Read it while you still can. 

I just added my feelings about the commission cuts and that I'm not uploading there anymore.  I doubt any of this is going to change the istock strategy but it might make more people aware of what's happening.

So did I !

One confused contributor does not an IS snafu make.

Well, that guy can expect to get a forum ban soon, I expect. He's spoken up quite a few times against iStock.

Here's an interesting, slightly OT tidbit: Months ago (before I was banned from the forums) I submitted some images to Designer Spotlight, and just now they are getting around to reviewing them. Well, they were all rejected with the reason, "Please resubmit when account is active". I actually wasn't even aware that my account wasn't active, but okay, whatever.

So it seems iStock doesn't particularly care about keeping the loyal customers they had with any kind of feeling of goodwill. I think they only interested about their big clients anymore. You know the ones...the ones that they give the deep, deep discounts to.

I'm just happy that there are other options out there. And I just found a great source for vector artwork that I'm really excited about. So, good riddance iStock. It's actually kind of ironic that their "punishment" for me motivated me to find other (better) sources for stock.

It doesn't surprise me that it took months for them to get to it...I submitted one a long time ago and remember that it took months to be reviewed. It is interesting that they are saying your account is not active, though.

I'm just happy that there are other options out there. And I just found a great source for vector artwork that I'm really excited about. So, good riddance iStock. It's actually kind of ironic that their "punishment" for me motivated me to find other (better) sources for stock.

cough... mystockvectors.com ...cough. Oh wait, this wasn't a pimping thread.

Back to the topic. It's hard for me to get too upset by this anymore. It is what it is. Buyers leave. New ones come in. I'm not a spokesperson for any of these agencies. I do find the exclusive postings of "I feel your pain" amusing. I'm not sure why, but I do.

I wish more buyers thought about it in this way, but unfortunately most aren't well enough informed of their options.

I have been steering as many of my clients as I can away from iStock. There is absolutely zero incentive for me to encourage people I work with to spend money at that site anymore.

And did you see the weird way Lobo closed that thread? Some weird accusations that the OP is actually not who he claims and is not even a buyer (even though the OP said they had 400 credits in his account). I think the thing that iStock now seems to be best at is alienating their buyers. Just crazy.

Wow! looks like Mortons LTD is doing really great business
http://www.mortons.co.uk/dates.html

I'm not a buyer but occasionally search the site. I haven't done so for a while but do agree that any intuitive feel for searches is gone. I was surprised how hard to was just to find the advanced search function. I think the designers are usually to close to the methods to understand what a first time buyer or one who is used to a particular methodology is used to. Then a switch-a-roo happens and confusion and frustration set in.

The mortons account was opened in 2007, so it isn't like mortons opened the account yesterday just so he could post in the forum. So did mortons buy from IS? Do they have credits in their account?

Mortons said in their OP that they had 400 credits in their account and I had the impression that they did indeed buy from iStock. This is not the first time they have posted about things that aren't working.

So the new customer relations policy is to call people liars and frauds? Good luck with that. 

I am perfectly sure that if he didn't have 400 credits, Lobo would have outed him at the outset. The fact that he does indeed have that not-inconsiderable number of credits meant he had to spend hours finding some other excuse to malign him and close the thread.
"We've heard of customers, and want no truck with them."

LOL

So the new customer relations policy is to call people liars and frauds? Good luck with that. 

seems they are just alienating both buyers and contributors.  all that will be left is the clique or "in crowd" and some bright-eyed newbies who will take the slapping around with glee until the kool-aid wears off and they see that loyalty and contributing to the "community" does nothing unless you are accepted into the 'clique.'    (yeah, I'm still a little bitter)

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.

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.

He is welcome to participate here.  Nothing is stopping him, except probably the inability to lock a thread after getting the final say.

@ Stacey ~
While you are of course, entitled to your opinion, even if clearly wrong (in it being a conflict of interest) consider this.
Contributors have been shafted and their complaints ignored. There were threads which ran to several thousands into which there was no input from TPTB. In fact, if it weren't for the recent thread about Franky de Meyer, I might have suspected that most of the admins and inspectors had resigned. Buyers, even if also contributors, should expect a little more respect, and I have to say that if I were the OP, I'd demand a refund for my money and take it elsewhere. And as an exclusive, that could hurt me as much as it would hurt you. It would hurt Lobo not one iota, as he isn't a contributor, unless he also has another account (would that be a conflict of interest?).

Well said, Sue.

So, Stacy - er ... SNP. What does the moniker of the moment stand for, or should I hazard a guess?

Quote from: ShadySue on December 03, 2010, 05:59

@ Stacey ~
While you are of course, entitled to your opinion, even if clearly wrong (in it being a conflict of interest) consider this.
Contributors have been shafted and their complaints ignored. There were threads which ran to several thousands into which there was no input from TPTB. In fact, if it weren't for the recent thread about Franky de Meyer, I might have suspected that most of the admins and inspectors had resigned. Buyers, even if also contributors, should expect a little more respect, and I have to say that if I were the OP, I'd demand a refund for my money and take it elsewhere. And as an exclusive, that could hurt me as much as it would hurt you. It would hurt Lobo not one iota, as he isn't a contributor, unless he also has another account (would that be a conflict of interest?).

Well said, Sue.

So, Stacy - er ... SNP. What does the moniker of the moment stand for, or should I hazard a guess?

All I know is Stacy - er ... SNP is not biased, no, she self-admittedly got personally contacted by IStockphoto before the changes were announced. How many of you all got that treatment? No bias there at all, move along folks.