I am sure the sites that are screwing us are just delighted to see how we have very obligingly turned on each other, rather than directing our anger where it justifiably belongs.  Divide and conquer.  

Exactly!

Quote from: cclapper on June 09, 2011, 14:13

And by the way, I haven't "turned" on anyone, and I don't see any "division". The only conquering I see going on is by the agencies over the contributors, exactly as it has been for the past few months. I actually thought you and I were in the same camp. Has that changed?

What word would you use when someone can do something positive but doesn't because it's easier to sit back, keep things as they are, and just go with the flow, even when it means they are on a downhill slide? If lazy is too harsh, maybe another word fits?

Of course we are still in the same camp.  Most of us in this forum are.  Which is exactly my point.  The "lazy" label doesn't apply to most people here.    

Most of us, yes. All of us? No.

And for what it is worth...I fall into the lazy category myself sometimes. There's plenty more I could be doing, that's for sure.

Well the lazy label does apply to one person I know and it's me. Or maybe it's I give up and don't give a darn anymore? Not just IS, but BigStock and the rest, I just lost interest.

I don't have a clue what the RC target means, or what the P+ program is all about. I get a minimal 15% for being and independent who has just under 300 images on IS. Every month they flip a switch or change something, and make it more difficult to understand all the pricing, commissions, programs and new rules.

Last time I wrote to Scout because my latest images were refused for No EXIF no one replied. Unless of course it takes three weeks for them to figure out a scan never has EXIF data? 

What's the use?

Quote from: cclapper on June 09, 2011, 14:13

And by the way, I haven't "turned" on anyone, and I don't see any "division". The only conquering I see going on is by the agencies over the contributors, exactly as it has been for the past few months. I actually thought you and I were in the same camp. Has that changed?

What word would you use when someone can do something positive but doesn't because it's easier to sit back, keep things as they are, and just go with the flow, even when it means they are on a downhill slide? If lazy is too harsh, maybe another word fits?

Absolutely we are still in the same camp.  Most of us in this forum are.  Which is exactly my point.  The "lazy" label doesn't apply to most people here.    

I hate to see us starting to fight amongst ourselves.  Sorry if my post came off as too critical or aggressive.  You and Cory are two people who definitely ARE doing something about it and I have a lot of respect for you both

Last time I wrote to Scout because my latest images were refused for No EXIF no one replied. Unless of course it takes three weeks for them to figure out a scan never has EXIF data? 

How long did you wait? I've got an open Scout ticket since Mid-February.

<snip>Contributors just keep getting shlt on...

There is a simple solution for those who don't like being shlt on. Move out of the way.

Just a bunch of sheeple.  

Bah-ah-ah-ah-ah-ah

Another bute from LOBO   http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=330440&page=1

Quote from: Mantis on June 10, 2011, 19:21

Another bute from LOBO   http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=330440&page=1

Totally insensitive from someone whose salary derives from the contributors he enjoys putting down, but which presumably doesn't fluctuate with the whims of the best match, or reduce because of the policies of the company which is supposed to be representing his interests

I'm a pretty fair and decent person but if he worked for me I would have him in my office for a short discussion, and his response in retrospect would have been quite different.  He needs to represent the qualities of the Istock brand, regardless of who touches the process...and he dilutes, in my opinion, brand equity (not that they have much left).

Quote from: Mantis on June 10, 2011, 20:04

Quote from: ShadySue on June 10, 2011, 19:54

Quote from: Mantis on June 10, 2011, 19:21

Another bute from LOBO   http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=330440&page=1

Totally insensitive from someone whose salary derives from the contributors he enjoys putting down, but which presumably doesn't fluctuate with the whims of the best match, or reduce because of the policies of the company which is supposed to be representing his interests

I'm a pretty fair and decent person but if he worked for me I would have him in my office for a short discussion, and his response in retrospect would have been quite different.  He needs to represent the qualities of the Istock brand, regardless of who touches the process...and he dilutes, in my opinion, brand equity (not that they have much left).

I suspect that he does represent very well the iStock brand of 2010/11. For better or worse.

Okay, true.  You got me there.

I suspect he's been bullied his whole life, he was out of lunch money every day in school, he probably was a lonely nerd nobody cared about, the laughing stock of the class, getting wedgies from the yard tree every day and now he's going all out since he's "in power". But in real life he's probably as pathetic as he ever was, perhaps money bought him a girlfriend and staff at IS pretends they're his friends.