(Post a new comment)

	dae 2004-03-06 12:27 am UTC (link)
	And second point... those strings she claims to have added in? There's no other logical choice for the strings to go... so the chances are that someone could have done it anyway (Reply to this)(Thread)

	judyhazeleyes 2004-03-06 03:02 am UTC (link)
	THANK YOU! i was thinking that exact thing myself. i mean, if you added in a clown mask or tapdancing monkeys, i could see where the fury would come from. but sheesh - extending a pre-existing background? not exactly rocket science. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(Anonymous)
2004-03-07 03:03 am UTC (link)

Nah, it's not rocket science; but, it's a nifty image and the evidence is pretty clearly in favour that she made the image. The conflict probably could have been a lot smoother if the "thief" hadn't been so bratty about the whole thing. Bitching about making a 100x100 pixel cropped image and someone else using it "without permission" is one pathetic thing, but spending quality time working on a legimate graphic is another.

-Quantumbitch (http://quantumbitch.livejournal.com/info)

PS: And, yes, I am here because Lyme had mentioned it. So what.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	(Anonymous) 2004-03-07 03:05 am UTC (link)
	[ahem] that's legitimate, rather. - Quantumbitch (http://quantumbitch.livejournal.com/info) (Reply to this)(Parent)

	N'gah! eiviiaru 2004-03-06 12:43 am UTC (link)
	And what a goddamn ugly LJ layout to wank about, at that. I mean, Jesus! (Reply to this)

	guinevere33 2004-03-06 04:15 am UTC (link)
	Also, unless Roselady has changed the background image file, THE WATERMARK IS STILL THERE. Lower right-hand corner. Same as on Lyme's website. So I have no idea what she was bitching about. Some folks be so crazy... (Reply to this)(Thread)

	julia 2004-03-06 05:39 am UTC (link)
	Mind you, it took me an extra two clicks to see that watermark myself. I don't know how it works for Internet Explorer, but in Mozilla you just right click and choose "View Background Image"... You get a gold star, for no real reason! (Reply to this)(Parent)

Um, hello?
(Anonymous)
2004-03-07 01:30 am UTC (link)

If she made it, she has every reason to be mad. If I made an image and someone took it like that, I too would bring it to their attention. If you have no talent and use someone else's work, at least credit them. I create and edit images myself, and I can tell you, even extending something as "easy" as that takes a lot of effort and talent. Especially to make it look like it was originally part of the image. This person has every reason to be unhappy about the theft of what she made.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	Re: Um, hello? evening_rose 2004-03-07 02:29 am UTC (link)
	::pokes:: Hallo there. You are? Need a code? Or are you too sockpuppety? Because...you only showed up after I mentioned to lyme that gasp! she had been wanked. Will you be sticking around? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: Um, hello? (Anonymous) 2004-03-07 03:13 am UTC (link)
	No, I don't have a code, and you've thoroughly convinced me I don't want one to this site. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: Um, hello? amasaglajax 2004-03-08 03:23 pm UTC (link)
	Ouchies, man! That one hurt! : (Reply to this)(Parent)

	Re: Um, hello? phosfate 2004-03-08 04:33 pm UTC (link)
	sporfle! (Reply to this)(Parent)

	Re: Um, hello? apoplexia 2004-03-08 04:55 pm UTC (link)
	blows conch shell No, wait, that's for meta-wank. What I meant to say was: gather round ye bitchy girls from high school! (Reply to this)(Parent)

(Anonymous)
2004-03-07 02:40 am UTC (link)

mmm, because you wouldn't mind in the least, if something you'd spent hours making was taken without permission, your signature removed from it (or in this case, conveniently hidden), and passed off as someone else's? i'm sure, if you didn't care about having your hard work ripped off, you'd let it go without a word.

and to those who are saying "waaah, it's easy to do that!", i challenge you to delete the left half of that image and reproduce the effects half as well as (http://www.livejournal.com/userinfo.bml?user=Lyme)Lyme (http://www.livejournal.com/users/Lyme/) did. you can't do that with the line or stamp tool, and not have it look like you did a half-ass job.

it shows real maturity, posting to another journalling site, to call attention to someone who's just trying to have their work recognised as theirs. your post is the only instance of wanking i can see.

~ (http://www.livejournal.com/userinfo.bml?user=chianagirl)Chi (http://www.livejournal.com/users/chianagirl/)

(Reply to this)

	evening_rose 2004-03-07 03:12 am UTC (link)
	Aaaaaand we have minions. Right. ::scurries off to dinner:: (Reply to this)(Thread)

(Anonymous)
2004-03-07 03:42 am UTC (link)

Well... I'm not a minion of Lyme's and I am not the previous poster. I am Lyme's friend though and I would like to state that these children couldn't even ask for the image nor could they apologize once the theft was laid out in the open. Instead they chose to ask what her problem was, then treat her as if she had no right to be upset.

Now I, at this time, have been lucky enough that my graphics haven't been stolen. I have however, had bootlegs of concerts that I found and cleaned up stolen and sold for profit. Some of these bootlegs come to me in such poor quality it takes me months to clean them up (making them crisp, clear, and live) and provide them free. Then along comes some dweeb that can't do it themselves downloading them after I premier them and going off to Ebay and selling them as their own creation.

So I can see why Lyme would be upset that her original idea and concept was stolen with no credit. At least these little jerks didn't sell her graphics as their own. I wouldn't put it past them since they obviously took credit for its creation.

~ (http://www.livejournal.com/userinfo.bml?user=barbthebrazen)Barbarella (http://www.livejournal.com/users/barbthebrazen/)

(Reply to this)(Parent)

faultypremise
2004-03-07 04:04 am UTC (link)

*snert* You know, it's one thing to complain about something that took maybe five minutes of work or the actual 'creator' is disputable.

But this is just stupid. If this asshat stole an image that actually took time and effort, the least she can do is be apologetic. Sorry, but she's in the wrong on this one. Perhaps Lyme could have handled it better, but why is she being scrutinized for this? Why are you not chasitizing the individual who stole the image?

Splooge all over the place, all right.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	evening_rose 2004-03-07 04:31 am UTC (link)
	I'm not criticizing her because I can't say for certain that she's the one who stole the image. And neither can Lyme. Yes, it should have ended when Lyme asked to be credited or the image remove. But, it didn't. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	faultypremise 2004-03-07 04:57 am UTC (link)
	Funny, but for someone who got into the middle of something that had nothing to do with you, you sure didn't check all your facts either, while accusing lyme of the same thing. Hypocrite much? (Reply to this)(Parent)

	quinctia 2004-03-08 07:28 am UTC (link)
	I saw lyme splooging all over the place because the watermark is still there. That, and I'm sorta gawking that the pic took four hours to PS when I could redraw the damn thing in that amount of time. (Reply to this)(Parent)

(Anonymous)
2004-03-07 06:35 am UTC (link)

I find it hard to believe this is your first wank. You seem very practiced.

I also like how everything is on livejournal, but you're posting this here. I have a livejournal, but have already wasted too much time here and am way to lazy to code my addy. I don't see that you have any business getting in the middle and starting shit.

Okay, this is super-boring now. I hope it was good for you, because it didn't do anything for me.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	amasaglajax 2004-03-08 03:25 pm UTC (link)
	That's because fandom_wank and all its brethren were kicked off livejournal, ya idjit. ^__________^ And she ain't startin' shit, she just be reportin' on it, so don't be hatin'. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	evening_rose 2004-03-08 03:39 pm UTC (link)
	You know..I've been meaning to ask, what IS that in your icon? @_@ ::hypnotized by the strangeness:: XD Thanks for the stick-up, there. Well...that didn't come out like I wanted it to. Buut, yeah..o_O (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	amasaglajax 2004-03-08 04:41 pm UTC (link)
	I don't even know ^_^ theatresphynx over on LJ made it for me out of some random hilarious GIF she encountered. I luurrve it. Undulating!boy ^___^ he is my OTP, all by himself. and you're welcome for the stick-up! (*is thinking of self as bank robber, bustin' in to otf_wank: "This is a stick-up! Give me all your wank, and make it shnappy!") (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	evening_rose 2004-03-08 07:34 pm UTC (link)
	"All your wank are belong to us?"-type stick-up?? XD And..."Undulating Boy" is still hypnotizing. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

amasaglajax
2004-03-08 08:56 pm UTC (link)

undulating!boy will never cease to be hypnotizing. @_@ all must bow down before him as their pagan idol!

In A.D. 2004
Wank was beginning

Wanker: What happen?
Sockpuppet: Somebody set up us the wank.
Sockpuppet: We get wankers.
Wanker: What!
Sockpuppet: Fandom Wank turn on.
Wanker: It's You!!
Hive Vagina: How are you gentlemen!!
Hive Vagina: All your wank are belong to us.
Hive Vagina: You are on the way to spooge.
Wanker: What you say!!
Hive Vagina: You have no chance to survive make your condom.
Hive Vagina: lolololololol
Wanker: Take off every "zig."
Wanker: You know what you doing.
Wanker: Move "zig".
Wanker: For great erection.

^_____^

(Reply to this)(Parent)

	phosfate 2004-03-08 04:35 pm UTC (link)
	Nope. You're still boring. (Reply to this)(Parent)