Has anyone else noticed a lot of recent inconsistency in the review process at Bigstock lately?

I recently had a whole batch of photographs that were all rejected, many that have been accepted at all other agencies, including the crazy Shutterstock.  In another batch, they accepted some that I did not even bother to upload to others due to noise but it was a popular topic.  I do like the way they will notify buyers to stick to smaller sizes rather than total rejection for noise.  Action and outdoor shots are not always possible to do without noise.  The ones where they have done that have all sold.

But lately, I feel like the weekend reviewer at SS has moved to Bigstock.  Rejection of images that are in focus, correctly lighted, correct white balance.  I know reviewing can be subjective and one can learn from rejections and all that... but sometimes, the reviewer just is not doing their job.  Has anyone ever resubmitted to Bigstock when they know he review was bogus?  Maybe it is not worth it---photos are on other sites and selling so maybe I should just move on. 

On resubmitting - Sometimes I realize the rejection was warranted, usually because there is noise in the photo I overlooked. Sometimes I think the reviewer was high and I resubmit.

Almost no rejection with Bigstock

I was getting almost everything accepted at Bigstock for months (and then if one or two rejected, usually for noise on action shot so understandable).

Just in the past week, Bigstock has been rejecting everything. images accepted elsewhere at agencies that have strict review standards (SS, Fotolia).

On the other hand, SS seems slightly more reasonable and more images have been accepted there than usual.   Not a drastic change but closer to reasonable.