MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Stock Discussion => Topic started by: Poncke on December 23, 2012, 04:31
-
For me it was because I didnt want my portfolio to be scrutinized as I was a complete newbie, but along the way I learned its also a smart thing to stay anonymous because of the agencies reading this forum.
Maybe someday I will be ready to drop the curtain ;)
-
Actually there are only 2 reasons to be anonymous - fear or dishonesty. How valid is any opinion when even the author is not prepared to stand over it?
-
How valid is any opinion when even the author is not prepared to stand over it?
The value of an opinion only depends on the authenticity of the author if the author is making a statement which cannot stand on its own.
For example: jsnover recently pointed us to a site at which anonymous Getty and IS employees were talking about working at these companies. Ultimately this is hearsay. But it is interesting. On the other hand, anonymous inspection rants without examples are usually utterly pointless.
If someone with an historically successful and very public portfolio starts talking about trends then we pay attention. We try to work out whether their trend is a general trend - and we also look at their recent uploads and wonder whether perhaps they are beginning to compete with themselves. I think we pay less attention to people who say they are very successful but their work is hard to find. Whether they are public or not.
For the most part you can tell a good post by the style and the content. It has nothing to do with the signature.
-
How valid is any opinion when even the author is not prepared to stand over it?
The value of an opinion only depends on the authenticity of the author if the author is making a statement which cannot stand on its own.
+1
Exactly. An opinion is valid when it's valid. Knowledge of the author is irrelevant.
Actually all opinions are valid and should be heard, despite whether people agree with them or not. Isn't that the whole point of a forum? I'd probably get more respect if people knew who I was but in a forum like this, I prefer people respect the points I raise, rather than the person I am. I don't care if my competitors don't respect me as a person. The important thing is that my buyers respect my work.
Anonymity isn't the real issue. People who come to these forums for the sake of stirring trouble, whether they're anonymous or not, are the issue. People who can't argue a point amicably are the issue. People who have been in this industry too long and command respect and treat newbies with less respect than others are the issue. People who can't help but be rude are the issue. People who can't accept opinions that differ to their own are the issue.
Ponke, I would vote but I can't because I would need to choose a few options, including one important one that you've missed - copycats
-
@aspp
Actually, I wouldn't disagree with this - you can have well argued posts delivered anonymously but even these would be strengthened if the author is prepared to stand over them (as you yourself argue with examples). I would suggest though that "good" or "bad" depends on whether the reader agrees or not. On this particular site, the one area of opinion for which I'd have zero respect is port criticism by those in the long grass.
I challenge anyone to provide a reason for anonymity that isn’t rooted in fear or dishonesty.
-
I challenge anyone to provide a reason for anonymity that isn’t rooted in fear or dishonesty.
What about being business smart? I suppose that can fall into 'fear'.
-
Before this leads to some heated arguments (or should I rather say, before it starts), I do not believe there is a right or wrong here, just personal choice (for whatever reason).
The only reason I find pitiful is where people use anonymity to be able to say disrespectful/unreasonable/distasteful things they would not have if people knew who they are. That is just cowardliness.
-
I challenge anyone to provide a reason for anonymity that isn’t rooted in fear or dishonesty.
What about being business smart? I suppose that can fall into 'fear'.
Absolutely, discretion being the better part of valour and all that ;)
-
I challenge anyone to provide a reason for anonymity that isn’t rooted in fear or dishonesty.
What about being business smart? I suppose that can fall into 'fear'.
Absolutely, discretion being the better part of valour and all that ;)
Yeh, I'll let you have that one ;D
-
Fear of plagiarism.
-
There are a few (or mostly the same) who hide behind anonymity, and take their vengence out on other forum members, and thats counterproductive.
There can be other very important reasons to stay anonymous, which are not mentioned in the above poll. Think legal entities, financials and nations.
-
you can have well argued posts delivered anonymously but even these would be strengthened if the author is prepared to stand over
Only if the point requires a signature. Opinion does not necessarily have more gravitas for being signed. References (eg to sources) and examples are what matters (as I am sure many of us learned at University).
I would suggest though that "good" or "bad" depends on whether the reader agrees or not.
Only where the answer involves a subjective opinion. Not in a world of right and wrong answers.
On this particular site, the one area of opinion for which I'd have zero respect is port criticism by those in the long grass.
If someone asks for a critique it makes no difference whether the responses they get are anonymous or not. All that matters is the quality of the opinion. For the most part a well delivered critique will validate itself. The quality of a critique stands or falls on the quality of the opinion. Nothing else. Remember that the buyers are anonymous.
I challenge anyone to provide a reason for anonymity that isn’t rooted in fear or dishonesty.
I would turn that the other way. Unless an opinion requires a signature I do not see any reason why it should need to be signed.
In many cases you are likely to get more honest answers from anonymous sources.
-
Fear of plagiarism.
Yes, but not just that. Fear of everyone following you to greener pastures and bringing that down too.
-
How about "I am anonymous because I work for one of the agencies and want to give my real opinions" or something like that. I'm not saying I am or am not or know of members who are. There are reviewers and keymasters and IT people here from the agencies who are not "spies" but contributors too and can you imagine the scrutiny their portfolios and opinions would get if they were known for what they do at the agencies. Whenever an admin from an agency does post they are seen as having a pre-determined point of view and are speaking for that particular agency - often a good thing. But there are worker bees there too.
-
How about "I am anonymous because I work for one of the agencies and want to give my real opinions" or something like that. I'm not saying I am or am not or know of members who are. There are reviewers and keymasters and IT people here from the agencies who are not "spies" but contributors too and can you imagine the scrutiny their portfolios and opinions would get if they were known for what they do at the agencies. Whenever an admin from an agency does post they are seen as having a pre-determined point of view and are speaking for that particular agency - often a good thing. But there are worker bees there too.
Interesting, I never thought of that. Cuppacoffee, if I slip you $100, will approve my next 1000 images? ;)
-
@aspp
Actually, I wouldn't disagree with this - you can have well argued posts delivered anonymously but even these would be strengthened if the author is prepared to stand over them (as you yourself argue with examples). I would suggest though that "good" or "bad" depends on whether the reader agrees or not. On this particular site, the one area of opinion for which I'd have zero respect is port criticism by those in the long grass.
I challenge anyone to provide a reason for anonymity that isn’t rooted in fear or dishonesty.
Reason three and four. Trolling and Spam.
To answer the question, I'm not anonymous because I stand behind what I say. (I may be an idiot, but you know who the source is) If people wanted to steal ideas, they can go look at most popular images on the agency searches, (no points for fear of exposure, there are no secrets)
If an agency comes here and finds my posts upsetting (and they might even be true!) then retaliates, I don't want to work for a place that is that disrespectful of their artists. Drive a stake in the heart of the blood * parasite vampires! Don't feed them.
People need to move forward and be open, not hole up, stagnant and withdraw.
What that leaves the other two reasons. Spam or being a Troll.
"So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself—nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance."
Franklin D. Roosevelt, Inaugural Address, March 4, 1933
-
There are also wolves sneaking around. We should not forget wolves.
So we have trolls, parasites and vampires and woves, what else do we have?
Its an unholy place really.
-
Actually a pretty good post, Race. I was thinking about that before reading your answer. My idea is that there usually are two types of posters ... those seeking agreement and those seeking disagreement.
8)
-
Actually there are only 2 reasons to be anonymous - fear or dishonesty. How valid is any opinion when even the author is not prepared to stand over it?
I agree. Lots of people living in fear here. And the reasons seem unfounded to me. If copycats want to copy a good portfolio, it doesn't really matter what your name is, does it? Sean Locke has a great portfolio, I am sure people copy him. And anyone using an anonymous name with a great portfolio gets copied too. The name is irrelevant. Greener pastures - most people looking to diverse are going to find those pastures anyway, with or without your name.
I think that's what attracts a lot of people to the internet, they can be anonymous and say or do whatever they want to others without having to take responsibility for their actions or words. If a contributor is so afraid of retaliation from an agency, you have two choices...don't trash talk them, or leave because they are bad people anyway.
Spam? I got tons of that way before I started microstock. If someone wants to find out who you are, for the most part, a little digging can find the answer.
I don't get the whole anonymous thing.
-
@cathy, yes, those looking to diversify will find where I am eventually but that doesn't mean I should advertise it, inviting everyone in there at once. It gives me a chance to get my foot in the door.
But that's just one reason.
I don't see how being anonymous (on its own) matters. As long as they're respectful of others, what difference does it make? I understand trolls are a PITA and they annoy me just as much as anyone else. I can't remember the ID but that guy (ltn or something like that) in the Pinerest thread who came in here just to cause trouble - people like that are annoying. But then you get some like that who aren't anonymous.
IMO, if someone puts their point across without putting others down, I don't care if I know their name or portfolio. I won't change my opinion of their opinion.
Come to think of it, sometimes I prefer anonymity because there are many who are influenced by the person and not the opinion. How many of you have one or two of those friends that agree with you just for the sake of it. After a while it gets on your nerves and you end up respecting the guy who thinks for himself.
-
I think that's what attracts a lot of people to the internet, they can be anonymous and say or do whatever they want to others without having to take responsibility for their actions or words.
IMO these sorts of anti - anonymity themes are often propagated by interests which seek or advocate greater control of the internet and greater control of opinion in general. Often in concert with lobbying on behalf of companies which want greater freedom to harvest and exploit personal information. Anti - bullying arguments are often used in this context.
In reality, much of the most acerbic, ignorant and bitter opinion I regularly see is written or read (broadcast media) by people who are more than happy to put their names to it. This does not bother me however since I was bought up to understand that:
"sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me"
^ we need to get back to that. Rather than trying to stifle opinion.
-
<Noel Coward voice>
I prefer to remain an enigma.
</Noel Coward voice>
No not really... just fear I suppose. Fear of plagiarism, fear of vendettas, fear of hit-men. Just your basic paranoia. I'm not proud of that but it is what it is - and 20 years on the Internet have taught me to be cautious.
-
Without anonymity I'd be off like a shot. Why? Too many ex-colleagues and potential competitors who would be interested in who, what and where I supply.
It's purely a business decision, protecting my interests and proprietary business information. Not ideal, granted, but after 20 years in the game I've got to look after number one.
The validity and weight of my posts rests on their content rather than any personal reputation. It is in no way diminishing their honesty; but I'll let my peers be the judge of that.
-
The validity and weight of my posts rests on their content rather than any personal reputation. It is in no way diminishing their honesty
VERY nicely put! :)
-
Actually a pretty good post, Race. I was thinking about that before reading your answer. My idea is that there usually are two types of posters ... those seeking agreement and those seeking disagreement.
8)
And I'm both, depending on what time and what my opinion actually is. ;D
Let me add, this subject has been beat to death.
I'm only expressing my own personal opinion. Anyone who feels differently is fine with me. I don't expect the anonymous people to agree, or they wouldn't be anonymous in the first place? There's no right or wrong answer to an opinion question. As Warren has pointed out, feel free to disagree, in a polite and intelligent manner, I don't mind.
-
From a slightly different angle ... I include my name, my website, even email address.
Maybe there are buyers here. It pays to advertise.
8)
-
you can have well argued posts delivered anonymously but even these would be strengthened if the author is prepared to stand over
Only if the point requires a signature. Opinion does not necessarily have more gravitas for being signed. References (eg to sources) and examples are what matters (as I am sure many of us learned at University).
So, I suppose you submitted your course work anonymously?? Anonymous opinion can be well argued, honest and pertinent but does not have the same “gravitas”. There is a reason people have to give evidence in court and not just send in an anonymous note.
I would suggest though that "good" or "bad" depends on whether the reader agrees or not.
Only where the answer involves a subjective opinion. Not in a world of right and wrong answers.
Very little in this world is black or white – most discourse involves subjective opinion
On this particular site, the one area of opinion for which I'd have zero respect is port criticism by those in the long grass.
If someone asks for a critique it makes no difference whether the responses they get are anonymous or not. All that matters is the quality of the opinion. For the most part a well delivered critique will validate itself. The quality of a critique stands or falls on the quality of the opinion. Nothing else. Remember that the buyers are anonymous.
How can a newbie tell if an opinion is harsh but fair or something delivered by someone who gets his jollies from belittling others? If you want critique post on the SS or IS forum.
I challenge anyone to provide a reason for anonymity that isn’t rooted in fear or dishonesty.
I would turn that the other way. Unless an opinion requires a signature I do not see any reason why it should need to be signed.
In many cases you are likely to get more honest answers from anonymous sources.
Nobody is saying something needs to be signed, that is entirely up to the poster but the reader, equally, can draw conclusions. Being totally unaccountable for comment can certainly be an aid to honesty.
I think that's what attracts a lot of people to the internet, they can be anonymous and say or do whatever they want to others without having to take responsibility for their actions or words.
IMO these sorts of anti - anonymity themes are often propagated by interests which seek or advocate greater control of the internet and greater control of opinion in general. Often in concert with lobbying on behalf of companies which want greater freedom to harvest and exploit personal information. Anti - bullying arguments are often used in this context.
In reality, much of the most acerbic, ignorant and bitter opinion I regularly see is written or read (broadcast media) by people who are more than happy to put their names to it. This does not bother me however since I was bought up to understand that:
"sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me"
^ we need to get back to that. Rather than trying to stifle opinion.
What anti – anonymity theme? Started by an anonymous member with fairly balanced for and against. The argument that anonymity = freedom strikes me in the same way that the gun control = oppression argument does.
I have to say I really enjoyed the plagiarism argument. I’m wondering if someone could express the % probability of the increased risk of plagiarism by posting here as against having their actual work available on numerous sites with 100s of 1000s of users?
-
Without anonymity I'd be off like a shot. Why? Too many ex-colleagues and potential competitors who would be interested in who, what and where I supply.
It's purely a business decision, protecting my interests and proprietary business information. Not ideal, granted, but after 20 years in the game I've got to look after number one.
The validity and weight of my posts rests on their content rather than any personal reputation. It is in no way diminishing their honesty; but I'll let my peers be the judge of that.
Exactly. If you care to scroll down to the stat's you'll usually find that there are normally 2-3x more guests than registered users reading these posts. Even many of the registered users you'll never have heard of because they never actually post. Most of the regular contributors here are generous with their time, experience and the information that they choose to share. However there is a limit to how much you can afford to share when it's your livelihood, especially when the vast majority of the recipients (of that information) are completely anonymous themselves.
-
There's no right or wrong answer to an opinion question.
There is according to some people!!
Your pole doesn't really cover my reason.
I'm anonymous (to a certain extent as most people know who I am) here only because I know that sometimes buyers will search for my portfolio using the username that I use on nearly all the Microstock sites I submit to, same for others I have no doubt, a couple of years ago I discovered that because I also used my username here most of the search results on Google were posts I'd made here, if someone is searching for my username I want them to find my images not my idle ramblings on MSG. Hence I changed to just RT.
-
Thanks for the debate guys. Interesting points. I am not anonymous anywhere else on the stock sites. This is the only forum where I choose to be careful. Was it fear in the first place, no it was because I wanted my opinion to be valued on what I said, not of the portfolio I have. I have many people's opinions seen discarded because of their portfolio. So I decided to start off anonymous. During this time here, I actually realised its because I dont want agencies to retaliate because of my opinion. I can imagine some agencies would happily get rid of some contributors that slay them here in the forum.
Anyhoo, I have to come to appreciate many of you here, very strong minded and opiniated people, but the place is more civil than I first thought it would be :D
-
What happened to grafix04? Left us?
-
I can images some agencies would happily get rid of some contributors that slay them here in the forum.
That did happen with FT, can't remember the guys name (use to photo lots of girls not wearing very much), he gave his opinion about something FT had done and they kicked him off. I can't remember all the details but he didn't hold back on his opinion of them.
-
That was Bobby Deal - photoshow - that Fotolia kicked out.
And Fotolia deleted my account (which I had left open but with no images after I became an iStock exclusive) and then refused to have me back as a contributor when I returned to being an independent. This was all over their displeasure over comments in public forums about their policies.
I like knowing who I am talking to. I would prefer it if people weren't anonymous, but I understand why some need or prefer to be so. I don't say anything in a public forum or on facebook that I have a problem being found in a search. I do think knowing something about where I'm coming from - portfolio of 50, 2,000 or 50K; doing stock for 6 months or 6 years; are my images boudoir shots, travel, food, 3D renderings, etc. - provides context for my opinions. I'm not sure how you could assess them - and validity isn't relevant for the most part in discussions like these - without knowing something about me. If I comment on what iStock likes or doesn't but I'm not a contributor there, you'd treat that differently from the case where I'd been there for many years, or where I was exclusive and an inspector there.
-
What happened to grafix04? Left us?
Seems that way - his last post was here:
http://www.microstockgroup.com/123royaltyfree-com/2013-is-here-how-about-the-promisses/300/?topicseen (http://www.microstockgroup.com/123royaltyfree-com/2013-is-here-how-about-the-promisses/300/?topicseen)
-
That was Bobby Deal - photoshow - that Fotolia kicked out.
Thanks that's him, I had a complete blank.
I didn't know about your situation though.
-
Did they kick him out?
That was kind of stupid...'
-
How can a newbie tell if an opinion is harsh but fair or something delivered by someone who gets his jollies from belittling others?
By intelligently understanding and evaluating the merits of the points made.
-
That was Bobby Deal - photoshow - that Fotolia kicked out.
And Fotolia deleted my account (which I had left open but with no images after I became an iStock exclusive) and then refused to have me back as a contributor when I returned to being an independent. This was all over their displeasure over comments in public forums about their policies.
I like knowing who I am talking to. I would prefer it if people weren't anonymous, but I understand why some need or prefer to be so. I don't say anything in a public forum or on facebook that I have a problem being found in a search. I do think knowing something about where I'm coming from - portfolio of 50, 2,000 or 50K; doing stock for 6 months or 6 years; are my images boudoir shots, travel, food, 3D renderings, etc. - provides context for my opinions. I'm not sure how you could assess them - and validity isn't relevant for the most part in discussions like these - without knowing something about me. If I comment on what iStock likes or doesn't but I'm not a contributor there, you'd treat that differently from the case where I'd been there for many years, or where I was exclusive and an inspector there.
I think that because the sites do not post often at MSG, its members have a false sense of security that they can say what ever they want without consequence. I can remember when Rinder "claimed" on MSG that he submitted someone else work as a review test on IS. It not take long for them to permanently ban him from submitting to their site altogether and to be fair you can not blame them for taking such a stance.
I did not answer the questionnaire because the questions seemed to be biased against being anonymous. I do not flaunt who I am mainly because I think it is important not to take my own self worth too seriously and I want to be able to respond honestly to problems presenting on the sites without fear that the micros will retaliate in some way!
I give equal weight to the people I know here and the people I do not know based on what they have to say period.
In fact I know some people here that are anonymous because they walk the walk on the sites through action and you can also hear that wisdom in their words on MSG. Unless you are a newb, you can pretty much spot your friends even when they are posting anonymously to protect their business interests.
-
@cathy, yes, those looking to diversify will find where I am eventually but that doesn't mean I should advertise it, inviting everyone in there at once. It gives me a chance to get my foot in the door.
But that's just one reason.
I don't see how being anonymous (on its own) matters. As long as they're respectful of others, what difference does it make?
I understand trolls are a PITA and they annoy me just as much as anyone else. I can't remember the ID but that guy (ltn or something like that) in the Pinerest thread who came in here just to cause trouble - people like that are annoying. But then you get some like that who aren't anonymous.
IMO, if someone puts their point across without putting others down, I don't care if I know their name or portfolio. I won't change my opinion of their opinion.
Come to think of it, sometimes I prefer anonymity because there are many who are influenced by the person and not the opinion. How many of you have one or two of those friends that agree with you just for the sake of it. After a while it gets on your nerves and you end up respecting the guy who thinks for himself.
+1
-
There is nothing biased about it, or at least I never meant it to be biased. Just think of the poll written by a non English speaker. I am anonymous, so why would I be biased against myself ;)
-
Because I don't want my portfolio to be scrutinized 11 (23.4%)
Because I might get 'punished' by the agencies I am negative about 8 (17%)
Because I always post anonymous anywhere on the internet 3 (6.4%)
Because I am a troll 1 (2.1%) (I added this answer mainly for laughs, didnt expect to get a result here :) )
Because I think the discussions get too 'personal' here 2 (4.3%)
I am not anonymous because I dont worry about any of the above 3 (6.4%)
I am not anonymous because I have nothing to hide 6 (12.8%)
I am not anonymous because I like to be open and up front with people 10 (21.3%)
I am not anonymous because it never crossed my mind to be anonymous 3 (6.4%)
-
I have always respected and understood why people would choose to be anonymous here. It is nice to be able to say exactly what you think without having to worry about reprisals from the agencies who monitor the forums.
I was here for a very long time before it occurred to me to be anonymous, and I did try out an alter ego for a brief while. But in my case, my way of expressing myself is pretty easy to pick out to those who know me, and the only way I could have avoided being discovered would have been to change my syntax. Seemed like more bother than it was worth, so I just went back to being me.
Not to mention that, when I do have a criticism or suggestion that I want an agency to hear, I think I have more credibility as a known individual than as a random poster.
-
Because although I stand beside everything I say, and hope I apologise for any inadvertant mistakes, I don't necessarily want anyone outside stock who looks up my real name to find all my varied rabbitings.
Actually, I was semi-anonymous, i.e. I posted under a pseudonym, but you could find my name and port, should you have wanted to, in my profile; but the site update changed that.
... which doesn't seem to fit any of the poll options.
-
Actually there are only 2 reasons to be anonymous - fear or dishonesty.
Give me a break.
There's a long tradition of anonymity on the internet, going all the way back to Usenet. Plastering the details of one's personal life all over the web is a recent thing.
It's not clear to me why anyone should be asked to explain or justify their desire for privacy and anonymity. I'd say the questions should be going in the other direction: why is someone, in this context, expecting or demanding to know who I am?
-
I am not anonymous on this newsgroup for the same reason I don't wear a mask when I go out and interact with real people - what's the difference really?
So you know I am a photographer and you can see my portfolio and maybe if you're not too ethical you will copy some ideas, but that can't be stopped by me being anonymous. So what is there to hide?
When I express my opinions I like people to know who they are coming from. If an agency is petty enough to punish contributors for their opinions, then good riddance.
-
. If an agency is petty enough to punish contributors for their opinions, then good riddance.
Everybodies circumstances are different and not all of us are in a position where we can afford to just say good riddance to the big earning companies. Fotolia have chucked a few people out for things they have said here and although they have tanked for me now they were for over a year my highest earner by a big margin.
-
I don't mind if you have a look at my stuff... so you know I'm not shooting total cr8p. :D as a newbie I guess I just let it all hang out, maybe later I'll play closer to my chest, but for now I'm still pretty enthusiastic.
i'm not sure the copycat reason is overly valid (paranoid much?). There are 200000 photographers out there, any of whom who could view your work any time they chose to. I'd think once we "know" each other you'd be less likely to have copycats from within this community? That could be naive, but even if someone were to copy you, they may have done so either way. Chill, I say.
-
Deleted
-
Actually there are only 2 reasons to be anonymous - fear or dishonesty.
Give me a break.
There's a long tradition of anonymity on the internet, going all the way back to Usenet. Plastering the details of one's personal life all over the web is a recent thing.
It's not clear to me why anyone should be asked to explain or justify their desire for privacy and anonymity. I'd say the questions should be going in the other direction: why is someone, in this context, expecting or demanding to know who I am?
Nobody is expecting / demanding to know who anyone is or questioning anyone's right to be anonymous, nor is anyone saying fear is necessarily bad. However you dress is up, I have seen nothing here that doesn't, when brought down to essentials, fall into one of the 2 categories.
-
I can absolutely see why you'd want to hide your portfolio if you were saying horrid things about the diff agencies.
And frankly, fair enough!
Let's not let the past few weeks in Instagram's life be forgotten - we small folk still matter cos we have the numbers.
In the real world i hate unions - I am a business owner and in general I think the "little people" are clueless (we can debate this on another thread if you like).
I'm not sure yet how I feel about stock, cos it's such a unique business model. I'm still leaning towards: you're trying to pay us "african" wages...
-
I don't see a reason for myself to be anonymous.
-
I can absolutely see why you'd want to hide your portfolio if you were saying horrid things about the diff agencies.
People get barred not for saying horrid things but just telling the truth.
-
I have always respected and understood why people would choose to be anonymous here. It is nice to be able to say exactly what you think without having to worry about reprisals from the agencies who monitor the forums.
......
Not to mention that, when I do have a criticism or suggestion that I want an agency to hear, I think I have more credibility as a known individual than as a random poster.
i rarely post anything here that i havent already tried to discuss with the agency, so they shouldn't be surprised by anything they read here. [exception would be generic things like recent review times, etc]
in one sense we're all semi-anonymous since we only know most of the people here thru what they post, whether signed or not. i've been online since the early 80s and have always used a 'nym but readily identify myself if asked. in early days the same handle might be found on very different forums and you'd recognize 'friends'. today the internet is vast and nichified
for some topics it doesnt matter - technical information, etc, but for others it's useful to know the person 's backgd, biases, etc. even when anon this is easily done over time
over times anons who keep the same nickname become as wellnown as those who identify themselves. so the only time anons are a problem is when they suddenly show up in a discussion with very opinionated or critical observations. then they're flagged as trolls until enough evidence is gathered. it doesnt really happen here very much, but on review sites like tripadviser, yelp, etc, it really affects how you need to consider a very good/bad review, esp'ly if it's an outlier. on amazon, reading one rave review wont usually make me buy the book, unless i look at their other reviews and see they like the same other books i do.
-
i've been online since the early 80s
lol. even if you were 99% of us weren't, who were you talking to?
-
i've been online since the early 80s
lol. even if you were 99% of us weren't, who were you talking to?
i realize some here may not have been born yet
there was a BBS [bulletin board] community that interacted by 300 - 120 baud modems; there was compuserve, and colleges had online areas - one of our projects in a data structures course in late 70s was to write apps that would make it easier to play a multiplayer online game that was popular. i wrote my first multiplayer games for the HP 3000 for use on the company network
there were a lot of ways to get online - what was missing was the internet to connect all the pieces
-
i've been online since the early 80s
lol. even if you were 99% of us weren't, who were you talking to?
Don't know why you quoted me. I didn't say that.
-
i've been online since the early 80s
lol. even if you were 99% of us weren't, who were you talking to?
Don't know why you quoted me. I didn't say that.
Looks like cascoly said that yesterday at 1400. He had quoting something you said and when vannphoto was quoting him, he missed deleting your name in his clean-up of cascoly's quote and it came out as if you had said that instead of cascoly. Just shows we all need to be more careful when editing a multiple quote.
-
i've been online since the early 80s
lol. even if you were 99% of us weren't, who were you talking to?
Don't know why you quoted me. I didn't say that.
Someone did a bad cut and paste:
i've been online since the early 80s and have always used a 'nym but readily identify myself if asked. in early days the same handle might be found on very different forums and you'd recognize 'friends'. today the internet is vast and nichified
Hey cascoly I was a hub for Fidonet and national hub for UFOnet coming in from Canada. There's still a lingering group of usnet forums and groups, I don't participate anymore. My user name still pops up in searches with the fidonet number 154/414 and lists my fax number, which I still have. Except it's not a fax machine anymore it's and eFax. :)
That was in the days of dialup and I started with a really cool (ha ha) 300 baud, internal Hayes modem on a card. Sending a one sided floppy would be a matter of start the transfer, go watch a movie, come back and see how it went. That was 113K of data (yes, one sided Apple Disc II floppy)
I'm avoiding the anonymous debate. As some people try to be a mystery because they don't want people to see their photos. (interesting when you think about that?) Some have real names and Internet names, (where I fall I guess?) and some use their real names. Note, almost no one here is using their NAME for an ID. so there is some degree of anonymity even with the ones who do have links and open links to their ports.
I'm not going to work for anyone who threatens and bullies me. You can assume that's why I and some others, refuse to work for some agencies that have publicly said, they will ban people who post negative messages on forums like this. Up Theirs, the little Hitlers.
-
oh sorry, wrong [quote thingys.
-
oh sorry, wrong thingys.
Forty Lashes with a wet noodle! (and you do the dishes after dinner...)
-
lol, i fixed it. sort of... :D html codes and stuff are not my thing.
clearly.
-
That was in the days of dialup and I started with a really cool (ha ha) 300 baud, internal Hayes modem on a card. Sending a one sided floppy would be a matter of start the transfer, go watch a movie, come back and see how it went. That was 113K of data (yes, one sided Apple Disc II floppy)
I wrote my first programs in high school in '69, saved them on punched paper tape. First modem was 110 bps. I worked for a company that made dialup modems; I remember when 1200 bps was "high speed" then (2400 bps was "high speed" etc.). Remember "acoustic couplers" - you put the phone handset into 2 rubber cups? So I was an early participant in BBSs.
Originally, online anonymity was seen as a great equalizer; nobody was a "big wheel" online, and your posts had to stand on their own. For one thing, there was no way to prove your identity; you could claim to be anyone or anything, but how could someone reading your post verify those claims? So any reputation and credibility you had came from the content of your posts.
Facebook caught on and now everybody expects everything to be 'social'. Fine, if that's your thing.
-
oh sorry, wrong [quote thingys.
No problem :)
Just wanted to be clear, I had never heard of the internet in the early eighties. I'm old, but I'm not THAT old ;D
-
oh sorry, wrong [quote thingys.
No problem :)
Just wanted to be clear, I had never heard of the internet in the early eighties. I'm old, but I'm not THAT old ;D
I'd be deeply surprised if you had, Lisa. There was no Internet in the early eighties. Back then it was still the ARPANET, and still limited mostly to government research labs and universities. The Internet came into being around 1985, with the first domain name issued in March of that year to Symbolics.com, my employer at the time.
I had access to the ARPANET at Symbolics starting in late 1983, although I got to play with it in 1973 or 74 courtesy of a friend's access to systems at MIT. That's only a couple of years after my first computer experience, at a National Science Foundation summer program at San Diego State in 1971. That was an IBM 360 in those pre-networking days. Punched cards, don't you know.
-
Don't know why you quoted me. I didn't say that.
sorry - in trying to avoid extraneous quotes, i left in 1 tag too many -- fixed now
-
This is a funny thread. I chose "Troll" just because its the most unlike-me assessment there is, which is funny, because that means I lied and made the pole inaccurate, which means I probably really am just a troll.
-
This is a funny thread. I chose "Troll" just because its the most unlike-me assessment there is, which is funny, because that means I lied and made the pole inaccurate, which means I probably really am just a troll.
Exactly, so I rewarded you with a minus for ffing up the poll 8)
-
I chose the first option.
A couple of months ago, i had a vector in the top 50 of SS. Honestly, the drawing was really simple, but the concept was a hit. In the weeks after, i saw more and more duplicates of my vector on the site + some other contributors had taken a good look to my complete portfolio and duplicate at least 5 of my bestsellers....
Personally, I've got nothing to hide, but i want to avoid things like this again.
-
This is a funny thread. I chose "Troll" just because its the most unlike-me assessment there is, which is funny, because that means I lied and made the pole inaccurate, which means I probably really am just a troll.
Nope. If you were really a troll you would NEVER admit it :)
-
This is a funny thread. I chose "Troll" just because its the most unlike-me assessment there is, which is funny, because that means I lied and made the pole inaccurate, which means I probably really am just a troll.
Nope. If you were really a troll you would NEVER admit it :)
You are right Lisa, its actually a wum :D
-
The first ARPANET Interface Message Processors were at UCLA. Advanced Research Projects Agency Network (ARPANET) 1969
FidoNet founded in 1984 consisted of approximately 10,000 systems world-wide, which exchanged mail and files via Modems.
At a CERN facility in the Swiss Alps, when 36-year-old physicist Tim Berners-Lee published the first-ever website. August 6, 1991
http://www.internetsociety.org/internet/what-internet/history-internet/brief-history-internet (http://www.internetsociety.org/internet/what-internet/history-internet/brief-history-internet)
-
This is a funny thread. I chose "Troll" just because its the most unlike-me assessment there is, which is funny, because that means I lied and made the pole inaccurate, which means I probably really am just a troll.
LOL.
-
I chose the first option.
A couple of months ago, i had a vector in the top 50 of SS. Honestly, the drawing was really simple, but the concept was a hit. In the weeks after, i saw more and more duplicates of my vector on the site + some other contributors had taken a good look to my complete portfolio and duplicate at least 5 of my bestsellers....
Personally, I've got nothing to hide, but i want to avoid things like this again.
That's what I don't understand. I can still go search for the top 50 of SS. If your drawing is there, I can copy it. It doesn't matter what your name is! Copycats are going to rip you off, whether you use your real name or not. Your port is being scrutinized because its good and worth copying, not because you are using a real or fake name. How does using a fake name stop me from scrutinizing your portfolio and copying?
But of course you are free to do as you wish, no matter to me. :)
-
I'm happy to share my name and location at DT where I'm exclusive. Nothing to hide and I'm sure the big sellers don't hide themselves away, kind of feels backwards to work on pushing your port but then hide from the buyers. Happy New Year :)
-
just wanna let you guys know (the anonymous) that I have found 2 in the last week, so be careful when you speak here at MSG, I am good ;D
I will keep it to myself, don't worry!
-
I know almost exactly who is who here, friend or foe, dont matter, its easy finding out who is hiding behind a pseudo. I actually learnt that from a programmer wizard, who used to work with Bruce years back before he sold IS.
On another note. I can understand ppl hiding behind pseudos, people afraid of getting punished either by egencies or members, etc.
I for one, ClaridgeJ, lagereek, chris56 or whatever, use it as free advertising and earn good revenue from these, heck! I could do with some more I think.
-
If I worked for MI5 I might see the point, but for hanging out in microstock forum it's a bit over the top.
-
I was anonymous because Fotolia was punishing people it found out had been
negative truthful about it on this forum. When I dumped Fotolia I also said who I am, though most people had probably worked it out by then anyway.
If iStock had a policy of closing the account of anybody who criticised it in any way on the internet then I imagine there would be even more anonymous posters than there are (probably including some of those who say that there is no excuse for anonymity).
-
So much for free speach, that's is just plain bullying, it's a sad state of affairs if contributors have to hide for fear of account closure.
-
At the moment thats the only reason why I am anonymous, but I have been wanting to go public for a long time, but I am afraid I have been too negative about a few sites. Anyhoo, I am working on an exit strategy and go public on MSG and just talk nice about agencies ;-)
-
At the moment thats the only reason why I am anonymous, but I have been wanting to go public for a long time, but I am afraid I have been too negative about a few sites. Anyhoo, I am working on an exit strategy and go public on MSG and just talk nice about agencies ;-)
Gave you a heart. That is close to my situation. In the past I've been "threatened" by some MS agencies due to my "frankness" in their forums and banned on one. I know I've been overbearing here on MSG a few times and I've committed to cleaning up my act. I think that this year I will go public. Some on here know who I am. I don't claim to have an awesome port, but I have been doing this for 7 years so I do have some opinions. This is to day that I am not necessarily worried about people copying my port because, most on here, would never be able to copy my best sellers. I am worried about "revenge"....i.e account closure. But the recent activity at IS almost assures me I will become a public figure at MSG sooner than later.
-
At the moment thats the only reason why I am anonymous, but I have been wanting to go public for a long time, but I am afraid I have been too negative about a few sites. Anyhoo, I am working on an exit strategy and go public on MSG and just talk nice about agencies ;-)
I understand you, when I joined here I was naive, if not I would be anonymous too I guess, apart from that the only agency that punished me (unfairly) was Cutcaster, I believe I can live without them, anyway I know who you are and I am fine with that ;)