Ok, this is new to me... Twitter spam? So if you complain publicly and get a public response, it's spam?

People are weird...

What's the point of Twitter, hashtags, etc., if the public doesn't use them to find and comment on things?

Ok, this is new to me... Twitter spam? So if you complain publicly and get a public response, it's spam?

People are weird...

What's the point of Twitter, hashtags, etc., if the public doesn't use them to find and comment on things?

let's see the other side, imagine I was an illustrator like you, possibly a good competitor with similar work, your site was down and I took advantage on your own twitter saying that my website is running and could give a discount as well, how would you feel? don't think of Sean's case, talking about you

I understand Sean situation, its iStock yep but its kind of aggressive marketing and I don't think it the best way to get clients, wonder if there is someone here that studied some of these "marketing concepts"

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on March 04, 2014, 17:03

Some of them can't.  I answered several questions specifically about where to look elsewhere.

As for direct messaging, again, they asked in the open air of twitter.  They didn't send their concerns in a direct message, so I answer in the open air.

Well ok, whatever comforts you. If you believe you haven't behaved unprofessionally and that your sole reason for tweeting the same thing multiple times was "just helping others", there isn't much I can say or do. I can only choose to not believe you, what I actually opted for.

Also the other ones defending you that you are just helping others, like people can't type "microstock agency" in google, I don't know if they're being naive or just justifying your unprofessionalism under the pretext of helping because you're known in this community.

Whatever the case may be, it's yours and their choice, as mine is mine. I might not share the popular opinions around here, but at least I'm not phased by certain figures and am honest about my intentions and attitudes. Case closed for me.

You need to look at the totality of the last 12 months. I wonder what you would be saying if you knew and/or were affected by all the butt juice IS dumped on us, and Sean in particular? But I am glad the case is closed for you. 

Quote from: EmberMike on March 04, 2014, 17:51

Ok, this is new to me... Twitter spam? So if you complain publicly and get a public response, it's spam?

People are weird...

What's the point of Twitter, hashtags, etc., if the public doesn't use them to find and comment on things?

let's see the other side, imagine I was an illustrator like you, possibly a good competitor with similar work, your site was down and I took advantage on your own twitter saying that my website is running and could give a discount as well, how would you feel?

We're  in business. It's not about avoiding hurting your rival's feelings, it's about trying to sell your own work. It's odd to be worried about this when people just flagrantly copy other people's work and nobody gives a dam*. Marketing can't be worse than plagiarism.

Well, to stick strictly to marketing, then: Are you arguing that you shouldn't market in a way that might upset a rival by taking sales away from him?
I doubt if that approach would get an "A" in Marketing 101.
From a business perspective, the only argument against trying to take advantage of iStock's crash by grabbing their customers is the risk that it might backfire by making other potential customers think your business is too aggressive.

let's see the other side, imagine I was an illustrator like you, possibly a good competitor with similar work, your site was down and I took advantage on your own twitter saying that my website is running and could give a discount as well, how would you feel?

It's a business, not a playground.
I think it's completely fair to make use of one company's downtime to promote your own images. We're running a business, so this has nothing to do with hurting other people's feelings, it's about competition. It's aggressive, sure, but every business person with a sense of marketing would make use of situations like this. The buyer needs an image, so as Istocks competitor, you have a choice:
1) don't market your own site (to avoid hurting iStocks feelings), wait for an undetermined amount of time for istock to come up (could be hours), while the buyer needs an image NOW
2) use aggressive marketing to earn some money (the goal of any good business), get a happy buyer, destroy your competitor (in this case, iStock, who, by the way, fully deserves to lose buyers over this)