the fact is that they dont want any bad publicity on their forum. 

They have to do it all the time, on their own forum:
Sales falling
RCs being introduced.
Exclusive perks clawed back.
Indie commissions being reduced.
Promises reneged on.
Payments not being made on time.
Transfers to/from GI/PP not being made on time.
Faulty programming

How long have you got?
...

Besides, surely most people know to look outside of an internal site to find the dirt on any company. And weigh up on external sties how many company stooges are for the company, how many7 stooges for the opposition and guess the balance of information.

Life used to be simpler. 

In my opinion it is their site, their forum, their rules. Play along or get banned. I would do the same if anyone would talk bad about me on my page or blog, whatever, especially if it was a public/customers involved one. I never read the forum rules but I am sure that there are some about not posting this or that.

"Play along or get banned" is how a lot of trouble starts, because it is an attempt to build or preserve a myth.  It requires a lot of self-made sheep.

If iStock and their ilk had a little more courage they would leverage honest but civil feedback, no matter how uncomfortable, to make themselves better.  And some companies do do that; excellent survival strategy.

Imagine if your immune system decided to play along with the invaders.

Regards

"Play along or get banned" is how a lot of trouble starts, because it is an attempt to build or preserve a myth.  It requires a lot of self-made sheep.

The trouble with statements like that is they're demonstrably not true.
The 3 quotes below are from 2 pages of forum posts at IS, picked at random as I haven't time to be more thorough. If you're going to be critical of IS and Lobo, at least get it right. For the record I have been warned but never banned by Lobo, and, despite critics here, I'm not an IS lover unconditionally, but if you're going to criticise, at least do it with a degree of accuracy. Like here, most people banned from the forums have let their frothing mentalism get the better of them.
I have never met Lobo but people I know, who know him, say he's a very pleasant guy outside  the forums.


"So, well done whoever makes the decisions round here." (snark)

"You've successfully killed off a viable business for photographers by making it completely, demonstrably unsustainable for exclusives.iStock, this is not good enough."

 "As far as i am concerned, you are not earning your commission.Down 59% from last Feb 2012, down 27% from just last month. What the heck is going on here?"

Quote

"Play along or get banned" is how a lot of trouble starts, because it is an attempt to build or preserve a myth.  It requires a lot of self-made sheep.

The trouble with statements like that is they're demonstrably not true.
The 3 quotes below are from 2 pages of forum posts at IS, picked at random as I haven't time to be more thorough. If you're going to be critical of IS and Lobo, at least get it right. For the record I have been warned but never banned by Lobo, and, despite critics here, I'm not an IS lover unconditionally, but if you're going to criticise, at least do it with a degree of accuracy. Like here, most people banned from the forums have let their frothing mentalism get the better of them.
I have never met Lobo but people I know, who know him, say he's a very pleasant guy outside  the forums.


"So, well done whoever makes the decisions round here." (snark)

"You've successfully killed off a viable business for photographers by making it completely, demonstrably unsustainable for exclusives.iStock, this is not good enough."

 "As far as i am concerned, you are not earning your commission.Down 59% from last Feb 2012, down 27% from just last month. What the heck is going on here?"

Ok, my comment on "play along or get banned" was just that - a comment on the notion that forums in general are no place to point out your host's failings.  Perhaps I should have made that clear.  If you don't want candid feedback, why host the forum?  No problem with insisting that the feedback should be polite.

I acknowledge that iStock does tolerate some dissent.  Your selective quotes show that; with a little effort, I could easily find a counter example for each.

I stand by my assertion iStock would do better with a little more courage - and candour for that matter.

I'm not banned iStock or anywhere else, and I think civility is essential to any fruitful debate.

Regards

Fotolia is infamous for control tactics

http://www.fotolia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=42664

that is how they appreciate our work (in this case Konrad's), 12 days and no reply or change, still at 10$

Maybe they should care 85% more about indies?

Quote from: lirch on March 05, 2013, 09:31

I am sorry ShadySue, I meant no offense, just being objective. The point of having a forum is to discuss whatever the creator of the forum wants to discuss. It is the forum of Istock. Their house their rules. I dont see Istock or any other agency as a democracy  but as a business. If it's a good or a bad business that is another issue but the fact is that they dont want any bad publicity on their forum. 

It may be their house but its no good removing complaints. Its backfiring.

http://agsci.psu.edu/communications/web/best-practices/social-media/handling-negative-comments-or-complaints-in-social-media

Companies that do leave the complaints and respond to them in a normal on social media get a lot more credit, plus anyone visiting the site can make a decision based on whats in front of them and know what to expect from that company.

Indeed, I like that M&S and LandsEnd leave up even really bad reviews.

No thats not what I am saying. Take my comment any way you want. I am just adding something to the discussion. Did you even read the article? and then tell me if that sounds like IS?

Quote from: Poncke on March 05, 2013, 14:18

No thats not what I am saying. Take my comment any way you want. I am just adding something to the discussion. Did you even read the article? and then tell me if that sounds like IS?

Did you read it? 
"Do block users who abuse the site, and remove inappropriate comments (i.e., racist, derogatory, pornographic, etc.), ones that are too far off-topic, or just trying to use your site to sell a product or service."

Yes I did, conveniently bolding parts and conveniently leaving out other parts to be right, doesnt convince me tho. Sorry.

too bad I only saw another message from Lobo just now (it is from the 2th), I haven't replied to this one too, what for?

Subject: You can\'t Dump Exclusivity as a Non exclusive.


You aren't exclusive with us, lol. I'm not sure why you are saying that you are dumping exclusivity. Anyway, maybe you can post this in the MSG forums for all my pals in there.

Anyway, take care

Lobo

ah I don't understand what he is talking about

actually Lobo needs new glasses

the only thing I like reading at iStock forums is: I am going to leave exclusivity this month (even if it will hurt my sales but hey it feels good!)

.

Quote from: tickstock on March 11, 2013, 19:01

Quote from: blackwaterimages on February 10, 2013, 20:12

Quote from: djpadavona on February 10, 2013, 20:03

The internet is the ultimate power trip, particularly because you almost never encounter the person you are attacking in real life.

AH! Maybe  that's the real reason for the decline in iStockalypses.... They wouldn't want to have to face certain people in real life, I think.

Looks like there are going to be a lot of Lypses this year all over the world starting in the US.  http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=352097&page=1

look at all the fun there, I am going exclusive oh yeah I am going!

You don't need to be exclusive, you don't need to be an iStocker.
They're actively going out to recruit new contributors.

.