On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 14:13:04 GMT, LoveCorrie@best.net wrote in:
<f4WdnZ6Fy43yr9PSnZ2dnUVZ_tGdnZ2d@giganews.com>:
>
>On 29-Feb-2012, Willy Ewe <we@tinw.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Be aware the archive is charged with superfluous files, requiring
>> hours of sorting to obtain working folders.
>
>I hear you load and clear about posting files in future using an archive
>that is in smaller modules that can be combined in to a finished unit. I
>will do some research on google to figure out how to do that.
>
>Regarding your comment << "Be aware the archive is charged with superfluous
>files, requiring hours of sorting to obtain working folders">>
>
> I found the Jenny Hasking collection on a bit torrent site, and did spend
> some time editing the file folder names and adding some pictures when found
> easily. I did not spend any time editing the collection from what I
> received other than to verify they were relevant as I was not personally
> interested in these designs myself. I assumed that the end user could
> spend their own time editing the file contents to suit themselves. I
> personally am not prepared to spend hours editing the folders for someone
> else's end use. If I am incorrect in this assumption, and if people
> receiving these files don't won't them unless I have combed through them,
> in future I will not post such collections.
>
>I would appreciate some guideance from other posters on what would be
>satisfactory to the group
I'm a newbie, so my ideas are only my opinion. But perhaps each particular
collection could have been posted separately? Then we could only download
the collections we would be interested in.
|
|