pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Istock's 0% bug  (Read 1834 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: January 24, 2012, 02:37 »
0
Istock has had this "bug" for a couple of months now.
Their web site doesn't calculate your approval rating. Thus you can't know for sure what percentage of your files have been accepted, and you can't know how close you are to becoming an exclusive photographer. And so, applications for exclusivity are completely shut down while this bug lives on.

The site says, "You have a 0% approval rating. You're almost there. Keep trying."

This brings up two issues.

1) I don't believe it's a months-old math "bug", I think they are rethinking exclusivity in some way. (my opinion, of course)

2) The irritating way you get treated by the moderators.
Here's an example: newbielink:http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=339985&page=1 [nonactive]
The interaction goes like this.
You mention the bug on their Help forum.
Someone says you can calculate your own acceptance rate. Divide the rejects by the uploads. (if it's so easy why can't iStock do it anymore?)
Another person says you should contact support.
The moderator gets on and tells you "Do not report this bug again" and locks the thread.

If you contact support, they tell you "Do not report this bug again"
If you contact the moderator he tells you "Do not report this bug again"
That's it.
You can't discuss it with other members, you can't ask about it, you get this "stock", stuck reply that was clearly sent down from Headquarters.
They pretend that you are reporting the bug, then shut you down.

Clearly the "bug" has been already been reported, but people want to talk about it with each other [and dispel all these rumors] without being disrupted.

There is something going on here, more than crowd control. this is highly irregular and annoying.  Maybe there is something to be discussed here. Is it really an unfix-able "bug"?
« Last Edit: January 24, 2012, 03:21 by cuibel »


traveler1116

« Reply #1 on: January 24, 2012, 02:43 »
0
I think they said when you get 500 DLs you should be ok.

« Reply #2 on: January 24, 2012, 02:50 »
0
I think they said when you get 500 DLs you should be ok.

I believe you, but I never heard that from any of them in all my encounters with them over this.  What kind of moderation is that?

rubyroo

« Reply #3 on: January 24, 2012, 02:59 »
0
I think they said when you get 500 DLs you should be ok.

I have over 500 DLs and my acceptance rate shows zero, so if they did say that, it's not correct.

« Reply #4 on: January 24, 2012, 04:05 »
0
Is it really an unfix-able "bug"?
Yes. iStuck doesn't have bugs. It is a bug.

« Reply #5 on: January 24, 2012, 04:17 »
0
Who cares?

If it is preventing you from going exclusive then it is doing you a big favour. I'd call that 'a feature'.

rubyroo

« Reply #6 on: January 24, 2012, 04:23 »
0
 :D

Caz

« Reply #7 on: January 24, 2012, 04:57 »
0
I think they said when you get 500 DLs you should be ok.

I have over 500 DLs and my acceptance rate shows zero, so if they did say that, it's not correct.

It's always been the case that you can go exclusive when you have 500 downloads no matter what your acceptance rate. The acceptance rate is only an issue if you want to go exclusive when you only have 250-499 downloads.  In the time it's taken so far to get the bug fixed you'll probably have reached 500 downloads anyway, it's hardly a high bar to set.

rubyroo

« Reply #8 on: January 24, 2012, 05:24 »
0
Oops.  I clearly misunderstood the point there.  I thought traveller1116 meant that the AR was appearing for people with over 500 dls.

Uber "brain fart" on my part.  Apologies!   :-[

ShadySue

« Reply #9 on: January 24, 2012, 06:29 »
0
@ OP: you might consider taking this as a big 'hint' about what 'their' attitude is to exclusive contributors.
They caused the problem, not you.
In six weeks, they have not made it a priority to fix the problem.
Therefore, attracting new exclusives is not a priority for them.
Given that exclusivity is not as attractive a proposition as it was a few years back, they can't be inundated with new applicants in the 250-500 dls range. If they were really interested in encouraging new exclusives, they could easily go into their upload history and do a little sum to work out their AR. H*ck a numerate high school pupil on work experience could do it.
So, what does that tell  you?

michealo

« Reply #10 on: January 24, 2012, 08:27 »
0
@ OP: you might consider taking this as a big 'hint' about what 'their' attitude is to exclusive contributors.
They caused the problem, not you.
In six weeks, they have not made it a priority to fix the problem.
Therefore, attracting new exclusives is not a priority for them.
Given that exclusivity is not as attractive a proposition as it was a few years back, they can't be inundated with new applicants in the 250-500 dls range. If they were really interested in encouraging new exclusives, they could easily go into their upload history and do a little sum to work out their AR. H*ck a numerate high school pupil on work experience could do it.
So, what does that tell  you?

it tells me that someone that can't make 500 dls isn't likely to be a money maker for them ...

ShadySue

« Reply #11 on: January 24, 2012, 08:45 »
0
@ OP: you might consider taking this as a big 'hint' about what 'their' attitude is to exclusive contributors.
They caused the problem, not you.
In six weeks, they have not made it a priority to fix the problem.
Therefore, attracting new exclusives is not a priority for them.
Given that exclusivity is not as attractive a proposition as it was a few years back, they can't be inundated with new applicants in the 250-500 dls range. If they were really interested in encouraging new exclusives, they could easily go into their upload history and do a little sum to work out their AR. H*ck a numerate high school pupil on work experience could do it.
So, what does that tell  you?

it tells me that someone that can't make 500 dls isn't likely to be a money maker for them ...

Who said someone couldn't make 500 dls?
That was the rule until mid-2007, then they changed it to either 500dls with any acceptance rate, even 1%, or 250dls with 50% AR.
Clearly their idea then was to try to tie people into exclusivity - at a time when the exclusive benefits were better in some ways than they are now (though with no V/A) earlier in their stock career.
With more competition, it's far harder nowadays to reach even 250dls.
However, in theory, someone exceptional could make 250 dls in a very short time, but they still couldn't become exclusive now if they wanted to.
It's moot whether someone who reaches 250dls in six months is going to be a better money maker than someone who reaches 500dls in three years with a 10% AR - they don't care anyway ATM.
I'm sure we've all seen some apparent rising stars who get loads of dls at the beginning, then stop uploading.

If they wanted to reinstate the 500 rule, they could do it, without all this "we can't work out your AR" cr*p.

ShadySue

« Reply #12 on: January 24, 2012, 09:11 »
0
^^^
Or they could say, "have to have reached 250dls in x months". They could work that out easily.
My original conclusion stands.

helix7

« Reply #13 on: January 24, 2012, 10:23 »
0
...If it is preventing you from going exclusive then it is doing you a big favour. I'd call that 'a feature'.

Nice. :)

« Reply #14 on: January 24, 2012, 10:34 »
0
I'm guessing it's deliberate - they aren't accepting new exclusives (at least by the official route) while they "rethink" the terms.   And now it's all in chaos and will be for a while.   

traveler1116

« Reply #15 on: January 24, 2012, 11:08 »
0
I'm guessing it's deliberate - they aren't accepting new exclusives (at least by the official route) while they "rethink" the terms.   And now it's all in chaos and will be for a while.   
From what I've seen them say, they are accepting new exclusives still but you need 500DLs now until the acceptance % bug is fixed.  They have also said they are working on fixing it, we'll see if any new info comes out today but they have consistently said these things so I doubt there will be a change.

« Reply #16 on: January 24, 2012, 11:32 »
0
Wonder when they are going to fix the reported earnings...haven't had any earnings reported since the 20th.

ShadySue

« Reply #17 on: January 24, 2012, 11:38 »
0
Wonder when they are going to fix the reported earnings...haven't had any earnings reported since the 20th.

Do you mean your balance or your charts?
My balance seems to be updating in real time, as far as I can ever know, and my charts are updated until 22nd.
But they've been coming in 'clumps' throughtout January - sticking for a few days then 2-3 days are updated at once.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
2 Replies
3603 Views
Last post July 25, 2006, 06:12
by leaf
5 Replies
6761 Views
Last post August 22, 2006, 15:49
by amanda1863
5 Replies
1805 Views
Last post October 27, 2006, 12:10
by CJPhoto
3 Replies
1454 Views
Last post November 20, 2006, 19:19
by yingyang0
3 Replies
1485 Views
Last post January 26, 2007, 14:53
by madelaide

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors