand your point but I think you're being coy/devil's advocate.

No, not really.  I've thought about it quite a bit since I first read your OP on the issue.  And, my stance has somewhat changed.  I agree, in principle, with many of your points but have come to realize that there are some viable arguments that could represent a good counter-position.

Quote - Yes, they have historically made nice hair and I don't blame anyone for using a base mesh.  Hair is complicated and messy potentially.

I agree completely.  It's the only thing I haven't even tried to model myself.  To get it right, I'd have to have features I don't normally use or would need some apps I don't have atm.

Quote - But really, these two in particular, are the same whether they are the same mesh or not!  I mean, my point loses a little steam if they are different meshes, but not much.  The point is, it's the same hair in spirit and to put both out at the same time at different sites, presumably (and this is key) EXCLUSIVELY to those sites (to benefit from higher cut) is underhanded IMO. 

I dunno... I understand your point, really I do.  But, this type of thing happens all the time in "Real Life" products.  One TV is sold, exclusively, to one distributor as model xxx-9999.  The same TV but with a button on it that is different is sold to another distributor as model xxx-9998.  Neither distributor can acquire the other's "Exclusive" model.  This is called, among other things, "Protected Territory."  ie:  The distributors have their territory protected by the manufacturer from competitor's offerings of the same product since, in reality, no other competitor can have the "same" product since the model number is exclusive to the distributor.  It's only possible because, honestly, it's paperwork that determines what the product is called, how it is warranteed and all the things that make it unique.  Because "paper" and contracts require a specific mention of the product, all they have to do is change the model number for "exclusive distribution rights" for their distributors.  The point being - This practice is commonplace in markets today and I have to consider that when "judging" someone.

Quote - I think we can all agree that there was absolutely NO reason not to issue one package that includes the differences between these two, which are microscopic.  Either a Morph or a longer Transmap for that section of bang.

I can agree that, as far as the Poser marketplace is concerned, calling these "two different" products would take much more justification than what the product marketing images portray.  I also can agree that regardless of whether or not they are the same/similar mesh, some sort of effort should have been used to make them a little more unique.  However, as distasteful as I would think it if someone suggested that I do with a product I had created,  I can't throw large amounts of poo at someone who did so and feel that I could fully justify my outrage.

The worst I can say is that it's possible that a customer may buy both items and not get what they think they are.  But, if they did that, then they were looking for two very similar items to purchase in the first place and if there isn't much difference then the distinction is trivial to begin with in the eyes of the buyer.  So, in essence, they got what they wanted to begin with if they bought both.  /shrug