I went through this same nightmare a few years ago...discovered that most of my data which had been backed up on CD-Rs was lost.

99% of the blank CDR & DVDR media sold in stores is basically junk and not at all suitable for long-term storage. But there IS quality media available if you know what to look for and search the stores or shop online. I spent a couple of months of my spare time reading threads at

http://club.cdfreaks.com/

and particularly the blank media section

http://club.cdfreaks.com/f33/

and learned how to identify the best blank media (my fav is still an 8X DVD+R YUDEN000-T02 manufactured in Japan by Taiyo Yuden available online under their own brand or in limited supply in a few stores in the US under the Sony brand...though almost all Sony media is now 16X manufactured outside Japan and  is totally different)...how to burn it (different burners burn different media BEST at different burn speeds), how to do quality tests of the burned disc (using something like Nero CD-DVD Speed, for example)...and how to store the burned discs (best in a dark location where temp & humidity don't vary much)...etc, etc...for starters...

I agree that using multiple backup regimens is the wisest choice...however, choosing the highest quality blank media, and optimally burning & storing it will significantly reduce the chance of data loss.

A lot of people will re-run the quality test scans every year or two to look for signs of disc deterioration...if they see anything remarkable, they'll reburn the disc well before any data is lost.

Quote - Is one rating a lousy rating?I allways understood this rating system from one star -good- to five stars -the best- .So there is no negative rating for me.Athough without rating if I write "excellent work " ,I mean it ,or else I wouldn't have made a coment.

before the gallery was revamped sometime in 2006, the ratings system didn't have numbers but used words instead...words ranging from "Excellent" (the top rating) to "Great" to "Needs Work" to "Poor." I don't remember all the possibilities...there were something like 8 different choices. So I think that those general "concepts" have carried over to this number system...5 is "excellent" and 1 is "poor"

having said that, I do agree with your premise...most people wouldn't bother leaving any sort of comment or rating unless they liked the image to begin with...

well, I know what you mean, though...it takes some of the fun away when something like that happens.

I remember there was a guy/troll at another site a couple fo years ago who was just going through and giving a lousy rating to alot of people's images...think he had a "thing" against nudity...but at least it wasn't invisible as the username appeared with the rating...that made it easier to ban the guy, too! :lol: 

still trying to believe the best in people...I thought of another possibility...the darn "scroll wheel" on the mouse sometimes messes with drop-down boxes. So I tested it in I.E. After I gave a 5 rating to an image, I scrolled back up to what I had written in the comment box using the mouse wheel and, lo and behold, the rating box was still active and the rating of 5 changed to a lower rating. So maybe, it's just an innocent mistake by some people accidentally changing the rating they wanted to give when they used their scroll wheels. I'd like to think so, at least...

btw, this didn't happen when I tested it using Firefox (my usual browser)...another good reason to stay away from I.E. :biggrin:

in any case, don't let it bug ya, hun

Yeah, it's just one of those weird situations that come up at DAZ from time to time. The Pro bundle is on sale at a huge discount (75%) and the Complete bundle isn't on sale at all. So going Pro is certainly the best way right now to get started with Victoria 4. The system/program requirements are the same for both, so it's safe to take the plunge!

btw, there aren't any Aery Soul products in either package. The Pro bundle has an outfit by Lourdes Mercado that isn't in the Complete bundle and then there are Jim Burton's shoes added in, too

...Wonders (but doesn't know the answer) if someone can give a rating without leaving a comment?

if so, perhaps the "great" comment you read & the low rating you see are from two different people???

hmmm...prolly doesn't work that way... :unsure:

...well, sorry that's happening to you, Rick

jevans69 wrote:

Quote - I suppose we'll just leave you in your quiet corner where you can wring your hands over the injustice of it all.

LOL! Do you seriously think that I'm "wringing my hands" over this? If you do, then you're not nearly as smart as you say you are.

I don't even care about this place anymore, I've moved on. It's sad to see what the site has become this past year; but, these things happen.

However I DO care about some of the members still here. When they get poorly treated, I try to stand up with them. That's why I've stopped in this thread a couple of times.

But why are YOU in this thread? You've made it clear you're tired of seeing threads where people complain about how they were treated. DON'T READ THEM, DON'T PARTICIPATE IN THEM.

You know what, the title of this thread was "Rules unclear and unfair." Oh my gosh! {shock} Somebody's complaining again. You knew it before you even clicked on the link and started reading the first word. If you're so tired of these threads, why keep reading them? Instead, I guess you (and a few other people who are also "tired of reading these threads") have decided it's your collective responsibility to enter into these discussions, make fun of the person, call them childish, maybe even derail the thread with the same old "inside jokes" with each other AND with the forum moderators & coordinators (who, by the way, should be above such behavior, but sadly are not).

Is it any surprise that many members here feel like they aren't listened to, taken seriously, treated fairly...THEY'RE NOT!

At least be honest about this point: despite your protestations to the contrary, you love these threads. They give you a chance to show everyone how smart you are, how witty you can be, how grand your debating skills are...and you can bully somebody from time-to-time if they don't happen to be able to match your forum skills. Well congratulations, you've found quite a nice home here. Enjoy it!

And by the way, the admins, moderators & coordinators don't need your "help" with these discussions...they've proven over and again that they can stand their ground in a debate.

@jevans69...shrug...still too narrow a usage on your part...

...also I'm a bit disappointed you couldn't recognize the quote "...people either have their eyes open or their eyes closed... " surprised, in fact, considering everything else you apparently know...It has NOTHING to do with the question of whether you agree or disagree, or who's right or who's wrong. It's a statement about seeing what's...oh, nevermind...clearly just a waste of time to explain it...

@StaceyG...shrug...I re-read the thread AGAIN, and it does seem like alot of...oh, nevermind...just a waste of time to say it.

BTW, for anyone else still reading, there is a rumor going around that regarding this specific matter, this specific image...Primaltruck subsequently received an apology from an admin here and the warning was rescinded. I haven't heard this directly from him, so I can't verify it. But IF that is in fact the case, then despite what the mod/coord/admins say about their "system" to review images, in the end they still got it wrong and he was subjected to all this for nothing!

...carry on everybody...

Quote - > Quote - ...quelle surprise... so sorry to see this all happening with you Bill. I have seen the image, and it was inoffensive...

The image wasn't pulled because it was offensive. Have you read this thread so far?

Well, actually I READ every word of this thread...the term "inoffensive" can have a much broader meaning than the narrow one you have chosen to apply.

Quote -> Quote - and it's so nice to see the moderators/coordinators joking around so much...I'm sure that makes Primaltruck feel all the better. shrug...quelle surprise

It's not the job of the moderators and coordinators to make people feel better. This is not a kindergarden, and primaltruck did not skin his knee. I believe that some attempt was made to help primaltruck see things in a little more rational manner, which is a testament to the kind-heartedness of the mods. And if you think the mods here don't have kind hearts, you haven't visited enough Internet forums.

Sorry, but it IS the job of the moderators/coordinators to handle a matter such as this in a serious manner...several of them have stated repeatedly in this thread (as well as in the past threads) that...{assumes serious voice} these situations are discussed as a team, fairly & seriously (dare I say "professionally"?), behind the scenes and a consensus "vote" is taken. {ends serious voice} Yet the public demeanor & remarks of some of these same people in this thread reflects nothing but joking around and a total lack of seriousness. If I were Primaltruck, it would make me wonder if that's the way matters such as these are actually handled behind the scenes...lots of jokes, wisecracks and mockery (like the kindergarden you mentioned, perhaps?)...despite their claims to the contrary...

To my sensibility, NOT very professional behavior and not how the representatives of this site should be behaving...

but this is nothing new...in fact, NONE of this is new...the situation, the behavior, comments like yours...

...people either have their eyes open or their eyes closed...

...quelle surprise...

so sorry to see this all happening with you Bill. I have seen the image, and it was inoffensive...

and it's so nice to see the moderators/coordinators joking around so much...I'm sure that makes Primaltruck feel all the better.

shrug...quelle surprise

My thoughts & prayers are with you and your family, Sandy.

...bit of a cross post with Khai...who probably explained it better anyway!

Hi Stacey, thank you for your response...I do appreciate it and also think it is the sort of comprehensive answer I was asking for...so, I thank you again.

In exchange, I will try to answer YOUR question, though perhaps you meant it to be a rhetorical question to make a point rather than actually seeking an answer. Here's one anyway...

When I joined Rosity, I was interested in looking at the tutorials and at uploading images. I'm sure I looked at the TOS at the time, but I think we'd both agree it's a rather long document (probably out of necessity)...right now it's about 4 full page screens (and that's using a much smaller font size than was in place when I joined) plus there are links within the TOS that take you to other pages (such as the copyright policy). It's a lot to read & absorb and I'm sure I focused the most on the parts of the site that I wanted to use. That's just human nature and most of us aren't lawyers used to reading lengthy legalese documents. If it was there when I joined, I probably saw the part about private messages, but since I didn't know anyone here that I'd be sending IM's to, I wouldn't have paid as much attention to it as say the gallery policies, so it didn't sink in...my mistake, to be sure, but again just human nature.

As you also know, for many members here, English is not the language they normally use, so there may be issues in fully understanding all of the parts of the TOS. I'm not saying that's your fault, but you ask "why" people might be surprised at site mail being monitored...they may never have fully understood those sections of the TOS.

Stacey, you have to work with the TOS everyday as part of your job. I expect you know it inside and out...probabaly better than any other admin here and that's quite commendable. The run-of-the-mill Rosity member hasn't memorized the TOS, and I don't think you really expect us to. Most of us know (or should know) the TOS sections that directly affect the parts of the site we use. So MY first reaction to this subject was, huh, I would think private messages are private.

So that's the answer to your question. If a member is being harrassed or threatened, I fully support the admins using all the tools available to them to put an end to that sort of behavior, including checking private messages...and I think most other people would agree. But I think you and I can also agree that there have been on-going concerns by the membership about whether Rosity rules & guidelines are always enforced equally & equitably from member-to-member or by admin-to-admin...as hard as you might try to discuss issues and reach a consensus view, differences can & do develop. So I have been pursuing this subject with that on-going concern in mind. Maybe DebbieM was saying the exact same thing you were on this subject, or maybe there are differences in views between the two of you...it doesn't really matter to me at this point.

Anyway, that's why some us were surprised. I would guess you've experienced the same sort of thing at some point in your own life, maybe a clause in a bank account policy burried back on page 33 you didn't know existed that suddenly had some relevence to you, or an insurance policy that excludes on page 16 the one thing you needed covered. It happens whenever documents are lengthy and it really shouldn't surprise you that it could happen at Rosity, too...imho.

Thanks again...peace to you, Jen

Well, I'm gonna bow out of this discussion as there seems to be little progress being made on the subject and few other members seem concerned about it.

I still don't believe the matter has been addressed here (and I've asked a couple of times) regarding the apparent discrepency in attitudes among admins regarding monitoring/reading members' private messages...ranging from StaceyG's obvious reluctance to look at our private messages to DebbieM's clear willingness to do so. Other members can continue to press this issue if they're interested.

And for the record, let's not forget that the original accusation made by the admin against the merchant discussed in the locked thread about using Rosity's messaging system for 'spamming" turned out to be a false accusation.

{waves to Hedda Hi hon...nice to see you...how's ya doin'? }

karen1573 said:

Quote - The scenario in that locked thread wasn't a case of harrassment or threat...though I guess you'll say it's covered by that fuzzy "etc" you always included...

Yes, it was. The member had been accused of spamming other members.

Yes, it was...what??

Certainly you're not suggesting "spamming" is harrassment? Certainly you're not suggesting "spamming" is a threat?

[BTW, If I followed that locked thread correctly, I understood that the merchant demonstrated the messages had been sent from their own computer using Outlook Express and NOT on R'osity's mail system...but (as requested by jumpstartme2 & StaceyG) that merchant's situation is not the subject of this thread.]

If you go back and re-read my post, you'll see that my actual point was how DebbieM jumped at the opportunity to emphasize that members' site mails & emails could be monitored and how that left a totally different impression on this matter compared to the "No, No, No" answers Stacey had given.

From Stacey I heard basically this: We consider members private messages to be just that...PRIVATE. But in extreme situations such as if someone is being harassed or threatened by another member, we might, reluctantly, have to read member's mail.

From DebbieM's statements I almost got this impression: Reading members' private messages...sure, no problem.

Sorry, it's just the way it comes across to me. I guess I think the members are entitled to know which it is rather than having a widely different threashold or standard depending on which admin you just happen to be dealing with at the time.

jumping back in here for a moment...

Stacey, I was reading through the now-locked thread located in the Copyright Forum (originally posted to the Poser Forum) and I noticed something interesting.

Without my commenting on the rightness or wrongness of it having been included, there IS a site mail or email (not sure which it is) being quoted in that thread...it's from a rosity admin to a member...I guess it's from DebbieM (it was a little hard for me to follow all the whos, whats & whens in that thread...if I'm wrong on who it's from, I apologize to DebbieM in advance)...but it quotes the rosity admin regarding this very topic of reading members' private messages...

So last night during the discussion you and I had here, in all of the specific scenarios I asked about whether admins would resort to reading member's private messages, I'll concede that I did NOT describe a scenario that matches the topic of that now-locked thread...I concede that point right up front. But with the wide variety of scenarios I DID describe, you had no trouble insisting that, of course not, members' messages wouldn't be reviewed by any of the admins in those circumstances...

Yet, I was really amazed that in DebbieM's mail message she jumped at the opportunity to emphasize that members' site mails & emails could be monitored. It really leaves quite a different impression on this topic compared to the No, No, No, No, No, No answers you gave me last night. I would also point out that one of the scenarios I described to you was a dispute between a merchant and the admins (a little different topic, but not TOTALLY out in left field) and your response was still "No".

The scenario in that locked thread wasn't a case of harrassment or threat...though I guess you'll say it's covered by that fuzzy "etc" you always included...

Still, the conspicuous willingness DebbieM expressed to in fact scrutinize private messages appears quite out-of-step with the impression you left us with last night on this subject.