This is a cup of coffee ... real coffee. I got reported for the incorrect keyword "coffee". Pretty funny

Weird. So what are the consequences of being 'reported'?

Maybe they thought it was a cup of tea?

apparently you get paid 2 cents for reporting the wrong keyword, i imagine the result is they deduct 2 cents from your income.

I got one of those today too.

http://www.dreamstime.com/slice-of-pumpkin-pie-image1579686

(sorry not too good at embedding images)

It got flagged for using the words pumpkin pie. When I checked the data for the person reporting, it appears to be a buyer. No portfolio, nothing. A name and city. I replied and asked why pumpkin pie should be flagged. I also sent a message to support, asking why pumpkin pie was flagged, and also asking what happens to the file while it's being investigated, what happens to the person if they wrongly flag, and is the file available for download while all this is going on.

I am all for getting rid of keyword spamming, but this is ridiculous. I hope they reprimand people who do this nonsense. It's always something, isn't it?

Any chance of getting hold of some of that pie Cathy?

There seems to be a food theme here.  Hmmm....

Quote from: litifeta on February 17, 2010, 23:09
This is a cup of coffee ... real coffee. I got reported for the incorrect keyword "coffee". Pretty funny

Funny, I had the same exact thing.  Coffee removed from a series of images of a woman serving coffee, Chef removed from many pictures of a chef, Isolated and Chart removed from a picture of two doctors isolated and holding a chart. 

Don't know if their system is experiencing a glitch or if some submitters are trying to remove relevant keywords from competing images.  Either way, I sure hope the people tasked with reviewing these changes are paying attention.

I was going to help Cathy by posting her image, but I can't seem to get it to work either.   So much for me being Ms. Know-it-All

you mean like this ... LOL

OK so how did you do that?

I am getting plenty of these. Like image of handsome businessman sitting in office reported for bad keywords of "handsome", "businessman", "office". I never thought and still hope DT is not so stupid to let this reports harm your files without any reviewing.

Quote from: cclapper on February 18, 2010, 00:40
OK so how did you do that?

right click on the image on the page. that gives you the properties of the image with its url, which is different to the page. copy, hit the insert image button up there (pretend there is an arrow pointing) and then paste the image url in, then post.

This almost sounds like a scam - and maybe even an automated scam.  Is someone running a program that randomly chooses images, arbitrarily selects one keyword and reports it as 'bad'?  Maybe using some simple-minded heuristic such as - words that appears in both the description and the list of keywords...

DT instituted this new keyword spam reporting thing in August of 2009 (Here's the original thread - http://www.dreamstime.com/thread_18084)...

"Each time one of your images is flagged for irrelevant keywords, you will receive a comment. As you probably know, flags are reviewed and will continue to be reviewed. If the flag is valid, we approve it and your image had editing rights blocked. Should the flag be invalid, it will be refused. However, it may take some time to have flags reviewed therefore, while the report is still pending, you have the possibility of removing irrelevant keywords. In case the the report is correct, you can edit the images and delete the keyword/s in question."

So, when you report a bad keyword it automatically generates a comment to the contributor who can then reply to the comment and justify why they think the reported keyword is ok. Someone in Support reads both the bad keyword report and your reply and then decides whether or not to remove the keyword.

Problem is, they are just now only getting around to addressing all these comments. I think they've had a lot of other, more important things to deal with, or this system got sent to a server that didn't sync with the images. So these comments are just now showing up. I'm all for cleaning things up but I don't know if this is a good way to handle bad keyword reports.

The stupid thing about DT locking editing... if you get a legit bad-keyword, it will likely be from one of your oldish files and it will make you cringe at your own amateurishness... you will want to change the other keywords because now that you are a seasoned pro you will recognise the error of your ways and you won't be able to.

That's supposedly the good thing about this new reporting scheme. You get a comment and can then reply with a good reason or just delete the bad keyword before any action is taken. They are also pretty good with making a change if you just contact them and explain your situation, if it is a simple mistake. I've always found them to be very understanding.

I just got my notice today. When i go to the image, this message appears next to the keyword box:

This image has been rightfully reported as having bad keywords and an editor approved the needed corrections. At this time you can add more keywords only through the key-mentoring system.

When I click inside the keyword box to try to change the keywords, I can't. So if the reviewer has already checked the keywords and locked them, then they did so WITHOUT removing pumpkin and pie. Which almost leads me to believe:

QuoteThis almost sounds like a scam - and maybe even an automated scam.  Is someone running a program that randomly chooses images, arbitrarily selects one keyword and reports it as 'bad'?  Maybe using some simple-minded heuristic such as - words that appears in both the description and the list of keywords...

When I look at the page for the person who reported the bad keyword:
http://www.dreamstime.com/healthoffices_info
There's nothing there. I just assumed it was a buyer.

It also says that comment was dated 9/11/07 and yet that pink comment notice just showed up in the last couple of days. I'm positive it hasn't been there for 2-1/2 years!

Like this?


Yay!

ETA: I did reply to the comment and sent a message to support. But I should be able to self-edit the keywords, per their explanation, and I was not able to.

If DT is getting scammed by someone using fake accounts, and software that 'works' the site to rake in 2 cent payments by the hundreds or thousands - they're going to have a hellacious mess to clean up.

It does not work that way folks ... for starters, you have an opportunity to review the flagged images to double check that your keywords are correct - only if you insist that the keywords are correct do they then go to an admin - the admin then determines if the keywords are spam - and if they are, then and only then does the flagger get 2cents - i assure you no one is flagging for the 2cents ... it is just not feasible ... also if you flags are incorrect you flagging rights get suspended ...

On the other hand, the keywords you are getting notified on - Pumpkin pie, coffee etc - are just guesses by the system i.e. they are likely the term a person intially searched on but they may very well have gone off from there - those may not, or indeed, are likely not the keywords actually being flagged - if you are notified of a flag it would behoove you to check the image to ensure there are no incorrect words in your list  ...

Quoteit would behoove you to check the image to ensure there are no incorrect words in your list

I'm not sure that I'm understanding correctly... Are you saying that the flag does not tell you which keyword your image was flagged for?

TIA for clarification.

I'm not sure that I'm understanding correctly... Are you saying that the flag does not tell you which keyword your image was flagged for?

Think about it - 9 times out of 10 the person is simply clicking on a little icon of a flag - they are not inputting the actual words - so the system must be, by definiton, taking a guess - there is a facility for actually reporting the words themselves but this is very time consuming and I doubt very many people are using this procedure now - it is so much easier to just click the flag icon ... but keep in mind too that the person's identity is being given out as well so I really don't think people are by and large doing this for spite ... they are being held accountable.

ahhhh ... so that's how it works. Thanks for clearing it up Hoi

Quote from: hoi ha on February 18, 2010, 05:34
I'm not sure that I'm understanding correctly... Are you saying that the flag does not tell you which keyword your image was flagged for?

Think about it - 9 times out of 10 the person is simply clicking on a little icon of a flag - they are not inputting the actual words - so the system must be, by definiton, taking a guess - there is a facility for actually reporting the words themselves but this is very time consuming and I doubt very many people are using this procedure now - it is so much easier to just click the flag icon ... but keep in mind too that the person's identity is being given out as well so I really don't think people are by and large doing this for spite ... they are being held accountable.

Yeah, well put.
The image the system uses though would have been the last search term so generally, the keyword should be correct.

I have had a few images flagged for keywords and yep- there was a problem with them.  They were images I uploaded 5 years with totally rotten keywords   I like the keyword system and go in and correct images that get flagged.

On the same note, if i do a search and some crazy images show up, I'll flag the images.  It only takes a second to click the flag and helps clean up DT's database and helps the photographer clean up his images.

Didn't they stop paying the 2c recently?  There is a lot of talk about people flagging for the 2c but I doubt there are many if anybody that does it for the money.  I have flagged quite a few images because it really annoys me when totally irrelevant images come up before mine that are keyworded properly and also I would be very annoyed if I was a buyer and had to sort through all the rubbish to get to images that fitted my search.