IIRC, the license for the gallery has run out (for the updates) and the WF version of the gallery doesn't work with the current version of the board anymore. At least that's what I read somewhere (Nick's announcement maybe?).
This is a perfectly honest question: Is the $100 a problem? I would be perfectly willing to kick in something, and I suspect quite a few others would be as well. I would bet we could raise the $100 in a few hours, even during the slow part of the day. If it's just a question of money, that's not hard to solve.
Indeed, and then our license expired when the software changed hands. It's not the $100 that is a problem, its the throwing good money after bad.
I'm a little unclear on what the problem is, then. This was a popular feature. If there is money for it, why not do it? I'm not that interested in the gallery personally, but I've always been willing to contribute to some sort of general Wordforge fund, so I know you guys would ask if you needed the cash. Is there a technical problem? If so, that should go near the top of the list for fixes, IMO.
I don't get it either. What does this mean? In the meantime, does anyone know where I can put porn where they won't ban my account for it?
Because we already owned a copy of the software with upgrade rights, but they revoked our license when the software changed hands. We're not happy about it, and we're not going to spend $100 on a gallery software unless there is no other alternative. So at the moment I am posting over at vbulletin.org for recommended gallery replacements.
Well, there are times to stand on principle, Nick, but I don't think this is one of those times. If they revoked the license at the ownership transfer, I'm sure the fine print spelled that out somewhere. Essentially, your demanding a license different from the one the board owned, or that the rules for a different license be applied. Meanwhile, the board quality suffers while you stand your ground. By all means, if you can quickly find a gallery option that is better and/or cheaper and/or easier to implement, then go for it, but I wouldn't dedicate much time to that if it were me. People want the gallery, you have a quick and inexpensive option for installing one. Crying foul over a questionable license dispute isn't a good reason to stall for long.
I do think it is one of those times, not to mention the new owners supposedly have an inferior product. I have two different gallery options I'm currently investigating.
When you say owners, do you mean Elwood, or do you mean the software company? I thought you meant the former, but if it is the latter, that is a different situation. If so, good luck with the alternatives.
And by software owner, you mean the company, right, not the guy holding the license to use it? Because your terminology, though perhaps clear in your mind, probably isn't to most reading this thread.