Author Topic: istock organises conference call with selected few (Read 82661 times)

nico_blue · « **Reply #100 on:** March 13, 2011, 23:13 »

i've been a member of these forums since 2009... just never posted.

I hope TPTB on istock provide us with more information regarding the goals of this conference call tomorrow.

eddyp · « **Reply #101 on:** March 14, 2011, 00:37 »

Quote from: FreeTransform on March 13, 2011, 22:48

Quote from: Blufish on March 13, 2011, 20:43
Can I just say I love how many new IS people have come on over!
I've looked at this forum a handful of times over the years, but have not felt compelled to register and post until now.

Good for you Cheryl. I also have been around (mostly reading)... it's time to mingle...

eddyp · « **Reply #102 on:** March 14, 2011, 00:47 »

Quote from: nico_blue on March 13, 2011, 23:13

i've been a member of these forums since 2009... just never posted.

I hope TPTB on istock provide us with more information regarding the goals of this conference call tomorrow.

Yes Nico, let's hope they do that

blamb · « **Reply #103 on:** March 14, 2011, 01:24 »

What are you guys doing HERE???

lagereek · « **Reply #104 on:** March 14, 2011, 01:33 »

BUISNESS!! whatever happend to that? Meeting about fraud? waste of everyones time. Ofcourse! it will give a prolonged excuse for not fixing any bugs and glitches, etc, leaving the site in total shambles not to speak of reputation.

I dont care about this fraud business, I dont care about loosing some dosh, dont care! AS LONG AS THE SITE IS BACK; UP AND RUNNING THE WAY IT USED TO BE.

jm · « **Reply #105 on:** March 14, 2011, 01:37 »

"They can be the ears of the entire community..."
What ears do they mean when we may not hear anything?

eddyp · « **Reply #106 on:** March 14, 2011, 02:10 »

Quote from: blamb on March 14, 2011, 01:24

What are you guys doing HERE???

Microbius · « **Reply #107 on:** March 14, 2011, 03:00 »

So pointless, how is the community supposed to feel comforted by the knowledge that someone else knows what's going on? and worse can't even tell them if they are satisfied with what they have been told or not?
More smoke and mirrors? (or is that cloaks and daggers?)

leaf · « **Reply #108 on:** March 14, 2011, 03:35 »

I felt in one of KellyK's posts he wished the iStock staff could let the contributers know more of what is going on and how things are going to be resolved - but they couldn't for some reason.

I feel the conference call will be letting those 5 contributers know what they wished they could tell everyone. I feel they want to tell those 5 contributers why / how things will get 'better' so they can tell everyone else that it is true, things will get 'better'. That way it can come from the mouths of someone 'impartial' instead of the iStock staff who most people no longer believe.

So if THAT is all true, the NDA would just be making sure they don't repeat what was actually said but they could (and hopefully would) repeat that yes, things will get 'better'. ... and know why themselves.

RT · « **Reply #109 on:** March 14, 2011, 04:48 »

Quote from: leaf on March 14, 2011, 03:35

That way it can come from the mouths of someone 'impartial' instead of the iStock staff who most people no longer believe.

IMO someone 'impartial' would not be an iStock exclusive, if they want impartiality an independent contributor would be the best choice.

Here's something to consider, if there is indeed an investigation ongoing that involves outside agencies why are iStock trying to instigate the 'secret five', I find it strange to believe that any outside official agency would tell iStock that they can't disclose anything to the majority about the investigation but it's OK to go ahead and tell five people in secret. My biggest fear is that's in an in-house investigation which leaves me no faith in a satisfactory outcome whatsoever.

I've had some images stolen as a result of this fiasco like the majority of us, however at this stage there's isn't enough for me to consider committing the time to follow it up, but for anybody that does feel they want to commit that time you could consider this, iStock have informed you your property (images) have been stolen using a fraudulent credit card, YOU are the victim it's your property, iStock are not a victim as they've taken the money back (commissions) from you (which I'm not even sure is legal, it's hard for me to search not being in the US/Canada but most info I can find says it's the 'merchant' who is responsible for bearing the loss of fraudulent card use), therefore it is YOU that is the victim and is entitled to report the crime to the authorities, iStock are an involved in an administrative role and have chosen to keep vital information from us, if you want answers it might be the route to take.

Phil · « **Reply #110 on:** March 14, 2011, 06:31 »

now feeling that Sean Locke is the Messiah! Give us a sign!
(hopefully if he accepts (and only the true messiah denies his divinity) he will found out more than.. Blessed are they who convert their neighbour's ox, for they shall inhibit their girth)

loop · « **Reply #111 on:** March 14, 2011, 06:41 »

Quote from: leaf on March 14, 2011, 03:35

I felt in one of KellyK's posts he wished the iStock staff could let the contributers know more of what is going on and how things are going to be resolved - but they couldn't for some reason.

I feel the conference call will be letting those 5 contributers know what they wished they could tell everyone. I feel they want to tell those 5 contributers why / how things will get 'better' so they can tell everyone else that it is true, things will get 'better'. That way it can come from the mouths of someone 'impartial' instead of the iStock staff who most people no longer believe.

So if THAT is all true, the NDA would just be making sure they don't repeat what was actually said but they could (and hopefully would) repeat that yes, things will get 'better'. ... and know why themselves.

Well stated. I think all is reduced to that, no need of conspiracy theories.

ShadySue · « **Reply #112 on:** March 14, 2011, 06:44 »

Quote from: LSD72 on March 13, 2011, 22:42

BTW.. has anyone nominated Lobo

I don't know, but a few people have nominated Bruce. But it turns out, he's inelible for the same reason as Rob.
http://www.istockphoto.com/bitter
A little factoid that I'd missed.

lagereek · « **Reply #113 on:** March 14, 2011, 06:54 »

Quote from: ShadySue on March 14, 2011, 06:44

Quote from: LSD72 on March 13, 2011, 22:42
BTW.. has anyone nominated Lobo

I don't know, but a few people have nominated Bruce. But it turns out, he's inelible for the same reason as Rob.
http://www.istockphoto.com/bitter
A little factoid that I'd missed.

Bruce?? well not sure about that, he sold this place to Getty in the first place, fully aware of the Getty reputation of messing up things. So did Tony-Stone and Stan-Kanney BUT in them days Mark-Getty was the chairman and everyone was earning a fortune.

ShadySue · « **Reply #114 on:** March 14, 2011, 07:00 »

Quote from: lagereek on March 14, 2011, 06:54

Quote from: ShadySue on March 14, 2011, 06:44
Quote from: LSD72 on March 13, 2011, 22:42
BTW.. has anyone nominated Lobo

I don't know, but a few people have nominated Bruce. But it turns out, he's inelible for the same reason as Rob.
http://www.istockphoto.com/bitter
A little factoid that I'd missed.

Bruce?? well not sure about that, he sold this place to Getty in the first place, fully aware of the Getty reputation of messing up things. So did Tony-Stone and Stan-Kanney BUT in them days Mark-Getty was the chairman and everyone was earning a fortune.

The point was that he's not now exclusive to iStock.

cathyslife · « **Reply #115 on:** March 14, 2011, 07:01 »

Quote from: leaf on March 14, 2011, 03:35

I felt in one of KellyK's posts he wished the iStock staff could let the contributers know more of what is going on and how things are going to be resolved - but they couldn't for some reason.

I feel the conference call will be letting those 5 contributers know what they wished they could tell everyone. I feel they want to tell those 5 contributers why / how things will get 'better' so they can tell everyone else that it is true, things will get 'better'. That way it can come from the mouths of someone 'impartial' instead of the iStock staff who most people no longer believe.

So if THAT is all true, the NDA would just be making sure they don't repeat what was actually said but they could (and hopefully would) repeat that yes, things will get 'better'. ... and know why themselves.

I understand all of that. But TPTB and admins have been telling us for months that "things will get better"...how is 5 more people giving that oh-so-generic line going to solve anything? If Sean says things are going to get better, I believe him. That doesn't mean that shenanigans haven't been taking place, IP has been stolen and now in the hands of thieves, and money hasn't been clawed back from contributors.

It's all just more drama and diversion and smoke and mirrors. Audits and accountability are the way to go, for every single person who has their IP with istockphoto, not just exclusives, not just for those who have lost big time, but EVERYONE.

bunhill · « **Reply #116 on:** March 14, 2011, 07:53 »

Quote from: leaf on March 14, 2011, 03:35

I felt in one of KellyK's posts he wished the iStock staff could let the contributers know more of what is going on and how things are going to be resolved - but they couldn't for some reason.

I feel the conference call will be letting those 5 contributers know what they wished they could tell everyone.

It seems unlikely to me that even under NDA there could be any discussion of anything which is potentially sub judice or which might now or in the future relate to any investigation. I don't understand why they have made any of this public. I do not understand why they would not have preferred to quietly take the loss themselves against future profits and solve the security issues in private.

I guess that would be one of the questions which I would hope the 5 would ask. Since they are not a listed company -- so they do not have to answer to the share price or investor growth expectations.

I do think this is a potentially a positive move though.

ETA: thinking about this some more - I suppose it is possible that there is going to be some sort of compensation offered by iStockphoto to the people who have had their images stolen (and presumably distributed) but that for some reason it cannot be discussed yet. That might explain things to some extent. In which they may have a very positive message to deliver under NDA.

Michael Lancaster · « **Reply #117 on:** March 14, 2011, 08:38 »

Sean, are you going to sign the NDA?

OhGoAway! · « **Reply #118 on:** March 14, 2011, 08:45 »

What other conclusion could the five possibly return with, other than "Things will get better"? Could they possibly get worse? iStock wouldn't initiate this conversation unless they had some type of action plan to show off to them - whether its feasible, whether it even goes forward, can't possibly be known by the 5 selected. All they can possibly do is say, "What they have planned will help. Things will get better."

And that puts us no further forward than hearing Andrew say, "We're on it. Believe me, please, we don't like this any more than you do." Personally I trust Andrew a lot -- it's just that the crap they give him to feed to us stinks. But it's all they give him. The Selected 5 will be in the same boat.

Microbius · « **Reply #119 on:** March 14, 2011, 08:56 »

I still don't get it.
Will it make an iota of difference to anyone if the five get back from the call and say "don't worry it'll all be fine" or "ooohhhh it's terrible run for the hills" with no further info?
Everyone except those five will still be in the mushroom position; in the dark and fed on sh*t

ShadySue · « **Reply #120 on:** March 14, 2011, 08:58 »

Quote from: OhGoAway! on March 14, 2011, 08:45

What other conclusion could the five possibly return with, other than "Things will get better"? Could they possibly get worse? iStock wouldn't initiate this conversation unless they had some type of action plan to show off to them - whether its feasible, whether it even goes forward, can't possibly be known by the 5 selected. All they can possibly do is say, "What they have planned will help. Things will get better."

It's also about whether the reason the frauds went on for over two months is valid or not. That's the point that is probably sub judice.

jbarber873 · « **Reply #121 on:** March 14, 2011, 09:06 »

Quote from: Microbius on March 14, 2011, 08:56

I still don't get it.
Will it make an iota of difference to anyone if the five get back from the call and say "don't worry it'll all be fine" or "ooohhhh it's terrible run for the hills" with no further info?
Everyone except those five will still be in the mushroom position; in the dark and fed on sh*t

I'm feeling rather like a mushroom myself

Sadstock · « **Reply #122 on:** March 14, 2011, 09:26 »

Quote from: leaf on March 14, 2011, 03:35

I felt in one of KellyK's posts he wished the iStock staff could let the contributers know more of what is going on and how things are going to be resolved - but they couldn't for some reason.

I feel the conference call will be letting those 5 contributers know what they wished they could tell everyone. I feel they want to tell those 5 contributers why / how things will get 'better' so they can tell everyone else that it is true, things will get 'better'. That way it can come from the mouths of someone 'impartial' instead of the iStock staff who most people no longer believe.

So if THAT is all true, the NDA would just be making sure they don't repeat what was actually said but they could (and hopefully would) repeat that yes, things will get 'better'. ... and know why themselves.

Wanted to thank you for providing us with this forum. Its great that we have an alternative.

rubyroo · « **Reply #123 on:** March 14, 2011, 09:27 »

Quote from: Microbius on March 14, 2011, 08:56

I still don't get it.
Will it make an iota of difference to anyone if the five get back from the call and say "don't worry it'll all be fine" or "ooohhhh it's terrible run for the hills" with no further info?
Everyone except those five will still be in the mushroom position; in the dark and fed on sh*t

I think it's because they see us more as sheep than mushrooms.

Sadstock · « **Reply #124 on:** March 14, 2011, 09:28 »

Quote from: ShadySue on March 14, 2011, 06:44

Quote from: LSD72 on March 13, 2011, 22:42
BTW.. has anyone nominated Lobo

I don't know, but a few people have nominated Bruce. But it turns out, he's inelible for the same reason as Rob.
http://www.istockphoto.com/bitter
A little factoid that I'd missed.

Peebert is still exclusive

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: istock organises conference call with selected few (Read 82661 times)

nico_blue

eddyp

eddyp

blamb

lagereek

jm

eddyp

Microbius

leaf

RT

Phil

loop

ShadySue

lagereek

ShadySue

cathyslife

bunhill

Michael Lancaster

OhGoAway!

Microbius

ShadySue

jbarber873

Sadstock

rubyroo

Sadstock

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors