|
|
Post by Tom/CalClassic on Feb 15, 2023 13:15:06 GMT -5
Flightsim.com has changed all the links to files and forums again, so all the links are again broken on my site. They will only be fixed when someone at flightsim.com guarantees that they will NEVER change again in the foreseeable future. I'm disgusted with the way they are doing this - file links should have been carefully decided upon before the site went live. Wow. The only way to access those files now is to: 1. Get the link from my site. Example: forums.flightsim.com/files/file/209449-fs2004-1958-united-air-lines-douglas-dc-6b-cb-16/?do=getNewComment2. Copy the name part of the link: fs2004-1958-united-air-lines-douglas-dc-6b-cb-16 3. Go to the flightsim.com file library and paste that into the search box, with most dashes replaced by spaces fs2004 1958 united air lines douglas dc-6b cb-16 Sorry about that, |
|
|
|
Post by abbotsford on Feb 15, 2023 17:03:41 GMT -5
It really is shabby what they have done. Another site which they have cocked up is the www.freewarescenery.com/ where links to FS.com cannot be found easily. |
|
|
|
Post by johnhinson on Feb 16, 2023 1:18:37 GMT -5
If you jut take the "forums." out of the link it should work. It does for the above example.
Best regards,
John
|
|
|
|
Post by Erik on Feb 16, 2023 6:21:13 GMT -5
Works for me too, John. Still the biggest mistake any site owner/manager can make of course: changing links that have existed for decades (for part of the files) and are being used by thousands... TWICE. The Internet is built on links. What were they thinking - if at all.  Erik Edit: actually taking out the 'forums' part is a step back in the right direction I think, the file library shouldn't be forum-based. That said, they should have just left the links as they were and that goes for the actual forum part too. Searching for help on certain FS subjects always brings up FlightSim forum posts among others, but it is now even less tiring to decipher the once hacked AvSim forum posts than try and retrace FlightSim forum posts from what Google presents of them. Such a shame. |
|
|
|
Post by edakridge on Feb 16, 2023 6:50:14 GMT -5
Taking "forums." out worked for me too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Erik on Feb 16, 2023 7:13:10 GMT -5
Revealing post on the 'why' here: www.flightsim.com/forums/topic/56161-new-forum-software/?do=findComment&comment=297239 . While the ownership concept does seem to have its advantages, it appears to me FlightSim.com has given in to creators of not-really-entirely-freeware. These creators demand a status improvement in return, if I understand what Nels Anderson writes. IMHO they would earn that anyway, when sharing their creations. More Q&A, remarks and protests in that topic, obviously. Erik |
|
|
|
Post by Jorge on Feb 16, 2023 7:38:25 GMT -5
Revealing post on the 'why' here: www.flightsim.com/forums/topic/56161-new-forum-software/?do=findComment&comment=297239 . While the ownership concept does seem to have its advantages, it appears to me FlightSim.com has given in to creators of not-really-entirely-freeware. These creators demand a status improvement in return, if I understand what Nels Anderson writes. IMHO they would earn that anyway, when sharing their creations. More Q&A, remarks and protests in that topic, obviously. Erik I just read the post over there by following your link. It appears they caved in to the "FS" version of "woke mob" to me. In other words, "Do what the 'new' people who upload to the site want you to do (i.e. MSFS 2020 generation) and not what your current people want (i.e. anything before MSFS 2020)." I'm not sure how they pay for the site over there, but if it's based on "hits" to the site, then it's possible they preferred to follow the "mob" rather than set up a fund drive like places with older content are doing these days. With the "new" format, all the website is doing is being an online "repository" and not an "organized repository." The authors upload what they want, when they want, and the website admin has no control over what they post or in what condition it's in. The authors retain FULL control of their files by virtue of "access" and not by virtue of copywrite like we usually do with our traditional "readme.txt" files. With this new system, they just upload and the "copywrite" seems to stem from the fact the file is there to begin with. Like I said, it's basically a "social media" based site now, so I'm not having anything to do with it. No organization in the traditional sense, just "tags" for the files. Just because something says it's "FSX" doesn't necessarily mean it actually is. It may actually be "P3D" for all we know. The fact we're still using FS9 means we're probably going to get cut from the site altogether if the "new" uploaders demand the space on the server for their newer junk. Like Shultz would say on Hogan's Heroes, "Auf Viedersein!" Jorge Miami, FL |
|
|
|
Post by Tom/CalClassic on Feb 16, 2023 10:09:40 GMT -5
The team over there has fixed the problems and my links work again (whew!). As a file contributor I actually like the new setup, it makes updating files, descriptions, and pictures very easy. You folks as file downloaders may indeed have an issue with the lack of curation. You’ll always know what you’re getting if you download a CalClassic file though! 😎
|
|
|
|
Post by Erik on Feb 16, 2023 11:48:43 GMT -5
the "copywrite" seems to stem from the fact the file is there to begin with. Actually, this is true for any 'original work'. A readme file obviously helps in establishing the exact status of the work, but the absence of it essentially means all rights have been reserved. Let's hope that stability returns at FlightSim. Erik |
|
