MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Dreamstime.com => Topic started by: HughStoneIan on August 29, 2009, 13:12
-
As an example,
http://www.dreamstime.com/thread_18291 (http://www.dreamstime.com/thread_18291)
What's so bothersome about a simple thread about subscriptions that they have to lock it so quickly?? And threatening to delete future ones?? Wassup?
-
Maybe they dont want us to notice that subs will eventually take over sales, good for them but not for us...
-
The last time I tried to start a thread about it (and mine wasn't complaining about the number of sales, or anything else), the thread was deleted with no warning or acknowledgment. It simply disappeared, along with the responses.
DT and FT (aka FL ;D) constantly vie for 1st when it comes to title of Censorship Leader.
-
After one truly weird experience with DT's obsessive forum policing, I never posted there again.
-
The last time I tried to start a thread about it (and mine wasn't complaining about the number of sales, or anything else), the thread was deleted with no warning or acknowledgment. It simply disappeared, along with the responses.
DT and FT (aka FL ;D) constantly vie for 1st when it comes to title of Censorship Leader.
imo istock is #1 for 'this thread has been locked'
-
The last time I tried to start a thread about it (and mine wasn't complaining about the number of sales, or anything else), the thread was deleted with no warning or acknowledgment. It simply disappeared, along with the responses.
DT and FT (aka FL ;D) constantly vie for 1st when it comes to title of Censorship Leader.
Exactly, posts just disappear.
Sometimes I don't understand why. I saw a thread from Keeweeboy just saying he was unhappy with new 30% commission (instead of 50%) deleted. immediately. Maybe Ceausescu still has the control ? ;D
-
The last time I tried to start a thread about it (and mine wasn't complaining about the number of sales, or anything else), the thread was deleted with no warning or acknowledgment. It simply disappeared, along with the responses.
DT and FT (aka FL ;D) constantly vie for 1st when it comes to title of Censorship Leader.
imo istock is #1 for 'this thread has been locked'
they lock them others disappear them
-
Control the Media and flow of information. Hmmm...sounds familiar. At least they have Twitter in China....lol. ;)
-
Dreamstime has never been a place for discussion of topics that have a potential for heated debate especially when it could lead directly to them coming under fire for their own policies
-
Isn't this one of the main reasons for having this forum? The sites have a right to police and censor their forums any way they want. We are not citizens, and do not have any right to free speech on their sites. We have the right bring the discussion here and continue it to our hearts content. It seems a bit naive not to expect them to delete posts they don't like.
What I don't like are those sites who punish people for being outspoken here, and it has happened in the past. That says a lot more about the management of those sites.
-
This statement by the admin makes me sick:
"A sale is a sale. Someone appreciated your images and paid for them - be encouraged by that."
As if it didn't make a difference to anyone on DT whether it was a sale with a revenue of 3,60 or 0,20.
-
I think subscriptions are ruining microstock, at least for the photographers. At both FT and DT, I've noticed that more and more of my downloads are subscription, and it's hurting my earnings. DT most likely has no answer for this, so they cut off all discussion. It's very discouraging.
-
I use forums of agencies only when I want to ask something very specific, but that's very rare. Last year I was almost banned for posting about FT bad search engine. The administrator posted in my thread that my account will be deleted if I continue to write about it. Anyway, search engine was fixed few months after it because there were too many complaints.
-
I dont even go to the forums on the agencies anymore.. that is what is so great about this site. They can not monitor what we say.
Who wants to be banned for asking simple questions or wanting to know an answer.. ha How silly.
I have been in trouble on Crestock before. Of course if they banned me,,, no harm done. HA
I think all the agencies should get together and agree to drop the subscriptions. They would all make more money and so would we. Buyers are going to buy images even without the subscriptions.
-
This statement by the admin makes me sick:
"A sale is a sale. Someone appreciated your images and paid for them - be encouraged by that."
Well this is at the very least a huge lack of common sense from that guy. So according to this individual we should be thankful that someone is not stealing our images and is willing to make a huge sacrifice to "donate" whatever amount of money for them. What a 5ucker!!
-
We don't dislike threads about subscriptions any more than threads on the same subject being posted over and over again:
- sales up yesterday, sales down today - oh, the search engine changed and I'm affected!
- post your next image aka pimp your portfolio
Even if not so often, add to the above flaming the agency without any argument to support it or posting the same "I want this" over and over.
Basically, moderators will delete any repetitive subject and any post that tries to flame us without an argument. The pricing threads have tons of negative posts that were NOT deleted. Very few actually get deleted, we probably have an average of 1 post per day.
Freedom of speech doesn't mean that you can post anything. I've seen tons of threads on this forum being hijacked from the original subject, losing their goal. Posting on any forum should be a privilege not a right.
@Xalanx - to reply to your statement: this industry started with $0.20 per download and stayed below $1 for quite a long time. Just because you arrived at a later date, doesn't mean the past contributors were suckers, right?
Accusing moderators or reviewers this way is childish, if not rude. These people work, put a lot of energy and efforts into it. Not only for them, but also for you. Do you think is nice to badmouth them? Do you think that I would be posting here if I would have something to hide on Dreamstime (e.g. via censorship)?
-
Posting on any forum should be a privilege not a right.
I don't agree. In this forum, it's a privilege. As a contributor paying commission to a company, it's a right. BIIIIIG difference.
-
Posting on any forum should be a privilege not a right.
I don't agree. In this forum, it's a privilege. As a contributor paying commission to a company, it's a right. BIIIIIG difference.
Very true.
@Achilles: Why don't you close threads with praise about how great dreamstime is?
What do you mean flaming the agency? Agency reducing comissions is called ... how? In other words you'll accept only comments like "we're happy, we don't need anything and you guys rule"?! I find your answer in this independent forum a bit off the line.
I called THAT specific admin sucker, not the contributors. The line that stardust pointed to is rude and disrespectful. I have also no respect for a person like this. What's YOUR problem?
I really don't know why are you posting here, regarding this topic. When most of the contributors "badmouth" you for the reduction in comissions you come here and defend that moderator or whatever he is, despite his totally inconsiderate manner of dealing with submitters?
LE: You know, Achilles - I'm getting the feeling that this guy's (the admin in question) view about contributors is not shared only by him, among DT's staff, is this true?
Why don't you conduct a survey to see whether your changes are making submitters happy or not? Just to stand out of the crowd and not make people start to mistake DT for some other agency, renowned for its ... manners to contributors. What do you say? ;)
-
To tell someone how to feel about something that directly has an effect on them is nothing else than arrogant. THAT is what sucks, to me at least. How dare a DT admin tell contributors to be happy with a 20 cent sale? We're not schoolkids who need to be told off for moaning.
And why is it a privilege to post in a site's forum? if it's not every contributor's right to post on the forum, I really don't want to know.
Xalanx is absolutely right.
-
Threads celebrating milestones, congrats etc. are moderated just as well. One of the reasons that the Blogs exist is to take part of that traffic, leaving the boards less cluttered.
-
It's a good thing MSG is not controlled by DT. We can gripe, complain, praise, fool around, pimp, share, advise, instruct, celebrate all we want here and it stays here for people to see and reply.
Leaf...you really should do something about all this clutter that we enjoy going through. Maybe I should suggest that to SS too. To me, these are the 2 best Microstock Discussion Boards. Wonder why?
-
Threads celebrating milestones, congrats etc. are moderated just as well. One of the reasons that the Blogs exist is to take part of that traffic, leaving the boards less cluttered.
I wonder what would happen to a critical blog article about subscriptions (that also left the boards uncluttered)...
-
I think that, as long as people keep posting politely, there should be no reason to censor. There is nothing wrong about people disagreeing with each other (or an agency), it is the attacks and sarcasm that destroy a discussion (as seen here SO many times).
-
I can see Achilles point. Pimping threads and complaint threads can become tiresome real quick. Personally, I like to read the illustration forums at most sites because they seem to be a little more laid back and isolated from some of the normal gripes.
On the other hand, the complaint and pimping threads also seem to be the most popular and posted in. So maybe that is what the people want. I don't know if the solution is to isolate those topics to a separate forum topic area and move threads to that location instead of deleting them.
Just an idea.
-
It is amazing how may people that post in forums that belong to the websites do not understand thier purpose, they are just tools to share information to the benefit of the 'websites business', to generate a feeling of 'community and comfort for buyers and contributors' and act as a general communication channel for discussion without having to answer thousands of email enquiries.
Look how many site when you join have a link "to our community forum where you can get advice from fellow artists", so topics that flame or attack the changes to any business are not good for that business or how new suppliers may view it, why would they leave negative topics on public view as they will only harm the business, if the business has to cut what it pays to it's suppliers it does not need to be told that the suppliers are unhappy as it will already know.
Topics that show that the business has made a good change of policy, or added a new feature that benefits the contributors will be most welcomed, as they are good for the business, on the other hand every business will have to make changes to it's model from time to time that will affect it's suppliers, and they will not want these openly discussed in thier forums.
They will allow some negative but not to damaging topics to be left to run thier course or locked, these are to show that they are 'fair', 'open' and 'listen to thier contributors'.
David :D
-
If a microstock, or any business, is providing a "forum" purely as a promotional tool - and intends to censor any negative posts - they should make that crystal clear right up front.
The dictionaries I just checked all defined "forum" as "A public meeting place for open discussion". If a critical or complaining post earns you a threatening reply via a non-public back-channel, you're not on a "forum".
It's ironic that on the internet - which was supposed to be the path to a new era of free and open expression - the term "forum" has lost its meaning. So has the term "moderator". But George Orwell wouldn't be surprised.
-
.
-
Hi Stockastic,
As you rightly say forums have been about in one form or another for many years, are they really about free speech or a place for gathering information or to debate, they have often had an organisation behind them as a reason for their existence and been policed with severe consequences, for the earliest ‘public’ forums this could even mean death when someone spoke out.
Offending content is usually deleted. Sometimes if the topic is considered the source of the problem, it is locked; often a poster may request a topic expected to draw problems to be locked as well, although the moderators decide whether to grant it. In a locked thread, members cannot post anymore. In cases where the topic is considered a breach of rules it – with all of its posts – may be deleted.
There are very few unregulated internet forums (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_forum) and going against the written or un-written rules or objectives of the forum owners can lead to different types of censure.
Forums owned by website are for the benefit of the website owners and not the contributors, if you created a bit of software you might have a forum for building your user base or community, announcements of new versions and fixes, general discussions and reporting bugs, but any negative feedback could be costly to your business so how would you deal with it as a company other than moderation including deleting topics that harm you business.
Forums are part of building an online business but cannot be allowed to broadcast any negative comments that might hurt trade, even if they are true.
David :)
-
That's exactly what I mean. The original meaning of "forum" has been lost, and it now means something quite different, at least on the internet. Basically it's now slang for what used to be called a message board.
But if you were a city official, and you announced a "forum", and people showed up, and when they complained they were quietly taken aside and told that if they didn't shut up they'd lose city services - people would say this wasn't a forum at all, just a self-serving PR event. That's because outside of the web, "forum" still means a place for free and open expression - including negative and dissenting points of view.
-
I fully agree that negative comments should be allowed. My remark was in regards to repetitive posts on the same issue over and over.
Just do a search after subscriptions and see how many times this was discussed.
http://www.dreamstime.com/board_views.php?forumid=&srh_forum=subscriptions&x=0&y=0 (http://www.dreamstime.com/board_views.php?forumid=&srh_forum=subscriptions&x=0&y=0)
-
damned if you do, damned if you don't. I've been trying to stay away from the DT forum. I don't have the proper "cheerleader" attitude. But, according to a discussion ... that has been posted many, many times ... being active in the forum increases your placement in the search engine.
Sounds like your placement depends on how much time you spend * up" on the forum ... being a cheerleader.
Guess I will join the group the is not allowed to "clutter" the forum ... better to say nothing at all and reduce your search engine placement than to be the fly in the ointment and get completely ignored by the search engine. :-X
-
damned if you do, damned if you don't. I've been trying to stay away from the DT forum. I don't have the proper "cheerleader" attitude. But, according to a discussion ... that has been posted many, many times ... being active in the forum increases your placement in the search engine.
Sounds like your placement depends on how much time you spend up" on the forum ... being a cheerleader.
Guess I will join the group the is not allowed to "clutter" the forum ... better to say nothing at all and reduce your search engine placement than to be the fly in the ointment and get completely ignored by the search engine. :-X
I doubt that forum participation has anything to do with sort-order placement. If you look at the 'Top Contributors' listing then between them they have a staggering amount of sales but almost none of them post forum messages __ ever. They're probably too busy producing quality images. The 'cheerleaders' as you call them often have relatively few sales.
-
I doubt that forum participation has anything to do with sort-order placement. If you look at the 'Top Contributors' listing then between them they have a staggering amount of sales but almost none of them post forum messages __ ever. They're probably too busy producing quality images. The 'cheerleaders' as you call them often have relatively few sales.
I tend to agree. Don't see any evidence that forum participation helps in search placement.
I have heard forum participants (not admins) speculate that forum participation may result in more sales as a result of getting your name in front of buyers, but I don't see evidence of that either. Buyers mostly don't come to the forums on any of the sites unless they have some sort of complaint.
-
Re the subject of subscriptions on DT.
-DT has a RPD (Revenue per Download) stat on its stats page, including their average RPD. This helps people can see how subscriptions may be affecting their sales.
-DT has stated, as I recall, that they will watch to see whether or not subscriptions are hurting the revenues of contributors and make adjustments if this happens.
How many other sites have done this?
Why would DT have more reason to lock threads about subscriptions than other sites have?