Encrypted SiteIni's and other stuff

doglover wrote:

I do not like the direction this all takes.
As an user of the first hour (ask Jan about this), I am shut-out of all kind of information now.
Treated like scum.
If I am occasionally asking for help, I am getting offers for payment.
Or getting a version which only works as long as the writer pleases (because, he put a PHP script in his server - so I have to pass via that one)
Also, if I can help, I am trying to help. Only to receive postings, that it is nonsense what I write. He can do it better.
Problem is: he does not post anything better. Just write: I can do better.
While my version just works fine. Agreed, when I looked again, there was a better way. But it is just different.
I am not interested in writing SiteIni's for the world. Only in those I use for the Rytec work of providing EPG for enigma2 receivers. So the help I can provide is for those SiteIni's.
(BTW: the Rytec EPG is free of charge - it only cost me money)
I am not even allow to post in the restricted section, while in the past I have written many, many SiteIni's
PS: writing SiteIni's for use on enigma2, requires modification of the SiteIni's. In enigma there are only 4 fields for info. Start/stop info, Title. Subtile and Description. We want all the other info too. But this requires stuffing it in the description and Subtitle fields.

Really sad to see such a post right from you, Willy. But let's analyze your comments:

doglover wrote:

If I am occasionally asking for help, I am getting offers for payment.
Or getting a version which only works as long as the writer pleases (because, he put a PHP script in his server - so I have to pass via that one)

Did a Team member asked you money? or may be some user ? As far as i know you have always been helped, when attachment was not working I even come to your forum and gave you the site.ini, even the one "php" as i changed my mind right because of you. Same in the past with other team members.

doglover wrote:

Also, if I can help, I am trying to help. Only to receive postings, that it is nonsense what I write. He can do it better.
Problem is: he does not post anything better. Just write: I can do better.
While my version just works fine. Agreed, when I looked again, there was a better way. But it is just different.

So where is the problem? two site.ini two styles. We all know that.

doglover wrote:

I am not interested in writing SiteIni's for the world. Only in those I use for the Rytec work of providing EPG for enigma2 receivers. So the help I can provide is for those SiteIni's.
(BTW: the Rytec EPG is free of charge - it only cost me money)

Well here there are users interested in the "world" epg, so you will not provide your help? you made your choice, good. Your statement sound a bit "egoist" and I will not comment your "BTW", everyone makes his choice.

doglover wrote:

I am not even allow to post in the restricted section, while in the past I have written many, many SiteIni's

Nobody can, except team members, donators can access and download (and you have donator badge). It's a forum constraint...nothing we can do about. Opensource (github) is still there for anyone that wants to create/update siteini, although this may create problems with revisions, something that the authours have to evaluate and find a way to handle.

doglover wrote:

PS: writing SiteIni's for use on enigma2, requires modification of the SiteIni's. In enigma there are only 4 fields for info. Start/stop info, Title. Subtile and Description. We want all the other info too. But this requires stuffing it in the description and Subtitle fields.

All the newest version can still allow you to create and modify. For the encrypted siteini the work has been done by someone else, that prefer to keep his work hidden. Modification can be done with post-process.

I hope you understand that things have changed, many users here, want siteini to set epg for sites, iptv etc. etc and basically it is not correct that someone makes money out the work of the team. Am I right ?
Here the post from Jan http://www.webgrabplus.com/content/siteini-encryption-beta-217-and-more
Least not last you can contact us via pm and will be willing to help you.

doglover wrote:

I am reading in all this, stuff it.
Your are an egoïst and are making a business of it.
You are one that we want to eliminate from our users.
Thank you very much.
PS:That is my thanks for writing hondreds of SiteIni's in the starting years of WG++.
Lately others were faster than me, so I have not posted many SiteINi's anymore.
PS:Rex post-processing is very inconvenient.

Completly wrong. Again I am sorry if you think like that.

Was not going to answer, but I will, as this seems a personal discussion and I am tired to see you "Willy" throwing shit on us, after you have always received help from all the staff members, me in particular. Now I don't care if you disagree, i could care less, but few points:
1. I Personally do not run webgrab, therefore what the authors decide, it's their decision. I respect their decision and if they want to consider the "staff" opinion is up to them. I control nothing, but i always express my personal opinion.

2. About type "3" & "4" I sincerly do not understand your statement. Do you think the staff and the authors will become rich with a donation ? WRONG !! Do you think think I should pay from my pocket a vpn to test a site.ini in Israel ? WRONG !! Do you think I spend hours testing siteini and new methods just to have fun ?? WRONG !! Do you think i am here to make money and become rich ?? WRONG !!

3. Type 2, i see you do not understand. Informations are still read in same way is the siteini encrypted. Site encryption is not meant to do that and site can change anyway, with format,access,etc.etc. Fun start over? It is nice to have fun !!

4.Small changes are not possible. Most 90% of changes can be modified with postprocess, any member of the staff can do modifications on request (none until now), if this does not suite your needs, feel free to go ahead and make/change yourself.

5. The users selling epg, they can have it, but they have to donate, nobody here works for free, with this i mean I do the work and you get money ?? NO way. Encryption is a small way to control that.

6."I can come only to one conclusion: €€€" If need to make money I would already setup my own epg website, instead of being here responding to you. Again i must say you are wrong.

7. If users can get epg from exsisting site.ini It make no sense to publish other siteini. There is no need for site ini "collection" . In particular for site tha do not worth grabbing.

Hope is clear to you now. You can come to any conclusion you want...
PS
I have my real job to get money.

Sure we live in a free world, we can all express opinions. But...do not come here and say encryption is because €€€ or $$$
Then feel free to express your opinion, i will try to answer/explain as much as i can.

well i dont see the beef here.
if the creator of the ini chooses to encrypt it,so be it.
anyone who dont like it can download the manual and have at it.

last i checked no is being forced to use them.
could always contact gracenote,ect and get their rate on epg,i sure u wont be long in reconsidering that decision and realize u get alot here for 5 euro/yr.

It's not even 5€ as far as i know, paypal keeps 0.50 cents on 5 euro so is 4.50 donation at the end....big money !!

i need to dig out my abacus to calculate how many i did...

mat8861 wrote:

doglover wrote:
I do not like the direction this all takes.
As an user of the first hour (ask Jan about this), I am shut-out of all kind of information now.
Treated like scum.
If I am occasionally asking for help, I am getting offers for payment.
Or getting a version which only works as long as the writer pleases (because, he put a PHP script in his server - so I have to pass via that one)
Also, if I can help, I am trying to help. Only to receive postings, that it is nonsense what I write. He can do it better.
Problem is: he does not post anything better. Just write: I can do better.
While my version just works fine. Agreed, when I looked again, there was a better way. But it is just different.
I am not interested in writing SiteIni's for the world. Only in those I use for the Rytec work of providing EPG for enigma2 receivers. So the help I can provide is for those SiteIni's.
(BTW: the Rytec EPG is free of charge - it only cost me money)
I am not even allow to post in the restricted section, while in the past I have written many, many SiteIni's
PS: writing SiteIni's for use on enigma2, requires modification of the SiteIni's. In enigma there are only 4 fields for info. Start/stop info, Title. Subtile and Description. We want all the other info too. But this requires stuffing it in the description and Subtitle fields.

Really sad to see such a post right from you, Willy. But let's analyze your comments:

doglover wrote:
If I am occasionally asking for help, I am getting offers for payment.
Or getting a version which only works as long as the writer pleases (because, he put a PHP script in his server - so I have to pass via that one)

Did a Team member asked you money? or may be some user ? As far as i know you have always been helped, when attachment was not working I even come to your forum and gave you the site.ini, even the one "php" as i changed my mind right because of you. Same in the past with other team members.

doglover wrote:
Also, if I can help, I am trying to help. Only to receive postings, that it is nonsense what I write. He can do it better.
Problem is: he does not post anything better. Just write: I can do better.
While my version just works fine. Agreed, when I looked again, there was a better way. But it is just different.

So where is the problem? two site.ini two styles. We all know that.

doglover wrote:
I am not interested in writing SiteIni's for the world. Only in those I use for the Rytec work of providing EPG for enigma2 receivers. So the help I can provide is for those SiteIni's.
(BTW: the Rytec EPG is free of charge - it only cost me money)

Well here there are users interested in the "world" epg, so you will not provide your help? you made your choice, good. Your statement sound a bit "egoist" and I will not comment your "BTW", everyone makes his choice.

doglover wrote:
I am not even allow to post in the restricted section, while in the past I have written many, many SiteIni's

Nobody can, except team members, donators can access and download (and you have donator badge). It's a forum constraint...nothing we can do about. Opensource (github) is still there for anyone that wants to create/update siteini, although this may create problems with revisions, something that the authours have to evaluate and find a way to handle.

doglover wrote:
PS: writing SiteIni's for use on enigma2, requires modification of the SiteIni's. In enigma there are only 4 fields for info. Start/stop info, Title. Subtile and Description. We want all the other info too. But this requires stuffing it in the description and Subtitle fields.

All the newest version can still allow you to create and modify. For the encrypted siteini the work has been done by someone else, that prefer to keep his work hidden. Modification can be done with post-process.
I hope you understand that things have changed, many users here, want siteini to set epg for sites, iptv etc. etc and basically it is not correct that someone makes money out the work of the team. Am I right ?
Here the post from Jan http://www.webgrabplus.com/content/siteini-encryption-beta-217-and-moreomegle
Least not last you can contact us via pm and will be willing to help you.

Many users now requesting sites for setting EPGs for sites, IPTV, and more. It's not fair for someone to profit from the team's work. Right?