Public Forums 71,145 posts

[shackbase Friend shackbaseJoin date: May 2007Posts: 158Downloads:0Uploads:0 Thanks: 8 Thanked: 5 times in 1 posts]

#246166

@mfc – I was not aware of that until Hung posted about it here: http://www.joomlart.com/forums/showpost.php?p=47908&postcount=62 :p

Fedora was beyond what to expect in the bug department though, but that is still not why Fedora got a bad score, it got a bad score because it was a cheaplooking template. period, now THAT is a fact. Just drop it would you.

Cheers!

[Michael Casha Friend Michael CashaJoin date: September 2014Posts: 2561Downloads:1Uploads:32 Thanks: 41 Thanked: 119 times in 1 posts]

#246175

shackbase, I’m going to have to ask you in future to copy/paste the reviews onto your post, rather than linking to an offsite.

Since it’s your content, there is no need to go posting to your own site – as you effectively have the rights to post it here also.

[shackbase Friend shackbaseJoin date: May 2007Posts: 158Downloads:0Uploads:0 Thanks: 8 Thanked: 5 times in 1 posts]

#246177

Miccas – why the sudden change of heart? You even recommended I should post my reviews in an additional forum.

Sound to me that the moderators (as I have yet to see a post from Hung or one of the actual people behind JA) did not like to see a negative post about one template.

But sure, I do not mind posting the entire article on the JA forums from now on if that is what you want.

I just find the sudden change of heart kind of amusing, it just shows how the JA moderators try to stiffle critique.

Cheers,

–Tone

[Michael Casha Friend Michael CashaJoin date: September 2014Posts: 2561Downloads:1Uploads:32 Thanks: 41 Thanked: 119 times in 1 posts]

#246178

I’ve had a discussion with our moderators and I have absolutely no quirms about making negative posts, there is no issue there. However, since upgrading our rules we have considered that this could be made out to be spam – you’re directing us to your own site. I’m more than happy for you to post your reviews with a link at the bottom, but not just “hey, check out the review at www. xxx .com”

[mfcphil Friend mfcphilJoin date: September 2007Posts: 2866Downloads:3Uploads:218 Thanks: 211 Thanked: 388 times in 133 posts]

#246180

For the record…This is nothing to do with a negative review, negative comments, can only be used to help improve things in the long run.
But if you are writing a review about a template you should stick to the subject.
If you think its a cheap looking template, go ahead and say so, don’t say what some members have said! because then your painting a distorted one sided picture

What about all the members who are using it? I bet they think its great.
You can’t ensure all members are going to like every template.

It may not be the best template from JoomlArt, but its certainly not CHEAP LOOKING.

[shackbase Friend shackbaseJoin date: May 2007Posts: 158Downloads:0Uploads:0 Thanks: 8 Thanked: 5 times in 1 posts]

#246204

@miccas – these are product reviews of JoomlArt templates, it is a related concept. I would not post a forum thread stating that we have reviewed SEF Advanced 2008, albeit it technically would fit in the Share J! experience forum but I still would consider that more of a spam issue.

As far as posting the entire review with a link to the article at the bottom, I have no problems at all with that, if that is what you want.

@mfc – I just found it interesting how you only reacted to the last review as it had a negative tone vs the previous JA reviews which have all been in favor of the template in the review.

If I were to actually include this forum in my reviews, lately there has been more negative things about JA than positive so there is nothing one sided about making an off comment that the template was not met with a great enthusiasm because it is a basic looking template.

As far as some people using it on their site, I would certainly expect that there are people using the template, there are people using the basic templates that comes with Joomla by default (Rhuk solarflare II and madeyourweb). I would not consider them great templates either, but the difference between those is that they are FREE and JA’s start at $49.

While $49 is not alot of money, it is certainly more than free, so you expect a little more, a thing that JA consistently delivers, but utterly failed to do with JA Fedora, again, it is just that simple.

Let’s just agree to disagree – the differences between us is that I have no reason to feel one way or another, in the post ‘what happened?’ in JA Fedora, you voiced your discontent with this template as well, but now you are staunchly supporting it. mfc – what happend?

–Tone

[Michael Casha Friend Michael CashaJoin date: September 2014Posts: 2561Downloads:1Uploads:32 Thanks: 41 Thanked: 119 times in 1 posts]

#246212

Ok I think that’s enough off-topic posting guys. shackbase, you’re more than welcome to copy/paste your reviews but don’t attempt to use JoomlArt as your way of getting more visitors to your site.

Shackbase, might I also mention that JoomlArt’s Purity template will be included with all Joomla 1.5 downloads very soon. Not $49 – free.

[Author]

Posts