Author Topic: Hold on to your wallets! "There are irregularities with October's PP royalties" (Read 98896 times)

lisafx · « **Reply #250 on:** January 17, 2014, 18:45 »

Quote from: bunhill on January 17, 2014, 13:32

Quote from: lisafx on January 17, 2014, 13:01
Well, his "cover" has pretty much been blown. It's now widely known/believed that he's a Getty employee pushing their agenda in the guise of an objective contributor.

You were also convinced at one point that I was part of this conspiracy.

Nope. Reread that exchange. You were anonymous and had posted some things that made me wonder if you and Tickstock were tag teaming the discussion. I never said for certain that you were. You very quickly dispelled that notion.

Also, please reread my comments in the thread where the removal of anonymity was suggested. I am a staunch defender of anonymity (and free speech for that matter). Neither free speech nor anonymity is a carte blanche to say whatever you want and not be challenged by differing opinions.

If people are going to come in here and attack any and everyone who has a complaint or criticism about one site, it is perfectly reasonable to question their objectivity and motives.

If you want to argue with my opinions, that's fine with me. That's part of a discussion, but if you have to misquote and mischaracterize them to make your point, then you just sound ill-informed and contentious. Seems like maybe you have a personal ax to grind.

bunhill · « **Reply #251 on:** January 17, 2014, 19:12 »

Quote from: lisafx on January 17, 2014, 18:45

You were anonymous and had posted some things that made me wonder if you and Tickstock were tag teaming the discussion.

Honestly: I felt that it was a completely unreasonable and bitter suggestion - especially since I was being perfectly polite and sincere. And it was a suggestion which seemed to reflect a sort of inherent suspiciousness of other points of view. Therefore I found it quite unpleasant. I very nearly quit but that would have felt too much like being forced out. And I hate it when people flounce out of forums.

My sense here, sometimes, is that people who go against the group-think get, sort of, bullied into shutting up. Often it seems as if people are not happy to tolerate a range of different opinions without somehow feeling the need to raise the emotional temperature.

PS - there are lots of people who have not posted so far this year.

Ron · « **Reply #252 on:** January 17, 2014, 19:20 »

Quote from: bunhill on January 17, 2014, 19:12

....

My sense here, sometimes, is that people who go against the group-think get, sort of, bullied into shutting up. Often it seems as if people are not happy to tolerate a range of different opinions without somehow feeling the need to raise the emotional temperature.
...

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #253 on:** January 18, 2014, 02:54 »

Quote from: ShadySue on January 17, 2014, 14:42

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on January 17, 2014, 13:51

I've no idea who tickstock is but I can't imagine anyone at iStock or Getty caring enough about what's said here to send anyone in to participate. If they cared about community involvement, they wouldn't have destroyed the iStock forums, rendering a once vibrant place a virtual desert. And not even Getty's daft enough to think that sending in a troll is going to do squat to overcome the negative opinions of them their own policies and behaviors have brought about.
I think this is the truth, though the sudden disappearance of Tickstock is very odd.
If what he had said on this forum before was true, he was in the PP, so would have lost presumably a 'reasonable sum'.

Another possible reading is that they destroyed the iS forums because they DO care about negative publicity and wanted to shut down the discussions. The only possible reasons for giving Sean the boot were things that happened on forums - theirs and here (and maybe in his blog).
I don't know what the truth is about Tickstock, though. He (or she) obviously had an agenda, but whether that was inspired by true love of IS or by a pay-packet I don't know. If it was true love and now a hundreds of dollars are under threat from the partner program then I suppose Tickstock could be going through feelings of rejection and abandonment. (I also agree with bunhill's quote in Ron's post, above).

cobalt · « **Reply #254 on:** January 18, 2014, 08:06 »

For me personally, one of the things that I like about msg is the fact that there are a lot of strong discussions here. msg is not owned by any agency. For me it is real, a professional business forum.

And business forums, at least the ones that I know, are not for the faint hearted. The business world is not a sweet place to live in, it is not a safe world.

So raging emotions and often wild discussions are for me part of what makes msg so interesting. And Tyler does moderate when things go completely out of hand.

If you have a general discussion group about photography things are different, but many people who come here are are feeding their families with their work. So reactions will be strong.

Overall msg is still a very friendly place, especially because the industry is so small and many people know each other personally.

But yes, you will definitely need to put more energy into your opinions, than on one of the agency run forums. And many people probably prefer an environment with stronger moderation and maybe a more "sheltered" discussion.

Which is fine, there are many forums and groups being run out there, so everyone can find their favourite discussion place on the net.

Red Dove · « **Reply #255 on:** January 18, 2014, 08:44 »

In the meantime, those scoundrels at IS have knocked off for the weekend. So "next week" becomes the "week after next week" - or something like that.

Understandably, they want to get the recoupmenteringability procedure absolutely bang on to ensure they don't leave a single cent behind in some starving contributor's bank account.

Noedelhap · « **Reply #256 on:** January 18, 2014, 09:05 »

And once again they're leaving us in complete darkness for another whole weekend about how much they're going to claw back. Their laziness and complete lack of punctuality is crazy.

Mantis · « **Reply #257 on:** January 18, 2014, 09:20 »

Quote from: bunhill on January 17, 2014, 13:32

Quote from: lisafx on January 17, 2014, 13:01
Well, his "cover" has pretty much been blown. It's now widely known/believed that he's a Getty employee pushing their agenda in the guise of an objective contributor.

You were also convinced at one point that I was part of this conspiracy. Anyhow: widely known/believed by who ? I doubt that more than 10 people in the whole world care.

I think that some people get annoyed and sometimes become quite unfriendly when others have a point of view which contradicts their own. Which is a pity because it discourages free speech.

So let's hope he comes back soon. The site needs posters representing a variety of different perspectives and experiences.

I don't believe that most peeps here discourage alternative opinions at all (what you call free speech), but most of his comments in Istock threads were OBVIOUS block and tackle, anything to mute the problems of Istock/Getty to the point where it became funny to some (me, at least) and annoying to others. Personally I welcome alternative opinions and an open discussion, but members like Tickstock hurt that tone openness for others.

Shelma1 · « **Reply #258 on:** January 18, 2014, 09:30 »

Quote from: Mantis on January 18, 2014, 09:20

Quote from: bunhill on January 17, 2014, 13:32
Quote from: lisafx on January 17, 2014, 13:01
Well, his "cover" has pretty much been blown. It's now widely known/believed that he's a Getty employee pushing their agenda in the guise of an objective contributor.

You were also convinced at one point that I was part of this conspiracy. Anyhow: widely known/believed by who ? I doubt that more than 10 people in the whole world care.

I think that some people get annoyed and sometimes become quite unfriendly when others have a point of view which contradicts their own. Which is a pity because it discourages free speech.

So let's hope he comes back soon. The site needs posters representing a variety of different perspectives and experiences.

I don't believe that most peeps here discourage alternative opinions at all (what you call free speech), but most of his comments in Istock threads were OBVIOUS block and tackle, anything to mute the problems of Istock/Getty to the point where it became funny to some (me, at least) and annoying to others. Personally I welcome alternative opinions and an open discussion, but members like Tickstock hurt that tone openness for others.

That, and trying to change almost every conversation about what's wrong with iStock to what's wrong with their main competitor, Shutterstock, even though he doesn't submit there.

Mantis · « **Reply #259 on:** January 18, 2014, 09:32 »

Quote from: Shelma1 on January 18, 2014, 09:30

Quote from: Mantis on January 18, 2014, 09:20
Quote from: bunhill on January 17, 2014, 13:32
Quote from: lisafx on January 17, 2014, 13:01
Well, his "cover" has pretty much been blown. It's now widely known/believed that he's a Getty employee pushing their agenda in the guise of an objective contributor.

You were also convinced at one point that I was part of this conspiracy. Anyhow: widely known/believed by who ? I doubt that more than 10 people in the whole world care.

I think that some people get annoyed and sometimes become quite unfriendly when others have a point of view which contradicts their own. Which is a pity because it discourages free speech.

So let's hope he comes back soon. The site needs posters representing a variety of different perspectives and experiences.

I don't believe that most peeps here discourage alternative opinions at all (what you call free speech), but most of his comments in Istock threads were OBVIOUS block and tackle, anything to mute the problems of Istock/Getty to the point where it became funny to some (me, at least) and annoying to others. Personally I welcome alternative opinions and an open discussion, but members like Tickstock hurt that tone openness for others.

That, and trying to change almost every conversation about what's wrong with iStock to what's wrong with their main competitor, Shutterstock, even though he doesn't submit there.

There is that.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #260 on:** January 18, 2014, 10:04 »

Quote from: Noedelhap on January 18, 2014, 09:05

And once again they're leaving us in complete darkness for another whole weekend about how much they're going to claw back. Their laziness and complete lack of punctuality is crazy.

Don't we know, deep down, that the clawback is going to be almost exactly the extra we made, beyond what we had come to expect? In my case, almost exactly 50%.

Mantis · « **Reply #261 on:** January 18, 2014, 10:11 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on January 18, 2014, 10:04

Quote from: Noedelhap on January 18, 2014, 09:05
And once again they're leaving us in complete darkness for another whole weekend about how much they're going to claw back. Their laziness and complete lack of punctuality is crazy.
Don't we know, deep down, that the clawback is going to be almost exactly the extra we made, beyond what we had come to expect? In my case, almost exactly 50%.

My thoughts exactly. For me that's about $400 USD.

lisafx · « **Reply #262 on:** January 18, 2014, 11:17 »

Quote from: bunhill on January 17, 2014, 19:12

Quote from: lisafx on January 17, 2014, 18:45
You were anonymous and had posted some things that made me wonder if you and Tickstock were tag teaming the discussion.

Honestly: I felt that it was a completely unreasonable and bitter suggestion - especially since I was being perfectly polite and sincere. And it was a suggestion which seemed to reflect a sort of inherent suspiciousness of other points of view. Therefore I found it quite unpleasant. I very nearly quit but that would have felt too much like being forced out. And I hate it when people flounce out of forums.

Well, I am sorry you were so hurt and offended. You seem to have read a LOT more into that brief exchange than was actually intended on my end and are ascribing motives to me that simply weren't there.

I will agree with Jasmin's comments above that this place often gets heated. My feelings have been hurt and I have been offended a number of times too. Sometimes it's good to take some time off when that happens. But it's pointless to re-litigate every slight, real or imagined, months later in unrelated threads, don't you think?

bunhill · « **Reply #263 on:** January 18, 2014, 12:28 »

Quote from: lisafx on January 18, 2014, 11:17

... unrelated threads ... etc

If the thread ends up being about conspiracy theories then previous conspiracy theories here do sort of come into scope. That was my thinking anyhow.

Quote from: lisafx on January 18, 2014, 11:17

Feel free to keep belaboring it if that is going to provide you some measure of comfort or self-validation.

Thanks. That does not seem at all snitty.

Noedelhap · « **Reply #264 on:** January 18, 2014, 13:26 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on January 18, 2014, 10:04

Quote from: Noedelhap on January 18, 2014, 09:05
And once again they're leaving us in complete darkness for another whole weekend about how much they're going to claw back. Their laziness and complete lack of punctuality is crazy.
Don't we know, deep down, that the clawback is going to be almost exactly the extra we made, beyond what we had come to expect? In my case, almost exactly 50%.

Yes, but I don't know how much extra I made. I have an estimated guess, but I'd just like to know some exact numbers ASAP.

lisafx · « **Reply #265 on:** January 19, 2014, 19:08 »

Quote from: bunhill on January 18, 2014, 12:28

Quote from: lisafx on January 18, 2014, 11:17
... unrelated threads ... etc

If the thread ends up being about conspiracy theories then previous conspiracy theories here do sort of come into scope. That was my thinking anyhow.

Quote from: lisafx on January 18, 2014, 11:17
Feel free to keep belaboring it if that is going to provide you some measure of comfort or self-validation.

Thanks. That does not seem at all snitty.

Yeah, I tend to agree. That's why I deleted that part of my post more than a half hour before you posted your response to it. How does that happen??

You seem to be nursing a grudge for a brief one or two post exchange that happened, a couple of months ago, and hasn't been repeated. I've said I was sorry to have offended you, and that it wasn't my intention. Not sure what more you're looking for. If you still are not satisfied, feel free to PM me and we can sort this out in a more appropriate venue.

If, instead, you still feel compelled to post your personal grievances in threads expressing conspiracy theories, you have your work cut out for you because there's some of that in half or better of the threads in these forums.

BoBoBolinski · « **Reply #266 on:** January 20, 2014, 04:18 »

^^^ Go and sort it out in the playground. No one is interested in stupid squabbles.

PhotoBomb · « **Reply #267 on:** January 23, 2014, 11:05 »

Curious as to how this latest screw-up is going to affect iStock getting out the tax forms on time???

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #268 on:** January 23, 2014, 12:59 »

Quote from: PhotoBomb on January 23, 2014, 11:05

Curious as to how this latest screw-up is going to affect iStock getting out the tax forms on time???

Not sure if they do anything for Canadian residents, but iStock doesn't send out 1099s to US residents, so it won't affect anything for those of us in the US. I assume the US is no different to them from any other country that isn't Canada

PhotoBomb · « **Reply #269 on:** January 23, 2014, 13:13 »

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on January 23, 2014, 12:59

Quote from: PhotoBomb on January 23, 2014, 11:05
Curious as to how this latest screw-up is going to affect iStock getting out the tax forms on time???

Not sure if they do anything for Canadian residents, but iStock doesn't send out 1099s to US residents, so it won't affect anything for those of us in the US. I assume the US is no different to them from any other country that isn't Canada

Thnaks I had forgotten they didn't sen them.

Pixart · « **Reply #270 on:** January 23, 2014, 17:03 »

Yes they send to Canadians, but you can never rely on when they will arrive. Due in Feb arrive in April kinda issue.

Red Dove · « **Reply #271 on:** January 23, 2014, 18:26 »

Tis' Thursday of the week following the original week in which they were going to provide further detail about the recoupmentabilitationary process. Professionals my hairy ar*e.

Julied83 · « **Reply #272 on:** January 23, 2014, 18:30 »

Don't know what's going on, my account balance goes up and then goes down. My two last download dissapear ! I didn't receive email refund. Scary !

Goofy · « **Reply #273 on:** January 23, 2014, 19:26 »

I don't expect much for December PP might even be zero for them to recoup their overpayment in October...

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #274 on:** January 23, 2014, 20:14 »

Quote from: Julied83 on January 23, 2014, 18:30

Don't know what's going on, my account balance goes up and then goes down. My two last download dissapear ! I didn't receive email refund. Scary !

There used to be an issue with two or three different servers being updated at different times, so one might know about a sale while another hadn't been notified, and suppliers got shifted betweent them while this was happening. So vanishing sales might not mean anything more than a slow server update.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Hold on to your wallets! "There are irregularities with October's PP royalties" (Read 98896 times)

lisafx

bunhill

Ron

BaldricksTrousers

cobalt

Red Dove

Noedelhap

Mantis

Shelma1

Mantis

BaldricksTrousers

Mantis

lisafx

bunhill

Noedelhap

lisafx

BoBoBolinski

PhotoBomb

Jo Ann Snover

PhotoBomb

Pixart

Red Dove

Julied83

Goofy

BaldricksTrousers

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors