Author Topic: Istock F5 epic fail (Read 268482 times)

caspixel · « **Reply #400 on:** January 11, 2011, 13:30 »

Quote from: jamirae on January 11, 2011, 11:00

oh look, another epic fail. Even people that want to buy something at istock can't seem to get in the door:

from this thread:
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=290922&page=1
Quote
I refered a buyer to istock. They told me when they hit the sign up button it said something to the effect of "we are experiencing a high volume of new sign ups please try again later". Unfortunately they are not going to try again later they just went to another site and found the image there. Is this a known issue? Buyers signing up seems kinda like a priority.

(Edited on 2011-01-10 21:44:24 by LightScribe)

seriously, they really need to get someone in there that can handle this fraud crap without affecting the real buyers.

That's some brilliant fraud prevention there.

cathyslife · « **Reply #401 on:** January 11, 2011, 13:35 »

Quote from: lisafx on January 11, 2011, 13:00

Oh dear Lord.

I am glad they are dealing with the fraud. I really am. Surely there should be some way to do that without preventing all new buyers from joining?

I have never been more grateful to be non-exclusive.

Yes, instead of prevent new buyers from joining, why don't they allow the purchases, just delay the downloads until the cc info can be manually checked?

And I agree, totally grateful to be non-exclusive.

lisafx · « **Reply #402 on:** January 11, 2011, 19:31 »

Just got my Contact Sheet. As usual, all sunshine and roses and nothing about any problems being addressed. No surprise there.

What did surprise me was when I clicked on the "seasonal search" link for valentines images and it preselects only illustrations! I have never had illos only checked in my life. So I unchecked it and the rest of the images came up. Then I closed the window and went back and clicked the link in Contact Sheet again. Guess what. Illustrations only was checked again.

Well, at least they have finally done something for the illustrators but basically another SNAFU.

Oh, and as an added bonus, when you uncheck illustrations and see the photos too, you will notice that many of the Vetta and Agency images gracing the first page are couples that have nothing at all to do with Valentine's day.

Are we supposed to be adding "valentine's day" to all of our images of couples??

disorderly · « **Reply #403 on:** January 11, 2011, 19:38 »

Quote from: lisafx on January 11, 2011, 19:31

Are we supposed to be adding "valentine's day" to all of our images of couples??

Except for the ones where they're assaulting each other, yeah.

ShadySue · « **Reply #404 on:** January 11, 2011, 19:56 »

Quote from: lisafx on January 11, 2011, 19:31

Are we supposed to be adding "valentine's day" to all of our images of couples??

Only if you want the to be Vetta.

michealo · « **Reply #405 on:** January 12, 2011, 07:15 »

Quote from: caspixel on January 06, 2011, 17:53

Why does Lobo have to lock every single thread with a snarky comment? Why not a "We are very concerned with protecting our contributors IP rights. Thanks for noticing, we are looking into it."?

Oh, wait, that's because they don't give a crap about you and your IP rights (and it shines through time and again).

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=289322&page=2#post5545062

I don't think it is that snarky. It gives the required information. And it is likely a canned response using a macro. As in lock this thread and a moderator selects a canned response from a list.

cathyslife · « **Reply #406 on:** January 12, 2011, 07:31 »

Quote from: michealo on January 12, 2011, 07:15

Quote from: caspixel on January 06, 2011, 17:53
Why does Lobo have to lock every single thread with a snarky comment? Why not a "We are very concerned with protecting our contributors IP rights. Thanks for noticing, we are looking into it."?

Oh, wait, that's because they don't give a crap about you and your IP rights (and it shines through time and again).

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=289322&page=2#post5545062

I don't think it is that snarky. It gives the required information. And it is likely a canned response using a macro. As in lock this thread and a moderator selects a canned response from a list.

If it's a canned response, it must be something that was just instituted because his remarks in the past have been downright rude, snarky and arrogant.

klsbear · « **Reply #407 on:** January 12, 2011, 08:07 »

Now we have contributors writing code to fix problems and giving the solution to the IS programmers - they should be asking how many RC's they get for uploading working fixes to the f5 failed code.

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=291522&page=1

cathyslife · « **Reply #408 on:** January 12, 2011, 10:31 »

I see kelvinjay locking threads now

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=291562&page=1
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=291542&page=1

and very little of Lobo. Do you think he quit, or got promoted to CEO?

jamirae · « **Reply #409 on:** January 12, 2011, 10:31 »

Quote from: klsbear on January 12, 2011, 08:07

Now we have contributors writing code to fix problems and giving the solution to the IS programmers - they should be asking how many RC's they get for uploading working fixes to the f5 failed code.

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=291522&page=1

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAA!

Unfreakingbelievable!

caspixel · « **Reply #410 on:** January 12, 2011, 10:36 »

Quote from: cclapper on January 12, 2011, 10:31

I see kelvinjay locking threads now

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=291562&page=1
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=291542&page=1

and very little of Lobo. Do you think he quit, or got promoted to CEO?

Fired?

ShadySue · « **Reply #411 on:** January 12, 2011, 10:40 »

Quote from: caspixel on January 12, 2011, 10:36

Quote from: cclapper on January 12, 2011, 10:31
I see kelvinjay locking threads now

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=291562&page=1
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=291542&page=1

and very little of Lobo. Do you think he quit, or got promoted to CEO?

Maybe he's on holiday? I see he's still up there and still has his moderator badge.

Fired?

cathyslife · « **Reply #412 on:** January 12, 2011, 10:42 »

Quote from: ShadySue on January 12, 2011, 10:40

Quote from: caspixel on January 12, 2011, 10:36
Quote from: cclapper on January 12, 2011, 10:31
I see kelvinjay locking threads now

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=291562&page=1
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=291542&page=1

and very little of Lobo. Do you think he quit, or got promoted to CEO?

Maybe he's on holiday? I see he's still up there and still has his moderator badge.

Fired?

Maybe they moved him over to head up the IT dept.

lisafx · « **Reply #413 on:** January 12, 2011, 11:14 »

Quote from: cclapper on January 12, 2011, 10:31

I see kelvinjay locking threads now

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=291562&page=1
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=291542&page=1

and very little of Lobo. Do you think he quit, or got promoted to CEO?

Yeah, I just noticed they made Kelvin a moderator. Too bad.

Although he was always a vocal and clever critic of IS policy when necessary, I had noticed that recently his posts were very much towing the company line. Now his complete 180 in the forums makes sense.

Very clever of Istock. Silence one of your most effective critics by putting him on the payroll.

cathyslife · « **Reply #414 on:** January 12, 2011, 11:21 »

Quote from: lisafx on January 12, 2011, 11:14

Quote from: cclapper on January 12, 2011, 10:31
I see kelvinjay locking threads now

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=291562&page=1
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=291542&page=1

and very little of Lobo. Do you think he quit, or got promoted to CEO?

Yeah, I just noticed they made Kelvin a moderator. Too bad.

Although he was always a vocal and clever critic of IS policy when necessary, I had noticed that recently his posts were very much towing the company line. Now his complete 180 in the forums makes sense.

Very clever of Istock. Silence one of your most effective critics by putting him on the payroll.

Yep. Another sellout. At least he is locking threads tactfully, even though they are still getting locked.

I totally expect sjlocke to be next. $:-\$

ShadySue · « **Reply #415 on:** January 12, 2011, 11:35 »

[double post, sorry]

ShadySue · « **Reply #416 on:** January 12, 2011, 11:35 »

Quote from: ShadySue on January 12, 2011, 11:35

Quote from: cclapper on January 12, 2011, 11:21
Quote from: lisafx on January 12, 2011, 11:14
Quote from: cclapper on January 12, 2011, 10:31
I see kelvinjay locking threads now

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=291562&page=1
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=291542&page=1

and very little of Lobo. Do you think he quit, or got promoted to CEO?

Yeah, I just noticed they made Kelvin a moderator. Too bad.

Although he was always a vocal and clever critic of IS policy when necessary, I had noticed that recently his posts were very much towing the company line. Now his complete 180 in the forums makes sense.

Very clever of Istock. Silence one of your most effective critics by putting him on the payroll.

Yep. Another sellout. At least he is locking threads tactfully, even though they are still getting locked.

I totally expect sjlocke to be next. $:-\$

I don't think Sean can be easily ~~bought~~ silenced. It would have been really easy for him to stay off the iStock forums and here: most of the other top hitters are 'invisible', and he hasn't so far.
I can't imagine he hasn't been asked to be an inspector at the very least.

lisafx · « **Reply #417 on:** January 12, 2011, 11:54 »

Quote from: ShadySue on January 12, 2011, 11:35

Quote from: ShadySue on January 12, 2011, 11:35
Quote from: cclapper on January 12, 2011, 11:21

Yep. Another sellout. At least he is locking threads tactfully, even though they are still getting locked.

I totally expect sjlocke to be next. $:-\$

I don't think Sean can be easily ~~bought~~ silenced. It would have been really easy for him to stay off the iStock forums and here: most of the other top hitters are 'invisible', and he hasn't so far.
I can't imagine he hasn't been asked to be an inspector at the very least.

I have to agree about Sean. Unlikely to sell out. For one thing, he's too busy producing great stock and making money to want to take the time to moderate the forums or serve in some other administrative capacity.

cathyslife · « **Reply #418 on:** January 12, 2011, 12:02 »

Quote from: lisafx on January 12, 2011, 11:54

Quote from: ShadySue on January 12, 2011, 11:35
Quote from: ShadySue on January 12, 2011, 11:35
Quote from: cclapper on January 12, 2011, 11:21

Yep. Another sellout. At least he is locking threads tactfully, even though they are still getting locked.

I totally expect sjlocke to be next. $:-\$

I don't think Sean can be easily ~~bought~~ silenced. It would have been really easy for him to stay off the iStock forums and here: most of the other top hitters are 'invisible', and he hasn't so far.
I can't imagine he hasn't been asked to be an inspector at the very least.

I have to agree about Sean. Unlikely to sell out. For one thing, he's too busy producing great stock and making money to want to take the time to moderate the forums or serve in some other administrative capacity.

I hope you all are right.

iclick · « **Reply #419 on:** January 12, 2011, 13:14 »

Quote from: cclapper on January 12, 2011, 07:31

Quote from: michealo on January 12, 2011, 07:15
Quote from: caspixel on January 06, 2011, 17:53
Why does Lobo have to lock every single thread with a snarky comment? Why not a "We are very concerned with protecting our contributors IP rights. Thanks for noticing, we are looking into it."?

Oh, wait, that's because they don't give a crap about you and your IP rights (and it shines through time and again).

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=289322&page=2#post5545062

I don't think it is that snarky. It gives the required information. And it is likely a canned response using a macro. As in lock this thread and a moderator selects a canned response from a list.

If it's a canned response, it must be something that was just instituted because his remarks in the past have been downright rude, snarky and arrogant.

Totally agree, have noticed this in the past and thought how unprofessional .... there is always one

caspixel · « **Reply #420 on:** January 12, 2011, 16:14 »

Quote from: lisafx on January 12, 2011, 11:14

Quote from: cclapper on January 12, 2011, 10:31
I see kelvinjay locking threads now

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=291562&page=1
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=291542&page=1

and very little of Lobo. Do you think he quit, or got promoted to CEO?

Yeah, I just noticed they made Kelvin a moderator. Too bad.

Although he was always a vocal and clever critic of IS policy when necessary, I had noticed that recently his posts were very much towing the company line. Now his complete 180 in the forums makes sense.

Very clever of Istock. Silence one of your most effective critics by putting him on the payroll.

I had noticed that shift too. Such a shame. I really like Kelvin. Never thought he could be bought out like that.

He is way better than Lobo, though.

cathyslife · « **Reply #421 on:** January 12, 2011, 17:08 »

I spotted a thread on the IS forum regarding deactivation of images. Guess what...that's broken now too. I am so pis*ed at all of this nonsense. Now I can't even continue deactivating my images.

It just worked yesterday and days before because I have been deactivating non-sellers for the past two months. The deactivated images were taking a week or two to be purged out of my portfolio, but at least if someone clicked on the image in my port, it took you to a deactivation page and the image couldn't be purchased. Now, nothing happens. I deactivate the image, but you can still go to the buying page.

If I were independently wealthy, you can believe I'd be filing a lawsuit. This is ALL just plain bullsh*t.

edit: so kelvinjay suggested deactivating the image twice. He says it's been that way for a year. Well, I've been deactivating regularly for the past two months and I haven't had to do everything twice. Until now. So now, we're being punished for deactivating by being made to do everything twice. I can't wait to be done with this site.

jamirae · « **Reply #422 on:** January 12, 2011, 17:15 »

Quote from: cclapper on January 12, 2011, 17:08

I spotted a thread on the IS forum regarding deactivation of images. Guess what...that's broken now too. I am so pis*ed at all of this nonsense. Now I can't even continue deactivating my images.

It just worked yesterday and days before because I have been deactivating non-sellers for the past two months. The deactivated images were taking a week or two to be purged out of my portfolio, but at least if someone clicked on the image in my port, it took you to a deactivation page and the image couldn't be purchased. Now, nothing happens. I deactivate the image, but you can still go to the buying page.

If I were independently wealthy, you can believe I'd be filing a lawsuit. This is ALL just plain bullsh*t.

I'll save you the trip to iStock forums.. "I'm so sorry you are having trouble. Please send in a support ticket." or "We are aware of this issue and are working on it. We will post an update soon."

cathyslife · « **Reply #423 on:** January 12, 2011, 17:21 »

Quote from: jamirae on January 12, 2011, 17:15

Quote from: cclapper on January 12, 2011, 17:08
I spotted a thread on the IS forum regarding deactivation of images. Guess what...that's broken now too. I am so pis*ed at all of this nonsense. Now I can't even continue deactivating my images.

It just worked yesterday and days before because I have been deactivating non-sellers for the past two months. The deactivated images were taking a week or two to be purged out of my portfolio, but at least if someone clicked on the image in my port, it took you to a deactivation page and the image couldn't be purchased. Now, nothing happens. I deactivate the image, but you can still go to the buying page.

If I were independently wealthy, you can believe I'd be filing a lawsuit. This is ALL just plain bullsh*t.

I'll save you the trip to iStock forums.. "I'm so sorry you are having trouble. Please send in a support ticket." or "We are aware of this issue and are working on it. We will post an update soon."

kelvinjay offered the support ticket solution, or post the number you want deactivated and he would look into it. Right.

lisafx · « **Reply #424 on:** January 12, 2011, 17:25 »

If I were a conspiracy-minded person, I might wonder if the deactivating of images was broken on purpose, coming as it does, right as the lower royalties kick in....

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Istock F5 epic fail (Read 268482 times)

caspixel

cathyslife

lisafx

disorderly

ShadySue

michealo

cathyslife

klsbear

cathyslife

jamirae

caspixel

ShadySue

cathyslife

lisafx

cathyslife

ShadySue

ShadySue

lisafx

cathyslife

iclick

caspixel

cathyslife

jamirae

cathyslife

lisafx

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors