"Not sure about the logistics of a signed contract for each new merchant that uploads a product to the marketplace. We have a much higher volume there than folks like DAZ, etc." Lol! So does Sprint. Wanna buy a phone service plan without a contract? Anyone who engages in a business transaction involving expectations of performance and planned revenue generation must have a mutually agreed upon statement of business process and accountability- a contract. Otherwise it is an informal private agreement, and not subject to actual enforcement of regualtion on either party's part.

Michelleh, Why would you not want Renderosity to have a productive forum for advancing it's business operations? Do you not benefit from the site and the resources it provides? Maybe there's something here I'm missing ... Tim I never said that. Why do you think I came up with the idea to have a marketplace segment on the magazine cd? That was my idea, btw. Does this show that I don't want the MP to be successful? I don't think so. I just want these nice people to get their clear answers, for chrissake.

I don't dislike you, Tim. I don't think you see how these tiny little bursts of communication give people the impression that they are being stalled off and ignored. I don't think yu realise how many people are very upset and dissilusioned. I still care about tis place, because of the peopel here. I just hate seing these kind of thigns, which mainly get out of control because it took you how long, almost a week? to address the issue. Don't do that. It only hurts everyone.

Renderosity spends a great deal of money providing this site and it's resources to the members at no charge. It's only means of livelihood comes from operating the marketplace. There have been members who would undermine the marketplace to advance their own goals. There's nothing inherently wrong with that. We simply prefer not having to spar with those folks in the merchants forum where we are attempting to advance the business aspect of this site to the benefit of the merchants, ourselves, and the members of the community." Private club? Members only? Fine, but that doesn't address the issue of refusing to provide a standard merchant contract or address the issues raised about enforcing powerless restrictions due to their unenforcibility. I should know better. It just hurts me to see this dance. The people who do the most and ask the least (simple explanations and fair treatment) get hurt the worst. Now the excluding factor is 'undermining the MP to advance their own goals', which leaves the door wide open to arbitrary exclusion. Next will be 'anyone who undermines the site to advance their own goals'.

"Hi guys, We are reviewing/revising the policy on merchant forum access as we speak. The original policy may be overly broad. I think we can get much closer to our original intent with a more narrowly focused policy. Please give us a day or two to get this right. Tim" When you run it through the Meaningless Doublespeak- to- English translator, it reads as: "Hi, guys! .... Tim" In what way is the policy being reviewed/revised? In what way is the original policy overly broad? What was the original intent? And while you are here, what about the implementation of a standard, legally binding contract to ensure that this sort of pseudo-business doesn't keep happening? What about a brief personal apology for all those parties, something to give the impression that the PTB give a rat's ass, instead of this nonsense that could have come from a Portable Excuse Generator?

WHAT!?!?!?!?! Holy moly. That's what I get for assuming. I would never, never, never enter into a business arrangement with someone withoug a contract with a delineation of rights and responsibilities. "I wil do this, you do that. If I don't do this or you do that, this will happen. If I want to change this, we both have to reverify. Sign here, file in triplicate." PERIOD. Anything less is not business, it's playing pretend. Make it up as you go guidelines don't cut it. I think, Clint, that you are one of the sincerely nicest people I have ever met. It's a shame you are being put in this position.

Bloody typeos.

Look at ti like this. In ther eal world, you sign a contract on paper with ink, so does the other party. Same principle here, only digital. Now, later on, the other party types up a new contract and says "this is the new agreement". You break a rule which is in the 'new' agreement, and are penalised, even though you ahve only signed the old one. You go to court. The other party says 'but your honor, I changed the contract to this! I know, the new contrat was never signed... you mean, that's important?" Question- how many books will the judge throw at them? ;) Sounds ludicrous, right? Well, this is no more than the digital equivalent. Same rules.

"what is the legal stance on one side of a party changing a legal agreement, (hosting and selling a product for an individual), without first consulting the other individual concerned? It invalidates the contract, unless they had a clause permitting modification without resigning (no). Also with the merchant exclusion- the merchant regulations would have to contain a non-competition clause, again which would have to be included at the time of agreement to be legal. To the best of my knowledge.

I said I wasn't going to post here anymore, but.... I think it's important to remember that for every shift and change in corporate politics, there are people behind them, and sometimes people get hurt. Despite our occasional differences on some things, I think Steve desered better for his patience and perserverrance. The CL people tried harder than most, who would have just ignored the customer base altogether, like most 'high-end' companies. If in nothing else, that makes what Steve and CL did a success. Good luck Steve and everyone else. I am sure this is only a difficult period, and better things will come.

Me, too. I'm outta here. I just packed up my gallery, and am hitting the road. And the bull goes on... without me. Have a good one, folks!

Mission accomplished, then. That's the entire method, in a nutshell- when a problem happens, give a superficial, blowoff explanation, or an apology which costs nothing since no rectification will be done. Then sit back in silence, let the more vocal members voice their dissatisfactions. Then, after about a week, more mebers get tired of it and ask them to stop already. Next, let the whole thing wind to a halt. Everythign is peaceful and quiet again, and nothing has changed. Helluva way to run a business.

I never said it's all about Legume. I said it's not a community participation event, as is, other than in a very controlled manner. I prefer open nominations, and open voting, but that's me.

LOL! Seriously- if you are going to really pick artist of the minute, month, year, whatever... it has to be voted for openly by all members. But it isn't going to happen because the admins won't let us vote untin the come up with the 'absolute perfect cheatproof cloneproof goofproof or your money back guaranteed' system. Well, it ain't gonna happen. So we have the 'Rosity Academy Awards- merit awards given to carefully selected entrats based on (supposedly impartial) judges' high standards. That'll work. Just quit calling it a community thing.

No biggie, just call it what it is- an elitist title given to a chosen few selected for a limited vote, and then honored by selection of the few moderators and administrators. I know, call it "Miss/Mister Rendersoity", and have a swimsuit contest. ;)