Author Topic: Can't say anything negitive here - they are watching (Read 12902 times)

KiwiRob · « **on:** April 19, 2007, 08:13 »

Wow just had an email from a stock site taking me to task over a comment I made here, they have invited me to remove my portfolio, scary stuff. Has anyone else had this experience?

snem · « **Reply #1 on:** April 19, 2007, 08:45 »

what???

StockManiac · « **Reply #2 on:** April 19, 2007, 09:00 »

This is the second report in less than a week (or so) that stated that a microstock site has retaliated against comments made on this forum. These are extremely important accusations. If true, they show that sites monitor these boards and will retaliate if they see a comment that doesn't follow their mantra.

People have questioned my anonymity here. Now you all know what can happen.

Dreamstime employees asked for my portfolio ID twice during two threads on a similar topic:

40,000...:
http://www.microstockgroup.com/index.php?topic=1475.0

Does DT Treat All Submitters Alike? You Decide...:
http://www.microstockgroup.com/index.php?topic=1581.msg13803;topicseen#new

I respectfully denied their request because I understand human nature all too well.

What everyone needs to realize is that your freedom of speech is being threatened by these microsites with these actions. They should have absolutely NO say over what is stated on this or other boards. They have their own boards which they can control. This board (and others like it) were created so that artists could get together and discuss things without feeling like the thread would be closed or their account dropped.

And not only are the members of these forums at risk, but so are the owners of these boards. The microstocks could just as easily threaten the owners of these forums with deleting their portfolio unless they monitor the posts according to their wishes.

I can't stress this enough: Your freedoms are at risk by actions like this.

We need to band together and fight this sort of threat with all of the powers that we have.

KiwiRob · « **Reply #3 on:** April 19, 2007, 09:26 »

It might be a good idea to allow alters on this forum.

sharply_done · « **Reply #4 on:** April 19, 2007, 09:39 »

.

[Removed my comments - sorry about that]

thesentinel · « **Reply #5 on:** April 19, 2007, 09:49 »

With respect sharply done you've not been around this block long enough to know what can happen and why some people stick to anonimity.

sharply_done · « **Reply #6 on:** April 19, 2007, 10:03 »

That's why I removed my comments.

My apologies to the people who saw what I wrote. I didn't think about things as much as I should have, and erased what I wrote after reflecting further with the first few sips of my morning coffee.

maunger · « **Reply #7 on:** April 19, 2007, 14:49 »

even when i disagree with a site's policies etc. i still believe the proper behavior is to treat them with respect and not to just go around bad mouthing them.

KiwiRob · « **Reply #8 on:** April 19, 2007, 14:56 »

I wasn't really badmouthing, just not agreeing with an announcement that was made which I didn't think was a good business decision, had I made an announcement like that to my guys all hell would have broken loose and caused all sorts of problems.

leaf · « **Reply #9 on:** April 19, 2007, 15:40 »

yes i think it is unfortunate that people feel threatened to share their feelings here. I am not sure what to do about it.

I think it is important that we share our opinions, but also that we share them in a 'non attacking', or non insulting manner.

I don't think the essence of any of your comments are really out of line kiwirob, but they do have a little bit of a harsh tone. (calling someone a twit) I hadn't seen that post before now but probably would have responded to it if I had seen it when it was written.

If the micro site is reacting towards name calling, I don't blame them for that, although I think they could have contacted the admin here to remove the post. If the micro site is reacting to a negative comment about how they operate, I think it is out of line.

chellyar · « **Reply #10 on:** April 19, 2007, 15:58 »

Bummer....

I'm far less 'serious' about microstock than many, but this even makes me a little nervous.

I belong to a 'closed' forum for similar reasons, where a group of freelancers to a large media company want the ability to talk about the company policies etc away from their prying eyes. It shouldn't be necessary though, and companies should be paying attention to, not avoiding, comentary on their policies and actions from suppliers.. Without happy suppliers they don't exist.

I'm not sure how a stock site thinks comments made on here will negatively effect them either? Other members on this site can say all they like in a negative sense about any given site and it wont stop me, or most other people, submitting if their making money from them. What makes that difference is ease of submission, rejection rates and payout rates, or am I unique in that?

On the flip side, I can't imagine many stock site customers read these forums before selecting which stock site to visit?

I've never seen any real bad-mouthing of any of the sites on here though. Not that I've read all the messages of course, but I try to keep up. I'd have thought that the level of 'back chat' directed at the sites here was healthy, rather than negative.

Given that rep's from most of the sites are probably reading this, any one of them want to chime in with a responce to this thread? What is the perceived threat to your microstock business model of conversations being held in a public forum?

So, KiwiRob, did you wind you taking down your portfolio from the site in question?

Oh, and Leaf, can you change all our visible names to be random 8 digit numbers.

.

Cheers, Me. (looking over my shoulder)

snoozle · « **Reply #11 on:** April 19, 2007, 16:18 »

That's why I wear the dark glasses and the hat. I'm not trying to look cool, I'm in disguise

bbettina · « **Reply #12 on:** April 19, 2007, 16:38 »

I agree with Chellyar's comments. If I ran a microstock I probably would be here checking out what people have to say and how they perceive my site - that's normal and could even be good for all of us if issues brought up here would be taken seriously and addressed.
Criticism and suggestions are good things as long as they are constructive and free of racial, gender and other slur - isn't that how humans learn? The whole concept of "if you say something bad I am going to retaliate" sounds so last century, pre-Internet and global exchange. The business model of the microstocks is build on the fact that people everywhere have access to computers and contribute products (pics, illustrations, footage, whatever) and to then turn around and say "don't also exchange information, ideas and criticism" is strange at best.

It would be great if criticism could be open brought up and discussed on the microstock forums but that isn't happening. So it's wonderful to have this forum and all of you microstock employees out there: this is no threat, this is a bunch of passionate people who put a lot of time into this and have ideas, suggestions and sometimes grievances. Why don't you just listen and take us seriously - at least once in a while?

Take care,

Tina

berryspun · « **Reply #13 on:** April 19, 2007, 17:20 »

Quote from: bbettina on April 19, 2007, 16:38

Why don't you just listen and take us seriously - at least once in a while?

Fortunately some of them do

Quote from: leaf on April 19, 2007, 15:40

yes i think it is unfortunate that people feel threatened to share their ifeelings here.

It is... and it could change the purpose and the usefulness of this great forum.

Quote from: leaf on April 19, 2007, 15:40

If the micro site is reacting to a negative comment about how they operate, I think it is out of line.

Agree. I come here, sometimes to give, but mostly to get the raw info - not negative but informative. I hope that it stays that way. The intimidation used towards KiwiRob reflects more about the stock site's own insecurity and the lack to handle criticism. Which is ironic when we know that every one of our pictures receives 'constructive' critics in the submission process.

litifeta · « **Reply #14 on:** April 19, 2007, 17:49 »

actually Leaf suggested a few months ago when i complained about this very subject to log in under another name.

Sad, but maybe i will consider this.

I don't think insulting comments have anything to do with being treated unfairly. You expect when you run a business that sometimes you upset people, and they all respond in different ways.

The measure of an organisation is its level of maturity, its ability to retain its professional image in the face of mounting opposition and criticism.

But I guess we are dealing with "new kids" in business who don't really have the nettle to handle problems in a mature and professional way.

dbvirago · « **Reply #15 on:** April 19, 2007, 18:18 »

Probably, shouldn't, but I'm going to play devil's advocated here. I hear 'freedom of speech' thrown around an awful lot. People seem to think this means you can say anything you want about anyone you want without consequences. In the U.S. freedom of speech simply means that Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech. I have no idea what the law is or is not in other countries. I'm pretty sure congress didn't pass a law recently that says if you bad mouth an agency on a forum, they can kick you off.

I think, as someone else said, these agencies should monitor these forums to learn what we like and dislike as a method to improve their sites. I also beleive it would be foolish and myopic to kick someone off for posting negative comments, unless those comments so imflamatory or libelous that kicking them off would be the first step in legal proceedings.

Our freedom of speech here is only limited by what the moderators will allow (and they can place those limits wherever they please), that doesn't mean it will be without consequences. The agencies have the freedom to kick anybody off they please, and there is nothing we can do about it.

There are agencies I like better than others, but my opinion has little to do with the money I make there. Some of the sites I like the best as far as friendly and functions, I make the least money. The site I like the least is my 3rd best performer. As long as the income outweighs the aggravation, I will allow them to represent my work. Personally, I think their upload procedure is cruel and unusual punishment, but I'm not citing the 8th ammendment.

anyway, that's my soapbox.

Void · « **Reply #16 on:** April 19, 2007, 18:23 »

if i am reading this correctly, calling the boss a twit and saying they suck is good grounds to get fired.
these microstocks are pretty much the bosses...we are the workers....

but hey that is just the way i think....and i really cant see the reason for such a long thread, kinda like that one on the shutterstock raise...i mean come on now, what is there to discuss, the company will be giving us more money, we should be happy no?
who really cares how much, they know how to sell.

I personally enjoy the threads with the tips and the fun stuff like the absurd rejection notices.....

I think a good thread would be one in which we post one of our personal favorite creations. not stock stuff but real art that we create for ourselves....any one else like the idea?

well off i go to ponder which image i would post in the new thread....

be good

S

litifeta · « **Reply #17 on:** April 19, 2007, 18:44 »

Quote from: Void on April 19, 2007, 18:23

if i am reading this correctly, calling the boss a twit and saying they suck is good grounds to get fired.
these microstocks are pretty much the bosses...we are the workers....

Actually man ... you're wrong!

We are - according to them - the artists, and they are our agents.

Even if you don't like that, fact is, they are an agent, and we are their suppliers. They actually don't have any product of their own, it is our product, and they take a commission.

Void · « **Reply #18 on:** April 19, 2007, 20:23 »

we all see things differently

madelaide · « **Reply #19 on:** April 19, 2007, 21:18 »

Quote from: bbettina on April 19, 2007, 16:38

Criticism and suggestions are good things as long as they are constructive and free of racial, gender and other slur - isn't that how humans learn?

I would add "as long as it's done with respect." What we see in many places are aggressive/offensive messages. Nobody likes to hear that, even if the critics may be correct. It's the same within our families, friends and workmates. We have the right to disagree, we have the right to criticise, but we don't have the right to offend.

Regards,
Adelaide

CJPhoto · « **Reply #20 on:** April 19, 2007, 23:38 »

Quote from: litifeta on April 19, 2007, 18:44

Quote from: Void on April 19, 2007, 18:23
if i am reading this correctly, calling the boss a twit and saying they suck is good grounds to get fired.
these microstocks are pretty much the bosses...we are the workers....

Actually man ... you're wrong!

We are - according to them - the artists, and they are our agents.

Even if you don't like that, fact is, they are an agent, and we are their suppliers. They actually don't have any product of their own, it is our product, and they take a commission.

Correct. they are our agent but they can still choose who they represent. In theory, Lawyers are the only profession who cant choose not to represnt someone, and that is only if they are conflicted, everyone has a choice.

For that reason, the agencies can do as tehy please. If you want to bad mouth, I suggest you use an alias (most people use a public alias anyway so a secret one shouldn't be an issue.

michaeldb · « **Reply #21 on:** April 19, 2007, 23:42 »

Thanks, KiwiRob, for the warning. Also to the other posters, good discussion, IMO. (Dbvirago is right, this is not a 'freedom of speech' issue.)

Is it an economic issue? If a site is selling my images for $1 and paying me .25, they would seem to be losing more than me if they kick me off. I wonder, What do they think they have to gain then?

Control over submitters? By making an example of a few, they hope to frighten the rest? Not very good public relations, in the long run, probably.

I like Lucky Oliver. Because when they accept my images, they usually add a little note complimenting one they liked the best. That makes me feel good toward them, and that is good businss, I think. Threatening to kick us around for speaking our minds may not be so smart.

yingyang0 · « **Reply #22 on:** April 20, 2007, 09:58 »

Quote from: CJPhoto on April 19, 2007, 23:38

Correct. they are our agent but they can still choose who they represent. In theory, Lawyers are the only profession who cant choose not to represnt [sic] someone, and that is only if they are conflicted, everyone has a choice.

For that reason, the agencies can do as tehy please. If you want to bad mouth, I suggest you use an alias (most people use a public alias anyway so a secret one shouldn't be an issue.

Public defenders can't choose who they represent, all other lawyers can and do reject or drop clients all the time.

StockManiac · « **Reply #24 on:** April 20, 2007, 16:22 »

Quote from: ss123 on April 20, 2007, 16:04

This is what I wrote to Rob (kiwirob)

Quote
Rob – I take offense to your post here.

http://www.microstockgroup.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=73536a7fc44af47645ff349f819f8b40&topic=1549.msg13198;topicseen#new

If you truly feel as though we are ripping you off (and that I am a twit), I would like to remove your photos from Shutterstock.
Just let me know – and ill be happy to end our business relationship.
It surprising to me that if you really feel this way you continue to be a member. Give me the word – I'll close your account.

I have a problem with somebody calling me a twit - and continuing to make money with me.

Not sure what the problem with *that* is.

But me not monitoring every single that is said about me or Shutterstock would be bad business sense.. Do you disagree Rob?

Regards,
Jon Oringer
Shutterstock, Inc.

Jon:

First off, let me thank you for coming onto this forum and being honest with us.

Second, let me say that I really like your site. I believe that it is the best microstock site out there.

While it was wrong of him to call you a "twit", it was just as bad (if not worse) threatening him with the removal of his portfolio from your site.

After all, this is a business-relationship not a love affair, which means that there is some money involved. His calling you a "twit" didn't remove a dime from your bank account, but closing out his account would remove some of the income that he receives from this industry.

Finally, many microstock sites would've kept all of the cash that was in his account as well (as part of closing his account), which is also an unfair practice. I'm not saying that you would have done this, but there is nothing in your email that said that you would "cash him out" if he chose to close his account.

Others have already stated that he shouldn't have made those comments, but you need to be brought to task as well. Just because you head a company, doesn't give you the right to treat others with disdain.

ss123 · « **Reply #25 on:** April 20, 2007, 16:23 »

There is no threat here.

I said if he was unhappy - he should leave.

Plain and simple.

furthermore - I'll pay him whatever is left in his account without a problem. This is not about money left in accounts.

Why would he keep selling through us if he felt as though we were ripping him off?

Jon Oringer

StockManiac · « **Reply #26 on:** April 20, 2007, 16:48 »

Quote from: ss123 on April 20, 2007, 16:23

There is no threat here.

While you might not have meant it as a threat, it definitely could have been taken that way.

Especially when you stated: "I would like to remove your photos from Shutterstock."

leaf · « **Reply #27 on:** April 20, 2007, 17:37 »

Thanks for stopping in Jon. It is nice to see your face here. It is also nice to hear both sides to the story.

maunger · « **Reply #28 on:** April 20, 2007, 18:36 »

Quote from: StockManiac on April 20, 2007, 16:48

Quote from: ss123 on April 20, 2007, 16:23
There is no threat here.

While you might not have meant it as a threat, it definitely could have been taken that way.

Especially when you stated: "I would like to remove your photos from Shutterstock."

Let's be clear... take the entire thing in context (you've only highlighted part of the sentence)

"If you truly feel as though we are ripping you off (and that I am a twit), I would like to remove your photos from Shutterstock."

Jon is telling the client that if the client is unhappy, then Jon is unhappy and he'd prefer that the client remove his images.

I don't see it as a threat at all.

thesentinel · « **Reply #29 on:** April 21, 2007, 01:46 »

Let's be clear.

He shouldn't have written anything at all.

chellyar · « **Reply #30 on:** April 21, 2007, 03:14 »

Hi Jon...

Just a second 'thanks' for dropping in, I imagine you're quite a busy fella...

Also, I find this interesting, as I thought it was the DT thread that triggered this, I completely missed Rob's comment about SS/Jon in the other thread, even though I read it end to end..

Just goes to show you, we all read things through our own set of rose coloured glasses.

Now we're done with that, let's move along now, nothing left to see here...

edit: Typo

souper · « **Reply #31 on:** April 21, 2007, 06:45 »

hello all

I read this thread, My day job: art teacher for kindergartner and 1st graders...... the school I teach in has single sex classes, so it's all boys or all girls. The boys classes are much more difficult to deal with because the boys are constantly arguing.

So, this is the sort of argument I see all day, the following is a written dramatization of how I would handle this:

rob: Ms. G... Ms. G........ Jon threatened me!

Ms. G (that's me): What do you mean he threatened you?

rob: He threatened my livelihood!
please note rob has mustered up a tear.

Ms G:Jon come over here
Jon slowly walks over, with a sour look on his face.

as soon as Jon is close enough, rob start crying and wining:He threatened my livelyhood, it's not fair, i can say whatever I want

Ms. G: Jon..... Did you threaten Rob livelihood?

Jon:No.
he would say this kicking the dirt, looking down. then he would get very excited and add.
He called me a twit!

Rob: I did not..... I called you a bit of a twit, besides it's a free country and I can say whatever I want!

This is where I would get to the solution part...

First Rob, he is the easy one......

Ms. G: Rob, while yes, it is a free country. It's not nice to call someone that you have to be around a "twit". You can think or say whatever you like, but don't you think that you may hurt his feelings? Would you want someone to call you a "twit"? That is not what nice people do, and I know that you're a nice person, so I think you may owe him an apology. What do you think?

I would wait for it to sink in to Rob's head that he hurt Jon's feelings and that is why Jon reacted the way he did. And as I said, Rob is a nice person and probably didn't mean to hurt Jon's feelings with and off hand remark. He probably apologize and then go play.

Then I would have to have a more serious conversation with Jon. I would get down to his level and talk in low tones..... Because of his reaction to Rob I would know that Jon is a very sensitive person and reacts harshly.

Ms. G: Jon, I realize your feelings were hurt by what Rob said, it was insensitive of him. but, wiether you realize it or not you have power over Rob's livelihood, the boy needs to make a living. When you say things about deleting his portfolio, it's much more serious. I think you may have overreacted to this, and lashed out. As I say I know your feelings were hurt, but your reaction was way overboard and makes you look bad here on the playground. If the other boys and girls think that you are going to lord your power over them, and take their livelihoods away at the drop of a hat, they are not going to want to play with you anymore. As Spiderman says, "With great power comes great responsibility". I think you have to do two things here, first: apologize to Rob. Second: Do some long hard thinking about who you are and what power you have.

OK this has been a long post. And I am sure Rob and Jon are not pleased to be compared to Kindergartners.... but, my answer to that is, if you don't like being compared to Kindergartners, don't act like one.

(OH NO SHE DI-ENT......Oh , yes I did)

maunger · « **Reply #32 on:** April 21, 2007, 07:51 »

Quote from: ienjoysoup on April 21, 2007, 06:45

So, this is the sort of argument I see all day, the following is a written dramatization of how I would handle this:

Boy, that puts in perspective for me

Maybe i'll start passing all my problems thru you and they'll all seem so much more simple heehee

Thanks for the post!

Nekros · « **Reply #33 on:** April 21, 2007, 10:50 »

Couldn't have said it better....

Quote from: souper on April 21, 2007, 06:45

hello all

I read this thread, My day job: art teacher for kindergartner and 1st graders...... the school I teach in has single sex classes, so it's all boys or all girls. The boys classes are much more difficult to deal with because the boys are constantly arguing.

So, this is the sort of argument I see all day, the following is a written dramatization of how I would handle this:

rob: Ms. G... Ms. G........ Jon threatened me!

Ms. G (that's me): What do you mean he threatened you?

rob: He threatened my livelihood!
please note rob has mustered up a tear.

Ms G:Jon come over here
Jon slowly walks over, with a sour look on his face.

as soon as Jon is close enough, rob start crying and wining:He threatened my livelyhood, it's not fair, i can say whatever I want

Ms. G: Jon..... Did you threaten Rob livelihood?

Jon:No.
he would say this kicking the dirt, looking down. then he would get very excited and add.
He called me a twit!

Rob: I did not..... I called you a bit of a twit, besides it's a free country and I can say whatever I want!

This is where I would get to the solution part...

First Rob, he is the easy one......

Ms. G: Rob, while yes, it is a free country. It's not nice to call someone that you have to be around a "twit". You can think or say whatever you like, but don't you think that you may hurt his feelings? Would you want someone to call you a "twit"? That is not what nice people do, and I know that you're a nice person, so I think you may owe him an apology. What do you think?

I would wait for it to sink in to Rob's head that he hurt Jon's feelings and that is why Jon reacted the way he did. And as I said, Rob is a nice person and probably didn't mean to hurt Jon's feelings with and off hand remark. He probably apologize and then go play.

Then I would have to have a more serious conversation with Jon. I would get down to his level and talk in low tones..... Because of his reaction to Rob I would know that Jon is a very sensitive person and reacts harshly.

Ms. G: Jon, I realize your feelings were hurt by what Rob said, it was insensitive of him. but, wiether you realize it or not you have power over Rob's livelihood, the boy needs to make a living. When you say things about deleting his portfolio, it's much more serious. I think you may have overreacted to this, and lashed out. As I say I know your feelings were hurt, but your reaction was way overboard and makes you look bad here on the playground. If the other boys and girls think that you are going to lord your power over them, and take their livelihoods away at the drop of a hat, they are not going to want to play with you anymore. As Spiderman says, "With great power comes great responsibility". I think you have to do two things here, first: apologize to Rob. Second: Do some long hard thinking about who you are and what power you have.

OK this has been a long post. And I am sure Rob and Jon are not pleased to be compared to Kindergartners.... but, my answer to that is, if you don't like being compared to Kindergartners, don't act like one.

(OH NO SHE DI-ENT......Oh , yes I did)

ss123 · « **Reply #34 on:** April 21, 2007, 11:02 »

Here is something that won't ever change: If you aren't happy at Shutterstock, then instead of running around complaining and calling names, leave. We do our best to make people happy - you should all know that by now. Of course, 100% of the clients won't be happy at 100% of the times - however, I take offense if you think we're ripping you off (and the twit part doesn't help). I would rather end a business relationship than have somebody be unhappy.

Here is something that can change: I don't have to participate here. If it bothers you guys - I won't post.

Jon Oringer

le_cyclope · « **Reply #35 on:** April 21, 2007, 11:10 »

Quote from: souper on April 21, 2007, 06:45

OK this has been a long post. And I am sure Rob and Jon are not pleased to be compared to Kindergartners.... but, my answer to that is, if you don't like being compared to Kindergartners, don't act like one.

(OH NO SHE DI-ENT......Oh , yes I did)

Ahhhhhhhhhhh,
What a refreshing way to go over it!!!

Thank you very much!

Claude

nruboc · « **Reply #36 on:** April 21, 2007, 11:26 »

Quote from: ss123 on April 21, 2007, 11:02

Here is something that won't ever change: If you aren't happy at Shutterstock, then instead of running around complaining and calling names, leave. We do our best to make people happy - you should all know that by now. Of course, 100% of the clients won't be happy at 100% of the times - however, I take offense if you think we're ripping you off (and the twit part doesn't help). I would rather end a business relationship than have somebody be unhappy.

Here is something that can change: I don't have to participate here. If it bothers you guys - I won't post.

Jon Oringer

Couldn't agree more - those who think 25 cents is a rip off, just don't understand the subscription model. As a designer, who first purchased a subscription to ShutterStock before submitting there, I downloaded ALOT of pictures (I maxed out). Of those pictures, I only actually used less than 5%. If I had to pay for each download (ala IStock), I would have only downloaded the ones I was 100% sure would work which would be about 95% fewer downloads.

Thanks for participating here, no bother at all, on the contrary it's good to know that the owners are actually following the contributors conversations

maunger · « **Reply #37 on:** April 21, 2007, 11:31 »

Quote from: ss123 on April 21, 2007, 11:02

Here is something that can change: I don't have to participate here. If it bothers you guys - I won't post.

Jon Oringer

Jon, I'd definately vote for your participation! Seeing both sides of an issue is important to me.

souper · « **Reply #38 on:** April 21, 2007, 11:36 »

Jon

it's great that you contribut here.....

it's great that you are interested.....

But you are being a bully. you have power over Rob and many others on this site because you control purse strings.......

and responding that we don't like it we can leave is evidence of that.

Truely I am sorry that you got offended by something someone said here, or anywhere... shutterstock is a great site.......

All you needed to say was that you are offended, by threating him..... you are being a bully. PLAY NICE IN THE SAND BOX!

I did mention I teach art ..... not english right? *wink wink*

berryspun · « **Reply #39 on:** April 21, 2007, 11:41 »

Quote from: ss123 on April 21, 2007, 11:02

Here is something that can change: I don't have to participate here. If it bothers you guys - I won't post.

Jon Oringer

I also would like to thank you Jon for explaining your point of view.

I'm not the owner of this site, just a contributor, but I'm sure that the same approach you have concerning your site would apply here: you're definitely right when you say that you don't have to participate. But if you are happy to do it, please do continue. Transparency, constructive criticism, and helping each other - whether as photographers or site administrators or both - is what I like here, and your contribution is definitely appreciated.

souper · « **Reply #41 on:** April 21, 2007, 11:52 »

I agree you should be offened by what he said..... I am not arguing that.

It's the: "You don't like it you can leave"

Maybe he can't afford to, and he's going through a hard time, saying things he shouldn't because he is upset about his money situation........ be the better man here Jon, put yourself in his shoes.

I get the feeling that you have at some point been in the "I have no money, what the heck am I going to do?" shoes, and maybe you reacted badly to something.

Read_My_Rights · « **Reply #42 on:** April 21, 2007, 12:48 »

Souper is super. Nicely done.

KiwiRob · « **Reply #43 on:** April 21, 2007, 13:18 »

Crickey this thread is going on a bit isn't it. Personally I wouldn't be offended at someone calling me a twit, there are far worse things to be called.

All I wanted with this post was to bring to peoples attention that things said here can have an impact on you. If you want to be controversial use an alter, it's safer.

The offending post has been deleted, I guess at the request of Jon.

nruboc · « **Reply #44 on:** April 21, 2007, 14:58 »

Quote from: KiwiRob on April 21, 2007, 13:18

Crickey this thread is going on a bit isn't it. Personally I wouldn't be offended at someone calling me a twit, there are far worse things to be called.

All I wanted with this post was to bring to peoples attention that things said here can have an impact on you. If you want to be controversial use an alter, it's safer.

The offending post has been deleted, I guess at the request of Jon.

You are a twit, for carrying on about how ShutterStock is ripping you off when you have no concept of subscription sites... now this thread can end

madelaide · « **Reply #45 on:** April 21, 2007, 17:24 »

Great post, Souper. I laughed a lot because it applies to so many daily situations at work, in family and in any forum I take part

Quote from: nruboc on April 21, 2007, 11:26

Couldn't agree more - those who think 25 cents is a rip off, just don't understand the subscription model. As a designer, who first purchased a subscription to ShutterStock before submitting there, I downloaded ALOT of pictures (I maxed out). Of those pictures, I only actually used less than 5%. If I had to pay for each download (ala IStock), I would have only downloaded the ones I was 100% sure would work which would be about 95% fewer downloads.

I understand the subscription model, I just prefer not to sell a high res image for 25c. I prefer that you buy only the ones you are 100% sure would work, and if mine is one of them, great.

Regards,
Adelaide

nruboc · « **Reply #46 on:** April 21, 2007, 17:50 »

Quote from: madelaide on April 21, 2007, 17:24

I understand the subscription model, I just prefer not to sell a high res image for 25c. I prefer that you buy only the ones you are 100% sure would work, and if mine is one of them, great.

Regards,
Adelaide

I assume you're in the process of deleting your files from Dreamstime - they have a 25 cent subscription plan as well.

leaf · « **Reply #47 on:** April 21, 2007, 18:46 »

ok ok.. perhaps this thread has reached it saturation point.

Thanks everyone for coming out to play

I think there was valid points made from both sides, and yes Jon i think 99% of the people here if not all appreciate your input so I hope you stay and give feedback once in a while.

-> kiwirob : Jon didn't ask the post to be removed but after it caused such a stir and was more 'insults' than opinion I decided to remove it.

allright - playground closed.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Can't say anything negitive here - they are watching (Read 12902 times)

dbvirago

nruboc

nruboc

nruboc

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors