Just giving you new space...and I like the comment above.
Actually, I went over to DST to find some smack worthy stuff, and I couldn't find anything. Pretty boring over there unless you are into arguing over health care reform.
So I don't want to kill the conversation started in the last thread...Why has DST lost its luster? Have people moved on to a new craft, have people moved to store forums, are people actually scrapping for themselves or have they all turned into designers?
1,717 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 1601 – 1717 of 1717Irene Alexeeva waited the full six months before going to Scrap Orchard--she mentioned it more than once on her blog while she was waiting. They must have threatened her with it when she left, b/c she didn't like it, but she waited it out.
Yes, the 6-month non-compete is absolutely true. However, it is un-enforceable, as you cannot legally prevent people from doing what they do to make a living.
DSP has tried (unsuccessfully) to enforce this for designers who have gone to sell elsewhere, but they can't seem to prevent (or threaten) people from selling elsewhere anyways.
Yes, the 6-month non-compete is absolutely true. However, it is un-enforceable, as you cannot legally prevent people from doing what they do to make a living.
DSP has tried (unsuccessfully) to enforce this for designers who have gone to sell elsewhere, but they can't seem to prevent (or threaten) people from selling elsewhere anyways.
October 17, 2009 11:32 AM
^^^^^^
That right there tells me all I would ever need to know about DSP.
I do not support businesses with such shoddy and slimy business practices.
yes it is too enforceable but maybe DSP doesn't want to pay the legal fees to do it
not enforcable
DSP is a waste of cyberspace.
To not allow designers to sell THE SAME ITEMS they had at DSP for a period of time after they leave is one thing but it is in fact illegal to stop someone from making their living in their usual manner. DSP wouldn't have a leg to stand on in court. They do that as a scare tactic to try and discourage people from leaving. That's probably whey those "long term" designers are still there. The scare tactic may be working on the ill informed ones in the bunch.
^^^^^^^
Why? In the corporate world when you are head hunted, they still make you sign a contract, with their own clauses. Admittedly, they may be lenient in some of them but I would say that 'exclusivity' clauses would remain very much intact.
I do not support businesses with such shoddy and slimy business practices.
October 17, 2009 12:17 PM
----------------
Exclusivity clauses are a standard in a lot of corporate business. So many of you keep going on about digi stores needing to be more professional, but then when they are, you bitch about it.
My money, my choice. I spend it where I want.
Exclusivity clauses are a standard in a lot of corporate business. So many of you keep going on about digi stores needing to be more professional, but then when they are, you bitch about it.
October 17, 2009 7:19 PM
There's a big difference between professional behavior and typical corporate tactics. If you can't see that, then that's too bad.
^^^
Spot on! Perhaps 7:19 could direct us to the posts asking for digital stores to conduct themselves like gigantic corporate conglomerates??
"So many of you keep going on about digi stores needing to be more professional, but then when they are, you bitch about it."
_____________________________
What is professional about having a policy that intimidates or threatens a designer? If you are a good store with good management, you don't need exclusivity contracts. Besides, in this economy I think its ludicrous to expect that of any designer.
I think we all do want stores to be professional and at the same token, not enslave people. I think it is good that people speak out and talk about these kinds of things.
Maybe one of the enslaved will read this and break free LOL... Come to light...you can design anywhere....AND you don't have to look like your neighbor....be free little birds...be free....
Who besides Ruby didn't wait the full 6 months? Stacey Jewell Stahl? 6 months. Beth Nixon? 6 months. Irene Alexeeva? 6 months. Amber Gray? I don't think she's even designing anymore. Not sure how Ruby got away with not waiting the 6 months.
I don't shop there anymore because of the Stepford mentality and how they treat some of their designers.
Exclusivity clauses are a standard in a lot of corporate business. So many of you keep going on about digi stores needing to be more professional, but then when they are, you bitch about it.
October 17, 2009 7:19 PM
-------------------------------------
"Exclusivity" and "not selling anwhere else at all for 6 months" ARE NOT the same thing. Exclusivity means one of two things. 1. They can only sell at one store. 2. They can only sell particular items at one store. They are free to sell at other stores but must sell different items.
Let's keep on topic here. We were talking about DSP trying to stop desigers from doing any selling anywhere else for 6 months after they leave DSP.
What is DSP frightened of you may ask! Answer in one: frightened their customers will follow them elsewhere (newbies especially) and actually realise there is a whole digi world outside of DSP.
What is DSP frightened of you may ask! Answer in one: frightened their customers will follow them elsewhere (newbies especially) and actually realise there is a whole digi world outside of DSP.
October 17, 2009 9:40 PM
Ding, ding, ding! We have a winner!
Not sure how Ruby got away with not waiting the 6 months.
____________________________
It is called a non-compete clause not an exclusivity clause and it is enforceable and legal. The reason Ruby "got away with it" is because she does not live in the United States. She falls outside of US jurisprudence.
My money, my choice. I spend it where I want.
October 17, 2009 7:44 PM
000000000000
Who said you couldn't?
I think we all do want stores to be professional and at the same token, not enslave people.
--------------
Enslave? You've got to be kidding me.
I don't shop there anymore because of the Stepford mentality
October 17, 2009 9:11 PM
-----------
I'm seeing an awful lot of Stepford mentality on this blog.
What is DSP frightened of you may ask! Answer in one: frightened their customers will follow them elsewhere (newbies especially) and actually realise there is a whole digi world outside of DSP.
October 17, 2009 9:40 PM
Ding, ding, ding! We have a winner!
October 17, 2009 9:43 PM
-----------
Oh yeah, for sure, that's the answer (snort)
^^^
:yawn:
I'm seeing an awful lot of Stepford mentality on this blog.
October 18, 2009 12:06 AM
Self awareness is the first step. Hope you can conquer that Stepford mentality-take it one day at a time.
^^^^^^^
Wishing you the same.
Maybe your best bud Robyn doesn't leave because she can't live without her design income for six months.
October 16, 2009 9:47 PM
--------------------------------
I don't think it is that big of a deal, Chloe & Ruby set up shop elsewhere only weeks later...
I don't shop there anymore because of the Stepford mentality and how they treat some of their designers.
October 17, 2009 9:11 PM
------------------------------
How on EARTH would you know how they treat their designers??
I somehow doubt you were one of them!
What is DSP frightened of you may ask! Answer in one: frightened their customers will follow them elsewhere (newbies especially) and actually realise there is a whole digi world outside of DSP.
October 17, 2009 9:40 PM
----------------------------
Oh get a grip! They have over 120,000 members, do you think they really care if a few newbies go elsewhere??
What is professional about having a policy that intimidates or threatens a designer? If you are a good store with good management, you don't need exclusivity contracts. Besides, in this economy I think its ludicrous to expect that of any designer.
--------------------------------
How is it a threat if the designer sees the contract right there before they sign up? How is that intimidating?
Clauses like that are standard in business..DSP are a business and act like one, instead of all the SAHM stores in the rest of Digiland. It is not something done on the side as a hobby, it is a business and run like one.
^^^^^^^^^
At last, someone who makes sense. Your replies echo my sentiments exactly. Kinda creepy actually, but refreshing.
At last, someone who makes sense. Your replies echo my sentiments exactly. Kinda creepy actually, but refreshing.
October 18, 2009 6:44 PM
-------------------------------
Oh yay, someone who actually agrees with me for a change! LOL
Clauses like that are standard in business..DSP are a business and act like one, instead of all the SAHM stores in the rest of Digiland. It is not something done on the side as a hobby, it is a business and run like one.
^^^^^
Pure insanity. I've been in the white collar world for many, many years in various positions, primarily in sales and marketing, and I have never seen or heard of anyone having to sign a 'non-compete' clause. Of course, this could be because I'm in California and in this state they're almost never enforced. In my opinion, non-competes are stupid, immoral, largely unenforceable, and definitely not the 'norm'. If this is evidence of what 'being a business' means to DSP, then I'll stick to the 'SAHM' stores, thanks.
Oh get a grip! They have over 120,000 members, do you think they really care if a few newbies go elsewhere??
October 18, 2009 6:01 PM
-------------------------------
120,000 members does NOT mean they have 120,000 customers. How many of those have never posted in the gallery or forums? There's a good chance a lot of those people have never purchased from there either.
120,000 members does NOT mean they have 120,000 customers. How many of those have never posted in the gallery or forums? There's a good chance a lot of those people have never purchased from there either.
October 18, 2009 10:05 PM
-----------------
By that argument, those people wouldn't be a loss to the site then, would they?
I've been in the white collar world for many, many years in various positions, primarily in sales and marketing, and I have never seen or heard of anyone having to sign a 'non-compete' clause.
__________________________________
Personal antidotes are hardly dispositive. Non-compete clauses are very common (And enforceable) in certain industries especially in regards to research & development positions. Personally I think that it is silly that any digital scrapbooking site would have a non-compete clause but that is their choice. The designers entering into such a contract are not forced to do so. However, if they do enter into such a contract the ETHICAL thing to do would be to abide by it. If some designers have gotten away with violating that aspect of the contract it is more a reflection of their unethical choices than it is on DSP.
Pure insanity. I've been in the white collar world for many, many years in various positions, primarily in sales and marketing, and I have never seen or heard of anyone having to sign a 'non-compete' clause. Of course, this could be because I'm in California and in this state they're almost never enforced. In my opinion, non-competes are stupid, immoral, largely unenforceable, and definitely not the 'norm'. If this is evidence of what 'being a business' means to DSP, then I'll stick to the 'SAHM' stores, thanks.
October 18, 2009 9:31 PM
-------------------------------
Non-compete clauses are not enforcable in California.
from wikipedia...
A non-compete clause or covenant not to compete (CNC), is a term used in contract law under which one party (usually an employee) agrees not to pursue a similar profession or trade in competition against another party (usually the employer). As a contract provision, a CNC is bound by traditional contract requirements including the consideration doctrine. The use of such clauses is premised on the possibility that upon their termination or resignation, an employee might begin working for a competitor or starting a business, and gain competitive advantage by abusing confidential information about their former employer's operations or trade secrets, or sensitive information such as customer/client lists, business practices, upcoming products, and marketing plans.
Conversely, a business might abuse a non-compete covenant to prevent an employee from working elsewhere at all. Most jurisdictions in which such contracts have been examined by the courts have deemed CNCs to be legally binding so long as the clause contains reasonable limitations as to the geographical area and time period in which an employee of a company may not compete. Courts have held that, as a matter of public policy, an individual cannot be barred from carrying out a trade in which (s)he has been trained except to the extent that is necessary to protect the employer.[citation needed]
The extent to which non-compete clauses are legally allowed varies per jurisdiction. Some jurisdictions, such as the state of California in the US, invalidate non-compete-clauses for all but equity stakeholders in businesses.[1]
120,000 members does NOT mean they have 120,000 customers. How many of those have never posted in the gallery or forums? There's a good chance a lot of those people have never purchased from there either.
October 18, 2009 10:05 PM
------------------------------
Ok, so say halve it.. still a hell of a lot of members who are more than likely buying.. given that I halved it. Why would you join a site if you weren't going to buy there???
By that argument, those people wouldn't be a loss to the site then, would they?
October 18, 2009 10:55 PM
-------------------------------
Precisely, and it would make it clear that having a non-compete clause has nothing to do with loosing a few customers.
If DSP is providing their Designers with specialized training or some kind of inside-information, then I could see them trying to protect themselves with a non-compete to prevent the designers from taking advantage of the knowledge/information and using it elsewhere.
But, I doubt that's the case. If it were, then they should just write the contract differently. They could determine the cost of the training and if the designers left before a certain amount of time, then they could require that the training be reimbursed.
Not really sure why we are arguing about the non compete clause. As has been pointed out, it's there on the site for anyone to see and if the designers choose to join that site, on their head be it. Any designer who joins up with any site without being fully aware of what's involved, deserves all they get. And I don't want to hear about non English speakers. Most of them are pretty damn canny about matters involving income and work.
Ruby Rynne/French Ruby and the rest are definitely unethical for signing any non-compete clause, then leaving and not abiding by it. WHY would anyone continue to support such behaviour? OOOHHHHH that's right - so many of you on here think Ruby's snarky attitude is refreshing. No honor among thieves, I guess.
^^^^^^
Excuse me?
You have no idea what went on behind closed doors with Ruby and DSP.
However, carry on with your assumptions and your limited view of the world, it seems to be getting you somewhere I presume.
I look at DSP's numbers the same way that I look at DST's.
Registered members doesn't mean active or spending members. Plenty of people that once registered at those sites have moved on, but not bothered to delete their user accounts.
I can promise you that traffic and sales were way down if they caved in on the 200 vs. 300 issue. That was something they were rabid about for a long time.
Oh yeah, that 200 thing was their passion. They extolled the virtues and claimed it was the "industry standard" and WHO do you think it was who decided what the industry standard was?????? DSP of course. If it was the bee all and end all that they claimed they wouldn't have gone with the 300 choice. Talk about frigging hypocracy!
October 18, 2009 9:31 PM
I had to sign a non-compete clause before. It was for 12 months, for that period of time I couldn't work for a company that directly competed with the company that I worked for if I quit.
It didn't stop me from earning my living like DSP does with theirs. There were plenty of avenues I could have pursued that were still in my area of expertise, but didn't directly compete with the business that I had signed my contract with.
What is known is that DSP requires designers to sign a contract that includes a six-month non-compete clause. Stacey Jewell Stahl, Beth Nixon, and Irene Alexeeva all honored that contract. Store owners who would consider signing any of these women could be confident, based on past actions, that they would be equally ethical in honoring their contracts. The same cannot be said of other designers who apparently did not honor their contracts with DSP. Was there some private agreement between DSP and these designers to waive the requirements of the non-compete clause? It is possible but I doubt it. Reputation is a valuable thing founded on exhibited actions. It is not unreasonable to question the ethics of designers who apparently do not honor the terms of the contracts they sign.
Call me crazy, but I thought when DSP ran their contest they had the option of a trial contract to the winners. The limited contract was for 6 months with no non-compete attached, and if you stayed on longer than you would honor the regular contract. Since I didn't join the contest I didn't pay that much attention, but before you guys jump all over someone for not honoring a contract, maybe you should consider that they didn't have the standard contract as the other designers since it was a contest. Just saying.
Anonymous said...
It is not unreasonable to question the ethics of designers who apparently do not honor the terms of the contracts they sign.
October 19, 2009 11:07 AM
--
APPARENTLY being the operative word. Appearances can be deceiving, don't forget.
it would be great if Ruby would come on here and say why she was able to sell somewhere else without being held to the 6 months non-compete. She has been here before, if memory serves correctly
The designers entering into such a contract are not forced to do so. However, if they do enter into such a contract the ETHICAL thing to do would be to abide by it. If some designers have gotten away with violating that aspect of the contract it is more a reflection of their unethical choices than it is on DSP.
------------------------------------
I was thinking the same thing but you said it better than I could.
I can promise you that traffic and sales were way down if they caved in on the 200 vs. 300 issue. That was something they were rabid about for a long time.
---------------------------------
Sales may not have been down. It could have been a strategic move to increase sales.
If it was the bee all and end all that they claimed they wouldn't have gone with the 300 choice. Talk about frigging hypocracy!
--------------------------------
Because someone changes their mind doesn't mean it is a hypocrisy. I have been a supporter of the 200 PPI for many years. Not because of DSP but because of research I have done. But I now scrap at 300. Because I am a hypocrite? No, because that is what the norm thinks is right. Unfortunately what is popular is not always right and what is right is not always popular. But it is not a big deal. I still do not think we should be creating at 300 PPI. There are some people who agree with me and a whole lot more that don't. I'm just going with the flow.
Obviously this is an anonymous board and we have no idea who is posting. But I think there are a couple of disgruntled ex DSP'ers who just can't let up.
Someone has stated how bad DSP treats their designers. Unless you are or were a designer at DSP, how would you know how they treat their designers?
I've participated at DSP and I don't have a clue what goes on behind the scenes. And as a scrapper I don't want to know.
what's the deal with SA closing down their forums and gallery? Kind of a harsh direction to take. Why not leave them open and run the workshops as well?
what's the deal with SA closing down their forums and gallery? Kind of a harsh direction to take. Why not leave them open and run the workshops as well?
October 19, 2009 2:50 PM
-----------------------------
I was going to ask the same thing. While we're asking why do all the message boards seem abandoned?! It almost feels like a ghost town around digi these days.
forums are really on the way out. with the surge in facebook and twitter the ability to get "instant" replies is way more appealing then waiting for someone to reply.
with vbulletin jacking their price up from $100/yr to $280 I'll be surprised if a LOT of sites dont take this route....
forums are really on the way out. with the surge in facebook and twitter the ability to get "instant" replies is way more appealing then waiting for someone to reply.
with vbulletin jacking their price up from $100/yr to $280 I'll be surprised if a LOT of sites dont take this route....
October 19, 2009 3:39 PM
hmm, trying to get ideas or answers about scrapping from facebook or twitter just doesn't appeal to me. It's all very unorganized and a pain if you don't happen to be part of the "live" discussion.
It will be interesting to see what other sites do, but I really don't think they're all going to dump their forums and galleries. SA has made plenty of (IMO) bad decisions before, and I think this is another one of them.
I just went over to SA and looked at their weekend workshop schedule. So much of the stuff is Friday during work hours---totally not do-able for lots of us working stiffs.
But maybe all their looking for is the SAHM crowd?
it would be great if Ruby would come on here and say why she was able to sell somewhere else without being held to the 6 months non-compete. She has been here before, if memory serves correctly
October 19, 2009 1:58 PM
-----------
Why? As the whole matter doesn't involve piracy, copying, etc. there is absolutely no need for Ruby to come here and justify herself. None of you who are disparaging her were customers and never will be customers of hers.
I don't see why she should come here just to satisfy a bunch of idle gossipers who have nothing better to do. She does not have to explain her business dealings with DSP to you or anyone else.
what's the deal with SA closing down their forums and gallery? Kind of a harsh direction to take. Why not leave them open and run the workshops as well?
October 19, 2009 2:50 PM
-----------------
I'm surprised it's taken this long. This was something that was in the works and under discussion almost 12 months ago, but Nancie was persuaded not to do it then. I guess the lack of participation in the forums made up her mind and the fact that the gallery has become nothing more than a CT dumping ground would have just made it easier for her.
hmm, trying to get ideas or answers about scrapping from facebook or twitter just doesn't appeal to me. It's all very unorganized and a pain if you don't happen to be part of the "live" discussion.
-------------------
I absolutely agree. I don't do Facebook or Twitter in the first place and I'm not going to, just to participate in scrap discussions.
just went over to SA and looked at their weekend workshop schedule. So much of the stuff is Friday during work hours---totally not do-able for lots of us working stiffs.
But maybe all their looking for is the SAHM crowd?
October 19, 2009 4:07 PM
----------------------
And probably not doable for anyone in a different time zone either. I haven't looked as I know it won't be at a time that suits me, it never is.
i think SA is making a decent decison. i was on a site ct at a big store that closed and it is alot of work even tending to forums that are dying. with the state of digi right now I think it is a great compromise.
I absolutely agree. I don't do Facebook or Twitter in the first place and I'm not going to, just to participate in scrap discussions.
October 19, 2009 5:04 PM
I do both, but I totally agree with you that there's just no appeal in using them for scrapping info. I don't follow any scrapping sites or fan them. Being a FB 'fan' is just a pointless endeavor for me, and it's a marketing gimmick for them-they're just trying to accumulate fans the way sites try to accumulate registered users. At least when you register for a forum, you get some discussion or information out of it.
Maybe if Nancie put some time and effort into the forums it would be a nice place to hang out--it used to be, but then they seemed to get some real doozie site CTs and such.
Oh yeah, that 200 thing was their passion. They extolled the virtues and claimed it was the "industry standard" and WHO do you think it was who decided what the industry standard was?????? DSP of course. If it was the bee all and end all that they claimed they wouldn't have gone with the 300 choice. Talk about frigging hypocracy!
October 19, 2009 6:58 AM
------------------------------
Or maybe they decided the 200ppi thing while the industry was in it's infancy (they were one of the few earliest sites) and now think there is sufficient reason to change given that 99% of sites now have 300ppi is the standard??
Don't you think that makes more sense?
Since when is changing your mind hypocritical?
I look at DSP's numbers the same way that I look at DST's.
Registered members doesn't mean active or spending members. Plenty of people that once registered at those sites have moved on, but not bothered to delete their user accounts.
-----------------------------
Ok, how about site traffic then? Their traffic far surpasses anywhere else...yes, that does not all equal sales, but a significant portion of it does....
Call me crazy, but I thought when DSP ran their contest they had the option of a trial contract to the winners. The limited contract was for 6 months with no non-compete attached, and if you stayed on longer than you would honor the regular contract. Since I didn't join the contest I didn't pay that much attention, but before you guys jump all over someone for not honoring a contract, maybe you should consider that they didn't have the standard contract as the other designers since it was a contest. Just saying.
October 19, 2009 11:51 AM
-------------------------------
That was for those taken on as apprentices. Ruby, Robyn and Cloe were offered and took full designer contracts.
Why? As the whole matter doesn't involve piracy, copying, etc. there is absolutely no need for Ruby to come here and justify herself. None of you who are disparaging her were customers and never will be customers of hers.
I don't see why she should come here just to satisfy a bunch of idle gossipers who have nothing better to do. She does not have to explain her business dealings with DSP to you or anyone else.
October 19, 2009 5:00 PM
==============================
READS = Ruby says no comment...
I'm surprised it's taken this long. This was something that was in the works and under discussion almost 12 months ago, but Nancie was persuaded not to do it then. I guess the lack of participation in the forums made up her mind and the fact that the gallery has become nothing more than a CT dumping ground would have just made it easier for her.
October 19, 2009 5:02 PM
---------------------------------
I wouldn't be surprised if a lot more sites head in this direction... CT's have ruined a lot of good gallerys.
==============================
READS = Ruby says no comment...
October 19, 2009 6:21 PM
----------
Wrong. I'm not her, but you won't believe that as you have your own little ideas, don't you?
Ok, how about site traffic then? Their traffic far surpasses anywhere else...yes, that does not all equal sales, but a significant portion of it does....
October 19, 2009 6:14 PM
No, I don't think high traffic automatically equals sales. All those web stats are just that-stats that are easily manipulated and skewed.
DSP has enough of the die-hard old skool scrappers and naaive newbies to keep them afloat.
But the PP was correct--with the owner's past attitude towards the 200/300 DPI issue, they had to be concerned enough to cave on an issue that she (owner) swore she would NEVER do. Very telling for those of us who were around the digi community back then and saw how she acted about it.
I wouldn't be surprised if a lot more sites head in this direction... CT's have ruined a lot of good gallerys.
October 19, 2009 6:22 PM
--------------
A lot of galleries are now requiring that LOs have at least some of their store product. Some of them are going so far as requiring at least 50% and some even more. Not that I blame them. Why should they pay to advertise another store, another designer?
I wouldn't be surprised if a lot more sites head in this direction... CT's have ruined a lot of good gallerys.
October 19, 2009 6:22 PM
----------
ITA. What's the point when you see the same CT LOs over and over and over ad nauseum?
she (owner) swore she would NEVER do. Very telling for those of us who were around the digi community back then and saw how she acted about it.
October 19, 2009 6:31 PM
-----------
So? She made a business decision to go with the flow. I was around then and it doesn't tell me anything, except that some people who are going to hold that against the owner, have way too much time on their hands.
ITA. What's the point when you see the same CT LOs over and over and over ad nauseum?
October 19, 2009 6:34 PM
-------------
No kidding. One of the worst was the site CT for A5D. I could always tell when they had a new release as the gallery at SA would be flooded with their LOs.
Ok, how about site traffic then? Their traffic far surpasses anywhere else...yes, that does not all equal sales, but a significant portion of it does....
October 19, 2009 6:14 PM
---------------
No, they don't far exceed any where else. ScrapGirls does pretty well. Speaking of which, any one notice that Carrie Stephens and Chere Kaye now sell there?
A lot of galleries are now requiring that LOs have at least some of their store product. Some of them are going so far as requiring at least 50% and some even more. Not that I blame them. Why should they pay to advertise another store, another designer?
October 19, 2009 6:33 PM
Sadly, I have to agree. I have never been a CT scrapper, but loved and posted in the open galleries because I was always shopped from so many places and mixed so much stuff when I scrapped. I really appreciated the stores who understood that not every customer shops in one place exclusively. But all the CT dumping just ruined it a long time ago, and the galleries have been overrun with pure crap and every store is flooded with the same LOs over and over.
From the store's standpoint it makes no sense to host all that rampant pimping and advertising. It's a damn shame.
So? She made a business decision to go with the flow. I was around then and it doesn't tell me anything, except that some people who are going to hold that against the owner, have way too much time on their hands.
October 19, 2009 6:35 PM
Wrong. I don't shop there because the store design and navigation is god-awful and they have nothing that appeals to me.
It sounds like you're the one holding things against people. Not everyone has to like DSP. To expect that is just silly and immature.
So? She made a business decision to go with the flow.
--------------
So why didn't she make a 'business decision' to go with the flow long before she did?
300 has been the standard for years-since I started back in 2005. The 'flow' was already 99% of stores going with 300 back then.
No, they don't far exceed any where else. ScrapGirls does pretty well. Speaking of which, any one notice that Carrie Stephens and Chere Kaye now sell there?
October 19, 2009 6:38 PM
ScrapGirls is another site that has the late 80's and early 90's howling for their web design back.
she (owner) swore she would NEVER do. Very telling for those of us who were around the digi community back then and saw how she acted about it.
October 19, 2009 6:31 PM
-----------
So? She made a business decision to go with the flow. I was around then and it doesn't tell me anything, except that some people who are going to hold that against the owner, have way too much time on their hands.
October 19, 2009 6:35 PM
----------------------------
I never said that I hold anything against her-I'm not even sure *who* she is, and I honestly don't care who she is.
I said that she was so rigid and unyielding in her attitude about it that I thought she finally gave in on something *she herself* said she would never do because she was losing sales. It's a logical conclusion, and you're the only one attempting to make anything personal out of it.
^^^^
No, I'm not actually. I've never shopped at DSP, never registered there or anything else. Just throwing a different point of view out there.
Not everyone has to like DSP. To expect that is just silly and immature.
October 19, 2009 6:42 PM
------------
I never said everyone had to like them, in fact, I don't care if no one likes them. I'm merely offering a different POV.
Just throwing a different point of view out there.
October 19, 2009 7:36 PM
so you've never shopped or registered there, so you have no personal opinions of the place? you're just 'throwing a different point of view' out there? why?
So? She made a business decision to go with the flow. I was around then and it doesn't tell me anything, except that some people who are going to hold that against the owner, have way too much time on their hands.
October 19, 2009 6:35 PM
--------------------------------
ITA
The industry has changed, and so she is making a smart business decision. The industry has changed a hell of a lot since that decision was first made.. why shouldn't she change her mind??
No, they don't far exceed any where else. ScrapGirls does pretty well. Speaking of which, any one notice that Carrie Stephens and Chere Kaye now sell there?
October 19, 2009 6:38 PM
-------------------------------
Oh yeah, don't know why but I always forget about scrapgirls
ScrapGirls is another site that has the late 80's and early 90's howling for their web design back.
October 19, 2009 6:49 PM
---------------------------------
And yet, both scrapgirls and dsp get more hits than any other digiscrap site....goes to show that looks aren't everything....
so you've never shopped or registered there, so you have no personal opinions of the place? you're just 'throwing a different point of view' out there? why?
October 19, 2009 7:55 PM
-------------------------------
Why not? Why are you sharing YOUR opinion??
300 has been the standard for years-since I started back in 2005. The 'flow' was already 99% of stores going with 300 back then.
October 19, 2009 6:46 PM
-----------------------------
What 99% of only a handful of stores??
I never said that I hold anything against her-I'm not even sure *who* she is, and I honestly don't care who she is.
I said that she was so rigid and unyielding in her attitude about it that I thought she finally gave in on something *she herself* said she would never do because she was losing sales. It's a logical conclusion, and you're the only one attempting to make anything personal out of it.
October 19, 2009 6:54 PM
--------------------------------
How can you know what her attitude is like if you don't even know who she is????
so you've never shopped or registered there, so you have no personal opinions of the place? you're just 'throwing a different point of view' out there? why?
October 19, 2009 7:55 PM
-------------
Why? Do I really need to explain why a different POV is a good thing?
Why does every response to a question have to be another freakin' question? Man, digi has so jumped the shark... And y'all wonder why no one is active anywhere anymore...
The industry has changed, and so she is making a smart business decision. The industry has changed a hell of a lot since that decision was first made.. why shouldn't she change her mind??
October 19, 2009 8:45 PM
---------------------------------
Bullshit! The "industry" didn't change. All but DSP was doing 300ppi from the start. It was the arrogant ones at DSP who appointed themselves the "industry leaders" and "declared" that 200ppi was the standard. It never was!
I seem to remember Sally someone (Beecher or something. I can't remember) was very outspoken and tried to sway people into 200ppi way back when. She used to be in a few scrapping groups I was a member of and every time new people joined she would bring up the same tired old 200ppi argument. The others in the group got so tired of it. She was probably part of the DSP cheer squad LOL
Bullshit! The "industry" didn't change. All but DSP was doing 300ppi from the start. It was the arrogant ones at DSP who appointed themselves the "industry leaders" and "declared" that 200ppi was the standard. It never was!
I seem to remember Sally someone (Beecher or something. I can't remember) was very outspoken and tried to sway people into 200ppi way back when. She used to be in a few scrapping groups I was a member of and every time new people joined she would bring up the same tired old 200ppi argument. The others in the group got so tired of it. She was probably part of the DSP cheer squad LOL
October 19, 2009 10:48 PM
-------------------------------
Well you obviously haven't been part of it for long then if you don't think it has changed.
I have been involved in the industry since 2004 and it has changed a HUGE amount. Back then there was only a handful of digital scrapbook sites about.. now there is probably several hundred if not more.
There are a lot of trends and styles that have come and gone, and designer skills have come a very long way, not to mention the whole CU phenomenon which has DRAMATICALLY effected the industry, then the whole CT bombardment of galleries.... need I go on?
Bullshit! The "industry" didn't change. All but DSP was doing 300ppi from the start. It was the arrogant ones at DSP who appointed themselves the "industry leaders" and "declared" that 200ppi was the standard. It never was!
-------------------------------
They were and still are industry leaders, like it or not.
When they started out they were one of a handful of digiscrap sites and had a large portion of the community buyers of their products. Now the industry has expanded and so has the amount of stores, and they no longer have as big a share of the market because it has gotten so much bigger and spread out more..ie they now accept that the industry as a whole as decided that 300ppi has become the norm and so they are doing both 200 & 300ppi.
As far as I am aware they still consider 200ppi an acceptable number to use as do a large portion of their members, but since the industry has grown, so has their stance. It is common sense and has nothing to do with being hypocritical.
Oh yeah, don't know why but I always forget about scrapgirls
Maybe they should send out more newsletters.
Why does every response to a question have to be another freakin' question? Man, digi has so jumped the shark... And y'all wonder why no one is active anywhere anymore...
------------
One, not every question is responded to with a question
Two, I hate that expression. Mostly because no one remembers where it come from or why.
Three, this blog has very little to do with the whole of the digi community.
Oh yeah, don't know why but I always forget about scrapgirls
Maybe they should send out more newsletters.
October 19, 2009 11:28 PM
------------------------
Not sure if you are being snarky or not. You won't receive a newsletter if you aren't signed up and if you are signed up, you would now they send a newsletter every week day.
I was being snarky. Sorry you missed the humor in it. LOL
I believe it's from Happy Days when Fonzie water skied over a shark, or something.
Whatever, she is right. Digi sucks now in a way it didn't use to. :(
This blog can most definitely intimidate people into not posting at digi sites! Someone posts a LO or responds to a thread and there are pages and pages on this blog picking people apart, drawing false conclusions and outright lies.
People talk and share their stories of what is done to people here and of course some people will be skittish to share their personal photographs/layouts/feelings. You have to be naive to think that doesn't happen. There are people with feelings on the other side of the computer!
^^^^^^^^
Oh please, you exaggerate.
This blog can most definitely intimidate people into not posting at digi sites! Someone posts a LO or responds to a thread and there are pages and pages on this blog picking people apart, drawing false conclusions and outright lies.
People talk and share their stories of what is done to people here and of course some people will be skittish to share their personal photographs/layouts/feelings. You have to be naive to think that doesn't happen. There are people with feelings on the other side of the computer!
October 20, 2009 1:10 AM
--------------------
It does happen, but not on the scale that your are suggesting. The way your post reads, one would think that everyone gets picked on or something. That is simply not true. Not to mention that if someone takes what is said on this blog to heart, but manages to ignore any good that is said about, then they are just trying to seek the downer. Why do they feel the need to concentrate on the negative?
I noticed lots of comments on DSP, everything, in fact, except the obvious: their stuff is either ugly, dark, old ladyish, or drab, and it is all funereal. Perfect for the old fashioned tin type pictures, but I don't have too many of those.
On Laurin Bavin, specifically, her "groupies" are hideous. Each and every one is so old lady-ish and FAKE! They just look like what they are: computer generated pixels shaped into a _______. Her papers are suitable for Heritage or Halloween, but not any other kinds of pictures I want to scrap.
The good news: With all the styles that have come and gone in digiland, DSP stayed above the fray and has never been caught up with that. Of course, they never changed their styles to start with, but hey! what are you complaining about, I said something nice!
The store is a mess, like Designer Digitals, there is too much there.
Their gallery is THE BEST place for CT LOs. Any LO with papers/elements from a non-DSP designer sticks out like a sore thumb.
The good news: With all the styles that have come and gone in digiland, DSP stayed above the fray and has never been caught up with that. Of course, they never changed their styles to start with, but hey! what are you complaining about, I said something nice!
I almost decorated my monitor with my cup of tea, then :D
I've never had anybody tear me or my layouts apart. Guess I'm just another Suzy! Not a bad person to be really.
Their gallery is THE BEST place for CT LOs. Any LO with papers/elements from a non-DSP designer sticks out like a sore thumb.
October 20, 2009 1:29 AM
lol!
You can say what you want about DSP but they are one of the few store forums that are actually quite active.
You can say what you want about DSP but they are one of the few store forums that are actually quite active.
October 20, 2009 5:09 AM
Yep, and posting there is the equivalent of hanging out in the senior citizens hall when you're 20 or 30. It's just not for everyone.
On Laurin Bavin, specifically, her "groupies" are hideous. Each and every one is so old lady-ish and FAKE! They just look like what they are: computer generated pixels shaped into a _______. Her papers are suitable for Heritage or Halloween, but not any other kinds of pictures I want to scrap.
The good news: With all the styles that have come and gone in digiland, DSP stayed above the fray and has never been caught up with that. Of course, they never changed their styles to start with, but hey! what are you complaining about, I said something nice!
The store is a mess, like Designer Digitals, there is too much there.
Their gallery is THE BEST place for CT LOs. Any LO with papers/elements from a non-DSP designer sticks out like a sore thumb.
October 20, 2009 1:29 AM
*************************
Lauren Bavin has a wide range of styles and products- AND she was doing Steam Punk before others jumped on that bandwagon. You obviously have not really looked at her 1000+ products much. In fact, I only went 3 pages deep to see fantasy, reality, paper, vintage, steam punk, nature, etc.
I don't shop there, I don't really like the vibe that comes out of there, but I think your complaints, in particular, are totally baseless.
But the PP was correct--with the owner's past attitude towards the 200/300 DPI issue, they had to be concerned enough to cave on an issue that she (owner) swore she would NEVER do. Very telling for those of us who were around the digi community back then and saw how she acted about it.
__________________________________________________Possibly like every other digi store out there the sales have cooled because of the economy. I don't know of too many stores that haven't been affected and if there is a store saying they haven't then I might have to think twice about why they are telling little fibs. Scrappers are much more cautious about how they are spending their money these days and many have had to put spending anything on the back burner because they just don't have extra money for their scrapping. Just like every other segment of our society many are out of work. It just isn't the USA either many other countries are having their own money issues so maybe that is why DSP finally decided to go to 300 ppi. As a store I won't shop there or have anything to do with them and it has nothing to do with ppi but the fact that I don't like snobs of any shape or form and they turned me off a long time ago and never been back.
can someone show me an example of "steam punk" -- never heard that term before
can someone show me an example of "steam punk" -- never heard that term before
October 20, 2009 7:58 AM
-------------------------------------
Google is your friend.
Steampunk
http://store.digitalscrapbookplace.com/index.php?main_page=advanced_search_result&search_in_description=1&keyword=steampunk
http://www.digitalscrapbookplace.com/forum/showthread.php?t=38856
http://shop.scrapbookgraphics.com/product.php?productid=25619&cat=0&page=1
ewww, followed the steampunk links to DSP and have to say their stuff is beyond hideous.
For ladies interested in a pretty much pimping free gallery, check out Scrap In Style TV.
http://www.scrapinstyletv.com/portfolio/browse.php?type=cat&cat=14
You can browse through layouts without even seeing the credits. Great community.
An for the chick who called the women here intimidating. Do you get out much? This just a blog. Come on now! As a designer myself I would love to get talked crap about on here. Just imagine the blog hits! Teehee
anyone know what happened to MissCrow? her site says down for maintenance, and she's listed as banned on dst. Shes one of my favorite designers, I use a little of her stuff here and there on almost every l/o.
She's still at OScraps:
http://www.oscraps.com/shop/home.php?cat=347&treem=1
VR: belenzon (another one of satan's minions)
I heard my name was mentioned here (snort)...
I refer all those so apparently interested in my leaving DSP to my comment of July 26, 2009 9:00 AM (this blog, June post, fourth page of comments). I have nothing further to add to that. cf sleeping dogs, and so on.
Post a Comment