MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Freedom of speech and a hint of intimidation  (Read 37558 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #75 on: February 05, 2011, 10:53 »
0
Hi Caspixel,

Wow, banned for months, that sounds really harsh.
I wonder what did you say that was worth that kind of ban :o
Did you call "a certain person's" cat names ? That would explain a lot.

All I did was make some jokes (which people liked and thanked me for the comic relief at a time when everyone was so stressed out) and commiserated with the contributors. But it was a long-standing grudge that Lobo had against me. He told me as much via sitemail right before the banning.


« Reply #76 on: February 05, 2011, 11:42 »
0
Hi Caspixel,
Wow, banned for months, that sounds really harsh.
I wonder what did you say that was worth that kind of ban :o
Did you call "a certain person's" cat names ? That would explain a lot.
All I did was make some jokes (which people liked and thanked me for the comic relief at a time when everyone was so stressed out) and commiserated with the contributors. But it was a long-standing grudge that Lobo had against me. He told me as much via sitemail right before the banning.

Yes unfortunately some people do not get or even appreciate the concept of humor. A concept that can make life a lot easier.
This kind of personal grudge, intimidation and downright bullying people is the exact reason of my protest.
It is not becoming for an agency of this level (or any agency at that) and it should not be tolerated.
Thank you for sharing that Caspixel.

« Reply #77 on: February 05, 2011, 11:51 »
0
Just found this and i thought it was quite appropriate and on-topic  :-X

« Reply #78 on: February 05, 2011, 12:19 »
0
A private forum on a private website, they can do whatever they want, and so could you if you owned a forum.

This is where I humbly disagree. For the site to be ultimately successful then they would need to pay attention to all the nuances of the site. I agree that technically they can however in reality the can't.

« Reply #79 on: February 05, 2011, 14:06 »
0

All I did was make some jokes (which people liked and thanked me for the comic relief at a time when everyone was so stressed out) and commiserated with the contributors. But it was a long-standing grudge that Lobo had against me. He told me as much via sitemail right before the banning.

Yeah I think thats what finally did me in, apparently this Lobo character doesnt have a sense of humor.

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #80 on: February 05, 2011, 15:00 »
0
Have to disagree with you, Race. When a private business is offering services to the public, it has to observe the rules of fairness and principles of human rights.

Decades ago, a private club or restaurant might refuse the entry of a colored person, can anyone do it today in North America? Free speech didn't come without fights.

The reality is, no one has taken it upon himself/herself to challenge any of the agencies in court, yet. Why? First of all, we are not rich enough; secondly, we haven't been hurt enough; thirdly, we are not brave enough.... The list can go on and on.... Think about it.

[
They own the website and the forum, they can allow or disallow anything they want. There is no human right or freedom of speech issue here. It's Their Site!

The End

Hi Race, How's it going? It;s not that simplistic. Bad feelings just  don't go away. It's true it's all there's to do as they wish but a whole lot of bad Karma has been made, which I'm sure no one as greedy as they are believe in.

You may be correct, about feelings, Karma or greed, but that wasn't the point or the subject. The question was freedom of speech and human rights. A private forum on a private website, they can do whatever they want, and so could you if you owned a forum.

I don't think human rights applies here. You are complaining about a company on the company's property and they most likely have the right to not let you do that.

Here, try this. Go to your local grocery store, go inside, and start yelling over and over again about much the place sucks.

Or if you have a day job, do the same thing there. Or even just post on Facebook or Twitter over and over again about how much your day job sucks.

Let me know what happens.

There is nothing stopping you from saying whatever you want. But there may be consequences.

« Reply #81 on: February 05, 2011, 15:14 »
0
Paulie, I think you are twisting the words here. Do you mean that the customers cannot make complaints in a store? Who was yelling? Some of the contributors were just posting their dissenting opinions or did they cause disruption of the business? Everything has to be measured in a fair proportion. If the contributors were causing disruption of the business, they can and should be banned. Otherwise, the master of the house has to observe the rules of fairness. I have no idea if Lobo was fair, I just want to emphasize that private business still have to observe the law and common principles of fairness.

In old times, if you hit your wife and kids in your house, that was a private matter. But the law evolves. Today, it's called domestic violence.

Have to disagree with you, Race. When a private business is offering services to the public, it has to observe the rules of fairness and principles of human rights.

Decades ago, a private club or restaurant might refuse the entry of a colored person, can anyone do it today in North America? Free speech didn't come without fights.

The reality is, no one has taken it upon himself/herself to challenge any of the agencies in court, yet. Why? First of all, we are not rich enough; secondly, we haven't been hurt enough; thirdly, we are not brave enough.... The list can go on and on.... Think about it.

[
They own the website and the forum, they can allow or disallow anything they want. There is no human right or freedom of speech issue here. It's Their Site!

The End

Hi Race, How's it going? It;s not that simplistic. Bad feelings just  don't go away. It's true it's all there's to do as they wish but a whole lot of bad Karma has been made, which I'm sure no one as greedy as they are believe in.

You may be correct, about feelings, Karma or greed, but that wasn't the point or the subject. The question was freedom of speech and human rights. A private forum on a private website, they can do whatever they want, and so could you if you owned a forum.

I don't think human rights applies here. You are complaining about a company on the company's property and they most likely have the right to not let you do that.

Here, try this. Go to your local grocery store, go inside, and start yelling over and over again about much the place sucks.

Or if you have a day job, do the same thing there. Or even just post on Facebook or Twitter over and over again about how much your day job sucks.

Let me know what happens.

There is nothing stopping you from saying whatever you want. But there may be consequences.

« Reply #82 on: February 05, 2011, 15:39 »
0
Paulie, I think you are twisting the words here. Do you mean that the customers cannot make complaints in a store? Who was yelling? Some of the contributors were just posting their dissenting opinions or did they cause disruption of the business? Everything has to be measured in a fair proportion. If the contributors were causing disruption of the business, they can and should be banned. Otherwise, the master of the house has to observe the rules of fairness. I have no idea if Lobo was fair, I just want to emphasize that private business still have to observe the law and common principles of fairness.

In old times, if you hit your wife and kids in your house, that was a private matter. But the law evolves. Today, it's called domestic violence.


Well, apparently they don't have to observe the law and common principles of fairness. No one has blown the whistle on them yet (i.e. filing lawsuits, etc.). And just like domestic violence, before it had a name and was against the law and could be prosecuted, contributors at IS continue to take the abuse and go back for more. The law for abuse from microstock agencies hasn't been written yet, because no one has the money/guts to take them to court.

Until contributors are willing to suffer the consequences of leaving IS and stopping the abuse by filing lawsuits, you can complain until you are blue in the face...and nothing is going to change! Life goes on as usual over at IS.

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #83 on: February 05, 2011, 15:47 »
0
Paulie, I think you are twisting the words here. Do you mean that the customers cannot make complaints in a store? Who was yelling? Some of the contributors were just posting their dissenting opinions or did they cause disruption of the business? Everything has to be measured in a fair proportion. If the contributors were causing disruption of the business, they can and should be banned. Otherwise, the master of the house has to observe the rules of fairness. I have no idea if Lobo was fair, I just want to emphasize that private business still have to observe the law and common principles of fairness.

In old times, if you hit your wife and kids in your house, that was a private matter. But the law evolves. Today, it's called domestic violence.


This isn't a court and a good percentage of people are venting and not trying to come to an agreement on anything.

Let's try it again your way. Go to your local grocery store, go up to the service desk, and offer your "dissenting opinions". Calmly and politely, tell them how poorly they run the store, how inept they are, and how they and the entire management team should be fired. Keep doing this every day and let me know what happens.

In business, companies are free to treat customers, partners, and suppliers as they wish within the limits of the law. I'm sure it's perfectly legal to throw someone out of a store if they are causing a disruption. It may not seem fair to the person causing the disruption but it's probably perfectly legal.

This is a pretty simple concept. It's their site. They don't need to accept complaints if they don't want to.

What if you had a money making blog and there were a group of people who posted complaints and insults all day every day. What would you do?

Yes, laws evolve and there should be a law for common sense.

« Reply #84 on: February 05, 2011, 15:56 »
0
The question is, whether or not these people who have been banned had gone beyond the reasonableness of fair complaints. Simply accepting the rule from the master of the house set a dangerous precedents for all.

Paulie, I think you are twisting the words here. Do you mean that the customers cannot make complaints in a store? Who was yelling? Some of the contributors were just posting their dissenting opinions or did they cause disruption of the business? Everything has to be measured in a fair proportion. If the contributors were causing disruption of the business, they can and should be banned. Otherwise, the master of the house has to observe the rules of fairness. I have no idea if Lobo was fair, I just want to emphasize that private business still have to observe the law and common principles of fairness.

In old times, if you hit your wife and kids in your house, that was a private matter. But the law evolves. Today, it's called domestic violence.


This isn't a court and a good percentage of people are venting and not trying to come to an agreement on anything.

Let's try it again your way. Go to your local grocery store, go up to the service desk, and offer your "dissenting opinions". Calmly and politely, tell them how poorly they run the store, how inept they are, and how they and the entire management team should be fired. Keep doing this every day and let me know what happens.

In business, companies are free to treat customers, partners, and suppliers as they wish within the limits of the law. I'm sure it's perfectly legal to throw someone out of a store if they are causing a disruption. It may not seem fair to the person causing the disruption but it's probably perfectly legal.

This is a pretty simple concept. It's their site. They don't need to accept complaints if they don't want to.

What if you had a money making blog and there were a group of people who posted complaints and insults all day every day. What would you do?

Yes, laws evolve and there should be a law for common sense.

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #85 on: February 05, 2011, 16:09 »
0


Paulie, I think you are twisting the words here. Do you mean that the customers cannot make complaints in a store? Who was yelling? Some of the contributors were just posting their dissenting opinions or did they cause disruption of the business? Everything has to be measured in a fair proportion. If the contributors were causing disruption of the business, they can and should be banned. Otherwise, the master of the house has to observe the rules of fairness. I have no idea if Lobo was fair, I just want to emphasize that private business still have to observe the law and common principles of fairness.

In old times, if you hit your wife and kids in your house, that was a private matter. But the law evolves. Today, it's called domestic violence.


This isn't a court and a good percentage of people are venting and not trying to come to an agreement on anything.

Let's try it again your way. Go to your local grocery store, go up to the service desk, and offer your "dissenting opinions". Calmly and politely, tell them how poorly they run the store, how inept they are, and how they and the entire management team should be fired. Keep doing this every day and let me know what happens.

In business, companies are free to treat customers, partners, and suppliers as they wish within the limits of the law. I'm sure it's perfectly legal to throw someone out of a store if they are causing a disruption. It may not seem fair to the person causing the disruption but it's probably perfectly legal.

This is a pretty simple concept. It's their site. They don't need to accept complaints if they don't want to.

What if you had a money making blog and there were a group of people who posted complaints and insults all day every day. What would you do?

Yes, laws evolve and there should be a law for common sense.

The question is, whether or not these people who have been banned had gone beyond the reasonableness of fair complaints. Simply accepting the rule from the master of the house set a dangerous precedents for all.

This again reminded me why I spend less and less time here.

You seem to be confusing fair with legal.

They don't need to be fair. Just like at-will employment. Most companies can get rid of an employee regardless of the reason as long as it's within the law. Come to work every day complaining about your company and they most likely will fire you. May not be fair, but perfectly legal and within their right to do so.

Since you seem to like the law so much, maybe you should dig into the contributor agreement and see what it says about the forum. My guess is that it states they can do whatever they want. And if so, anyone who signed it has no argument.

« Reply #86 on: February 05, 2011, 16:32 »
0


You seem to be confusing fair with legal.

They don't need to be fair. Just like at-will employment. Most companies can get rid of an employee regardless of the reason as long as it's within the law. Come to work every day complaining about your company and they most likely will fire you. May not be fair, but perfectly legal and within their right to do so.

Since you seem to like the law so much, maybe you should dig into the contributor agreement and see what it says about the forum. My guess is that it states they can do whatever they want. And if so, anyone who signed it has no argument.

Except this is not an employer/employee arrangement and the "agencies" went to great lengths long ago to distance themselves from the notion of being true agents or anything like an employer.

« Reply #87 on: February 05, 2011, 16:33 »
0
I think you should take it one step further.

I think going into iStock's forums and complaining is more like picketing with a sign in walmart with the sign saying walmart sucks and that the manager should be fired.  Walmart is private property and the owners have full right to remove you from their store.  You don't have 'freedom of speech' inside walmart. Inside walmart, it is walmart that decides how you can act.  On public property, or property you own you can say what you like

The same on the net, if you go to istock, it is iStock who decides what can and cannot be said inside their business (which extends onto the internet).  The only place you have real freedom of speech on the internet is if you buy a domain yourself and set up a website ... then you can say anything you like (within the limitations of the national law).

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #88 on: February 05, 2011, 18:58 »
0
I think you should take it one step further.

I think going into iStock's forums and complaining is more like picketing with a sign in walmart with the sign saying walmart sucks and that the manager should be fired.  Walmart is private property and the owners have full right to remove you from their store.  You don't have 'freedom of speech' inside walmart. Inside walmart, it is walmart that decides how you can act.  On public property, or property you own you can say what you like

The same on the net, if you go to istock, it is iStock who decides what can and cannot be said inside their business (which extends onto the internet).  The only place you have real freedom of speech on the internet is if you buy a domain yourself and set up a website ... then you can say anything you like (within the limitations of the national law).

Another good example but I don't think this will sink in either.

« Reply #89 on: February 05, 2011, 19:06 »
0
[
Another good example but I don't think this will sink in either.

Ah nope. It's not the black and white, all details fit into neat little cubbies, scenario you'd like it to be.

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #90 on: February 05, 2011, 20:09 »
0
[
Another good example but I don't think this will sink in either.

Ah nope. It's not the black and white, all details fit into neat little cubbies, scenario you'd like it to be.

Ahhh yep. It's pretty unbelievably simple and black and white. It's their site. They can do whatever they want with the forum.

In fact, they can choose to not have a forum. Then what? Would you sue them if they got rid of it?

« Reply #91 on: February 06, 2011, 12:38 »
0
[
Another good example but I don't think this will sink in either.

Ah nope. It's not the black and white, all details fit into neat little cubbies, scenario you'd like it to be.

Ahhh yep. It's pretty unbelievably simple and black and white. It's their site. They can do whatever they want with the forum.

In fact, they can choose to not have a forum. Then what? Would you sue them if they got rid of it?
Walmart, BP, and I dare say most large companies don't give a rat's patootie about the health of the environment. Profit, profit profit. But most will profess their commitment to green technologies and recycling etc. They do so because they know they gather good will by doing so. They don't have to do any of it. Many companies have 1-800 numbers to call to register complaints. They don't have to do this either. It's a matter of good business and maintaining a stream of communications. Many sites have open and lively forums where real discussions can take place and yes, as you so aptly put it, they don't have to do this either. It's a matter of perception. They ask how will we be viewed because of this or that action? I prefer not to bow towards the direction of iStock every time I reach my payout because I know they have reached it 4 times in the same period, now of course that goes to 5.25 times. But hey, it's their company and they can do whatever they want and we should all just accept this with grace and gratitude.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2011, 13:48 by Zeus »

« Reply #92 on: February 06, 2011, 13:12 »
0
I am sure they would get rid of the forum if they could. But it's actually saving them money and providing a service. Why hire customer service people when most questions can be answered by contributors willing to give away advice for free?

« Reply #93 on: February 06, 2011, 14:00 »
0

I am still banned from both the forums and sitemail


I just caught this -- banned from site mail ?  ???  I can't even begin to figure out the logic behind that. :(  Are they afraid people might email their CN (or "friends" as it is now) and tell them they're banned? 

« Reply #94 on: February 06, 2011, 16:07 »
0

I am still banned from both the forums and sitemail


I just caught this -- banned from site mail ?  ???  I can't even begin to figure out the logic behind that. :(  Are they afraid people might email their CN (or "friends" as it is now) and tell them they're banned? 

Absolutely no clue why they would do that. At one point I believe the functionality was tied together, so banned from one, banned from both. But recently ShadySue was banned from the forums, but still had access to sitemail.

It is a little annoying, because there are people I would like to communicate with about business matters, but now I can't. And I have a few sitemails that I am unable to access. So, I hope whoever sent them doesn't think I'm a jerk for never responding back.

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #95 on: February 06, 2011, 16:08 »
0
[
Another good example but I don't think this will sink in either.

Ah nope. It's not the black and white, all details fit into neat little cubbies, scenario you'd like it to be.

Ahhh yep. It's pretty unbelievably simple and black and white. It's their site. They can do whatever they want with the forum.

In fact, they can choose to not have a forum. Then what? Would you sue them if they got rid of it?
Walmart, BP, and I dare say most large companies don't give a rat's patootie about the health of the environment. Profit, profit profit. But most will profess their commitment to green technologies and recycling etc. They do so because they know they gather good will by doing so. They don't have to do any of it. Many companies have 1-800 numbers to call to register complaints. They don't have to do this either. It's a matter of good business and maintaining a stream of communications. Many sites have open and lively forums where real discussions can take place and yes, as you so aptly put it, they don't have to do this either. It's a matter of perception. They ask how will we be viewed because of this or that action? I prefer not to bow towards the direction of iStock every time I reach my payout because I know they have reached it 4 times in the same period, now of course that goes to 5.25 times. But hey, it's their company and they can do whatever they want and we should all just accept this with grace and gratitude.

You're talking two different topics. What they can do, and what they should do.

They should treat customers and suppliers with fairness and respect. But they can do whatever they want. It will take a while to see what the long term affects are of their current actions.

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #96 on: February 06, 2011, 16:10 »
0
I am sure they would get rid of the forum if they could. But it's actually saving them money and providing a service. Why hire customer service people when most questions can be answered by contributors willing to give away advice for free?

That plus they can control the content. They can remove any posts they don't like. If they get rid of the forum most people will come here to publicly flog them and they will have no control over it.

« Reply #97 on: February 06, 2011, 16:23 »
0
There is a difference between a site owned by an individual and a large corporation.

For a corporation, a forum is a valuable asset for the management to keep in touch with its suppliers and buyers. Again, I have no idea what Lobo did was correct or not, I am just using this as an example. A forum admin can make mistakes, just like a Walmart employee would. Walmart definitely will not ban a customer simply because that person goes to the store to complain about a problem. If the complaint is legitimate and valid, the management may apologize for the employee's mistake. I rarely use Walmart, so again I am talking about it hypothetically. But I think any credible corporation will do this.  

However, if the customer is interfering with the business operation and causing disruption, that is another matter. In my mind, someone who is complaining in IS forum is like a Walmart customer goes to the service department to complain. Complaints in the forum may give the company a negative PR image, but it is not the same as someone who was yelling and committing violent acts. If the company does not like negative PRs, they can shut down the forum. However, the customer can still complain to the government or sue in court if they feel strongly about the unfair treatment. An act happens in a private premises does not mean that it is above the law. Mind you, Lobo's decision may be his own and not that of his boss. In another way, Lobo's decision can be reversed if his boss feels differently.

Leaf, you are the boss of this forum, so your position is different from Lobo's.

Can you say whatever you want to say in your own forum? Nope, if you are promoting Nazi, racist, terrorist agendas, or even Wikileaks, someone will definitely try to shut you up or sue you in court. Yes, I have owned several forums of my own, but I haven't banned anyone, not yet. I am not saying I will never ban anyone, but you have to be fair if you want to be credible.

My point is, when we hear that our colleagues are banned by some agencies, be it IS, FT or DT, or whatever, and we know that these persons are banned just because of complaining about the things which most of us feel badly about, should we dismiss their grieves by saying, "Shut up, you deserve it, because it's their forum", knowing there is a huge imbalance of power?  

I think you should take it one step further.

I think going into iStock's forums and complaining is more like picketing with a sign in walmart with the sign saying walmart sucks and that the manager should be fired.  Walmart is private property and the owners have full right to remove you from their store.  You don't have 'freedom of speech' inside walmart. Inside walmart, it is walmart that decides how you can act.  On public property, or property you own you can say what you like

The same on the net, if you go to istock, it is iStock who decides what can and cannot be said inside their business (which extends onto the internet).  The only place you have real freedom of speech on the internet is if you buy a domain yourself and set up a website ... then you can say anything you like (within the limitations of the national law).
« Last Edit: February 06, 2011, 23:37 by Freedom »

« Reply #98 on: February 06, 2011, 17:07 »
0
I totally agree with everything you say Freedom.  I also think that people should express their opinions in the iStock forum - it is great for iStock to get feedback from both buyers and photographers.  I can't say wether the bannings were justified or not as I don't know all what was said.  From the little I have heard though, it seems people are getting banned pretty quickly over trivial things. I wasn't trying to say either way though.  My only point was whether iStock had the legal right to ban someone or not.  I was absolutely not trying to dismiss anyone's grievances or troubles.

jbarber873

« Reply #99 on: February 06, 2011, 17:35 »
0

I am still banned from both the forums and sitemail


I just caught this -- banned from site mail ?  ???  I can't even begin to figure out the logic behind that. :(  Are they afraid people might email their CN (or "friends" as it is now) and tell them they're banned? 

Absolutely no clue why they would do that. At one point I believe the functionality was tied together, so banned from one, banned from both. But recently ShadySue was banned from the forums, but still had access to sitemail.

It is a little annoying, because there are people I would like to communicate with about business matters, but now I can't. And I have a few sitemails that I am unable to access. So, I hope whoever sent them doesn't think I'm a jerk for never responding back.

    Lobo banned me from the forums and sitemail as well. I figured this was how they always did it. 4 months later, they opened up sitemail, but I'm still banned from the forums.  ;D


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
Free speech

Started by Aquilegia Off Topic

8 Replies
3452 Views
Last post August 28, 2006, 02:21
by kacper
55 Replies
13610 Views
Last post July 31, 2009, 06:44
by borg
11 Replies
7780 Views
Last post August 28, 2011, 19:23
by RacePhoto
33 Replies
6136 Views
Last post March 06, 2013, 09:34
by luissantos84
19 Replies
9034 Views
Last post February 16, 2016, 05:40
by Lana

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results