It looked very much as though he was dying for an excuse to lock the thread and to discredit the OP. The jibe about him having two accounts was a total non-sequitur, as he was hardly trying to pass himself off as not being a contributer. His complaint was the complaint of a buyer, and his contributer status is totally irrelevant to the points he was making.
The comment about having 'answered the point as best we can' is supremely risible. The obvious truism is, "If that's the case, your best isn't good enough".

^^^ Very well said. Sums up the situation perfectly.

So here's another PO'd buyer - I think he's so right it isn't funny, but what do I know?

This one may get deleted, not just locked. I'll keep the text just in case

Well, it's all going to be fixed 'soon' defined as 'within a few weeks, barring problems'.
Which could mean anything, but I sure hope it gets fixed soon.
At least RM's post has set me on a search to find an exact meaning of the term 'facet' in this context.  So that's the 'something new I've learned today'. 

Why in the world would he want to be so rude? Even if the OP was a buyer as well as a contributor, that still doesn't mean he had to sound so childish. There are a lot of buyers that also are contributors. That's a known fact and as far as I know there is nothing wrong with that. He should have just politely locked the thread and not made those accusations.

that isn't in fact all Lobo does. I've been on iStock for over four years. in that time, I've had many exchanges with Lobo. no matter how angry or frustrated, I can recall only one time I felt he was rude to me and we talked about it and he sincerely dealt with how I felt. he has a sh*tty job a lot of the time, gets very little in terms of accolades from contributors, but wears most of the garbage thrown around the minute people are pissed off and decide to send off knee jerk and belligerent messages.

I couldn't, and wouldn't do his job. I doubt anyone here would have the stomach for it. his sarcasm is probably the one thing that keeps him sane. you can't expect a thread started ON a site you are bashing to go unresponded to. and being a contributor AS WELL as a buyer certainly is relevant and a conflict of interest in this case I might add...

How is being a buyer AND a contributor a conflict of interest?

I was exclusive to iStock for 18 months and have worked with them for 3 1/2 years.  During that time I watched two completely different moderators handle the boards in completely different ways.  Sylvanworks was always 100% class.  Lobo became increasingly belligerent and sarcastic in the way he handled board disputes.  I've heard Lobo is a much different person if you meet/talk to him face to face, but I have seen this act on iStock for years and it is tiresome.

But I really don't care if an exclusive contributor to iStockphoto wants to defend Lobo.  It's really not my problem if he gives contributors and buyers a very poor impression of the site.  That's something you will have to deal with if it becomes too big of a problem.  Hell, since you are in favor of his actions, why not take an extra step and join him in discrediting more buyers on the iStock forums.  You are doing us all a great favor.

I couldn't, and wouldn't do his job. I doubt anyone here would have the stomach for it. his sarcasm is probably the one thing that keeps him sane. you can't expect a thread started ON a site you are bashing to go unresponded to. and being a contributor AS WELL as a buyer certainly is relevant and a conflict of interest in this case I might add...

Nobody is making him do that job. He can quit any time if it's making him crazy. He can just as easily lock a thread without the snarky, demeaning comments or any of the nasty sitemails he dispatches.

Nettiquette 101: Do not talk shite about another person, and certainly do not do it in a thread where he/she is not participating. Lobo might do a *** job, but he is a human being like any other. There is no need to get personal, and doing so only reflect badly on you.

I certainly do not understand this "conflict". I thought microstock started with designers sharing pictures, and always assume that most buyers also are sellers.
And he only wanted a good search engine. How can anybody have conflicting interests in that topic? A good search engine benefits both sellers and buyers.

BTW: in case someone wants to reveal this later on to discredit my reply: I have downloaded 6 files from DT, nothing from IS. Also: My house is white, and my grandmother is Faroese. That should cover all possible conflicts of interests?

What most people seem to forget is that we employ iStockphoto to sell our images, every time a buyer is insulted or put down on the forums it means a possible lost sale to us the contributor. There is a phrase in business "the customer is always right", of course anybody in business knows the customer is rarely right but they need to be treated with a level of diplomacy, otherwise as seen so frequently on the iStock forums they will take their business elsewhere.
As an independent contributor taking their business elsewhere would hopefully mean they'll find my product on the alternative site, but if I were an exclusive at iStockphoto I would be very very p***ed off at how my potential buyers are being spoken too by the staff there. Although as we often seem some exclusives seem to join in the banter and support this level of customer 'liason' and even more surprisingly defend the person who is driving their business away - something I just can't understand.

Nettiquette 101: Do not talk shite about another person, and certainly do not do it in a thread where he/she is not participating. Lobo might do a *** job, but he is a human being like any other. There is no need to get personal, and doing so only reflect badly on you.

How does insulting people with remarks on the forum and on sitemail, and then using your 'admin powers' banning them from both so they can't reply put up with your version of nettiquette? In case it's hard to comprehend: the latter is the real shaitty thing. He can go on trying to mock and insult people forever for all I care as long as they have their choice to retailate. He's gonna be pulled apart like warm bread in that case. There is a huge difference between what 'anyone' and payed(!) admin can and supposed to do. I personally think it's also worth noting: this happens on the forum of a site doing supposedly serious business, to the people doing business there. Threads are locked with an insult, about problems affecting people paying their bills. How about that, hmm?

So a buyer is leaving??  really, so what?  I recon theres hundereds of buyers leaving all over the place, swapping one agency for another and this is going on all the time, playing out each other. The only reason we hear about it, is because of the IS forum.
No big deal. Sorry.

The 'deal' is because of the way the buyer was treated, as if s/he had done something unethical.

We have always been allowed to operate two accounts at istock if we have dual roles there, using one as a contributor and one as a buyer. There is nothing underhanded or sneaky here. Pointing out in such a way that the complainant is also a contributor was clearly meant to detract credibility from this person's complaint, implying that the complaint was somehow LESS valid because the person complaining was a contributor in addition to spending THOUSANDS of dollars as a customer. That is ludicrous. The fact is, if the contributor had posted from their contributor account, stating the same complaints as a buyer, someone would have posted something smarta$$ like "Hmm, I just checked your account and these 400 credits you speak of seem to have been misplaced. Send me a sitemail so I can clear up your confusion." ... and then locked the thread. You know it's true.

A conflict of interest? Is the money I spend as a buyer worth less than that of buyers who haven't helped istock get rich? Is this an "us vs. them" game? I would think that satisfied customers would OR SHOULD be in the interest of ALL contributors. One doesn't exist without the other. I pretty much stay away from the IS forums because I can't stomach the arrogance of some of the people who post there, telling customers IS is simply the best and so they need to take their poor service, insults, and high prices and like it. It really is amazing to me, and clear evidence that some people just don't get out much.

Quote from: SNP on December 02, 2010, 20:28

...as for pissing off buyers, NO ONE as far as I'm concerned cares more about buyers than the people working at and for HQ...

No one would dispute that. I think we all know very well now that buyers and their money are more important that contributors. Keeping the buyers happy so that they keep paying the premium istock prices while contributors get the shaft is certainly top priority at HQ.

I dispute that. I don't see them putting out much effort in keeping buyers happy. Money is the only thing that IS is interested in. Unfortunately, it's attached to buyers. Their treatment of buyers in general doesn't speak much to wanting to keep them happy. Sure there are the token discounts here and there...a pretense. It's their attitude on the forums that speaks volumes about how they really feel.