Author Topic: istock organises conference call with selected few (Read 82663 times)

Phil · « **Reply #50 on:** March 13, 2011, 15:13 »

Quote from: caspixel on March 13, 2011, 09:38

what use is that if the people have to sign an NDA? Sounds like a nice way to muzzle even more people who are critical of iStock. This is the crappiest suggestion yet.

And why are people nominating Sean? What a foolish move. Sorry. But it would be the worst thing to have him muzzled. I can't believe people are falling for this. iStock treats the contributors like chumps and they fall right in line like good little Kool-Aid drinkers.

And why only exclusive members???

whats this about?! what brought it on? what are they going to discuss?

whatever it is I agree, we'll tell 5 people what we what them to hear and they wont be be able to tell anyone else? what's the point?

PeterChigmaroff · « **Reply #51 on:** March 13, 2011, 16:00 »

Quote from: Phil on March 13, 2011, 15:13

whats this about?! what brought it on? what are they going to discuss?

whatever it is I agree, we'll tell 5 people what we what them to hear and they wont be be able to tell anyone else? what's the point?

I agree, what's the point? Even a very frank and open talk with everyone would be met with uncertainty and skepticism. A closed doors NDA, we'll tell you what to say meeting is a joke and further erodes iStocks reputation.

jamirae · « **Reply #52 on:** March 13, 2011, 16:17 »

Clever. They are making the switch from all of us who are pissed off about the clawback of funds being on tge offemsive to making us go on the defensive.

Three words: class action lawsuit. I am in if anyone can get it rolling.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #53 on:** March 13, 2011, 16:19 »

I'd be happy to participate in a conference call - no NDA - to discuss major contributor problems. Discuss is an operative word - i.e. not just listen. Problems plural is key as well - the clawback of funds and loss of control of our images is very important, but is only one of the major failings on the site at the moment. If they dont' fix search soon, the future doesn't look bright at all.

I think iStock is trying to deflect trouble rather than solve problems. I think they want to try and ratchet down the contributor discontent and aren't thinking about solving the problems as the way to do that.

I hope they're willing to revisit the sort of conference call they're willing to have. Going from "trust us" to "trust them" isn't much of a step forward IMO.

Blufish · « **Reply #54 on:** March 13, 2011, 16:39 »

Anyone else find it interesting that Locke has not been heard from here there or anywhere since this conference call was announced? Hmmmm....

gostwyck · « **Reply #55 on:** March 13, 2011, 16:46 »

Quote from: Blufish on March 13, 2011, 16:39

Anyone else find it interesting that Locke has not been heard from here there or anywhere since this conference call was announced? Hmmmm....

It's a Sunday. He might be out with the family or on a shoot. Actually I think he has a very wise head on those shoulders and I think he's keeping his counsel until he understands more about exactly what is being offered & demanded.

visceralimage · « **Reply #56 on:** March 13, 2011, 16:47 »

Quote from: Blufish on March 13, 2011, 16:39

Anyone else find it interesting that Locke has not been heard from here there or anywhere since this conference call was announced? Hmmmm....

I would not be to chatty either if I had lost $5K this month; I would be spending my time speaking with an attorney, not some stuffed suit at IS

KB · « **Reply #57 on:** March 13, 2011, 16:54 »

Quote from: jsnover on March 13, 2011, 16:19

I'd be happy to participate in a conference call - no NDA - to discuss major contributor problems. Discuss is an operative word - i.e. not just listen. Problems plural is key as well - the clawback of funds and loss of control of our images is very important, but is only one of the major failings on the site at the moment. If they dont' fix search soon, the future doesn't look bright at all.

I think iStock is trying to deflect trouble rather than solve problems. I think they want to try and ratchet down the contributor discontent and aren't thinking about solving the problems as the way to do that.

I hope they're willing to revisit the sort of conference call they're willing to have. Going from "trust us" to "trust them" isn't much of a step forward IMO.

This illustrates why you were the second person (behind Sean) in my nomination list. I hope you will reconsider signing an NDA. I don't see requiring an NDA, or signing one, to be that big of a deal (as long as you get to read the NDA before signing it, of course). It likely will just say that you aren't to reveal any confidential information or trade secrets, something which I think you wouldn't want to do anyway.

However, I understand your desire not to be held potentially legally responsible for divulging something accidentally (or even being accused of it when you haven't done so), so I completely respect your decision if you stand by it. (Not that that should matter to you!)

nruboc · « **Reply #58 on:** March 13, 2011, 16:56 »

Quote from: caspixel on March 13, 2011, 13:42

My prediction on the favored five:

Stacey NewmanCamrocker
double_p
feverstockphoto
Willowpix

Pesky Monkey, jsnover, TerryJ and jtyler look like they have already declined. I just can't see Sean signing an NDA. So all that will be left are the 'syncopaths'.

You gotta be kidding me, right?

caspixel · « **Reply #59 on:** March 13, 2011, 17:01 »

Quote from: nruboc on March 13, 2011, 16:56

Quote from: caspixel on March 13, 2011, 13:42
My prediction on the favored five:

Stacey NewmanCamrocker
double_p
feverstockphoto
Willowpix

Pesky Monkey, jsnover, TerryJ and jtyler look like they have already declined. I just can't see Sean signing an NDA. So all that will be left are the 'syncopaths'.

You gotta be kidding me, right?

Believe it or not, she has been nominated!

nico_blue · « **Reply #60 on:** March 13, 2011, 17:49 »

Quote from: jsnover on March 13, 2011, 16:19

I'd be happy to participate in a conference call - no NDA - to discuss major contributor problems. Discuss is an operative word - i.e. not just listen. Problems plural is key as well - the clawback of funds and loss of control of our images is very important, but is only one of the major failings on the site at the moment. If they dont' fix search soon, the future doesn't look bright at all.

I think iStock is trying to deflect trouble rather than solve problems. I think they want to try and ratchet down the contributor discontent and aren't thinking about solving the problems as the way to do that.

I hope they're willing to revisit the sort of conference call they're willing to have. Going from "trust us" to "trust them" isn't much of a step forward IMO.

Very well said, agree with you 100%

gostwyck · « **Reply #61 on:** March 13, 2011, 18:21 »

Quote from: nico_blue on March 13, 2011, 17:49

Quote from: jsnover on March 13, 2011, 16:19
I'd be happy to participate in a conference call - no NDA - to discuss major contributor problems. Discuss is an operative word - i.e. not just listen. Problems plural is key as well - the clawback of funds and loss of control of our images is very important, but is only one of the major failings on the site at the moment. If they dont' fix search soon, the future doesn't look bright at all.

I think iStock is trying to deflect trouble rather than solve problems. I think they want to try and ratchet down the contributor discontent and aren't thinking about solving the problems as the way to do that.

I hope they're willing to revisit the sort of conference call they're willing to have. Going from "trust us" to "trust them" isn't much of a step forward IMO.

Very well said, agree with you 100%

Me too. 'We' the contributors need to have some say in what we want out of this too.

jsmithzz · « **Reply #62 on:** March 13, 2011, 18:22 »

Quote from: caspixel on March 13, 2011, 17:01

Quote from: nruboc on March 13, 2011, 16:56
Quote from: caspixel on March 13, 2011, 13:42
My prediction on the favored five:

Stacey NewmanCamrocker
double_p
feverstockphoto
Willowpix

Pesky Monkey, jsnover, TerryJ and jtyler look like they have already declined. I just can't see Sean signing an NDA. So all that will be left are the 'syncopaths'.

You gotta be kidding me, right?

Believe it or not, she has been nominated!

PinkCottonCandy was nominated too if you can believe that. While usually reasonable, her actions of late and her Moderator badge would put her at the bottom of the list in my book.

lisafx · « **Reply #63 on:** March 13, 2011, 18:27 »

Quote from: jamirae on March 13, 2011, 16:17

Three words: class action lawsuit. I am in if anyone can get it rolling.

Those are the only three words that matter at this point. Lots of us will be on that bandwagon, I think.

lisafx · « **Reply #64 on:** March 13, 2011, 18:30 »

Quote from: visceralimage on March 13, 2011, 16:47

Quote from: Blufish on March 13, 2011, 16:39
Anyone else find it interesting that Locke has not been heard from here there or anywhere since this conference call was announced? Hmmmm....

I would not be to chatty either if I had lost $5K this month; I would be spending my time speaking with an attorney, not some stuffed suit at IS

Yes indeed. I think you are exactly right.

caspixel · « **Reply #65 on:** March 13, 2011, 18:33 »

Has anyone wondered about the timing of that announcement? If KK is in Calgary, the announcement was posted at 4:30 local time. What was he doing at that ungodly hour? Drunk posting? Will he regret it tomorrow? LOL

cathyslife · « **Reply #66 on:** March 13, 2011, 18:38 »

Quote from: jsnover on March 13, 2011, 16:19

I'd be happy to participate in a conference call - no NDA - to discuss major contributor problems. Discuss is an operative word - i.e. not just listen. Problems plural is key as well - the clawback of funds and loss of control of our images is very important, but is only one of the major failings on the site at the moment. If they dont' fix search soon, the future doesn't look bright at all.

I think iStock is trying to deflect trouble rather than solve problems. I think they want to try and ratchet down the contributor discontent and aren't thinking about solving the problems as the way to do that.

I hope they're willing to revisit the sort of conference call they're willing to have. Going from "trust us" to "trust them" isn't much of a step forward IMO.

Under those conditions, I agree with you. A conference with those terms might be productive. But I am willing to wager it isn't going to happen that way because I don't think their purpose is to give anything to contributors or negotiate. Their cash cow is threatened and they need to make some move to "look" like they are extending themselves, but really they just want to take 5 key figures off the table.

The security problem and cc fraud is only a part of it all...and in the past few months, NOTHING has effectively been accomplished towards fixing the problems that have been there since the F5 rollout. That has NOTHING to do with a fraud investigation and having to keep that private.

Deflecting is a good word.

SNP · « **Reply #67 on:** March 13, 2011, 18:45 »

I think the group chosen should include contributors that represent all types of interests including vector. vector artists are certainly marginalized these days. yes, I've been nominated, and I'm glad there are contributors who trust me. I truly appreciate it. I don't feel I have the expertise to participate regarding this specific issue. I wouldn't accept the role because I don't believe I'm a good choice in this instance. it's moot anyways. there are five people who've been nominated more than any other five and I think they're all good choices.

I understand the reasoning behind not allowing non-exclusives, but I would have liked a non-exclusive on the panel. Jo Ann, FWIW, I think it's a mistake that you not accept the role as given to you by your peers. IMO and with respect, I think you're focusing on the NDA instead of the opportunity to truly advocate regarding an important issue. in any case, I guess we'll see how it goes.

loop · « **Reply #68 on:** March 13, 2011, 19:02 »

The NDA can be necessary. Or not. It's difficult to tell without knowing what has happened (although I suspect that there's something more in the thieves motivations than the scheme "stolen credit-cards/illegal downloads for profit). At least, the elected contributors will be able to say if they are satisfied or not with what they wil be told. That would be enough for me.

ShadySue · « **Reply #69 on:** March 13, 2011, 19:08 »

Quote from: SNP on March 13, 2011, 18:45

I think the group chosen should include contributors that represent all types of interests including vector. vector artists are certainly marginalized these days.

I've nothing against that, but in the context of the fraud, which I believe is all the conference call is about, I don't think it's vitally important. I'm not even sure whether the (top) Vector/Video/Audio/Flash contributors were affected proportionately to the (top) photographers by the fraud (?)

donding · « **Reply #70 on:** March 13, 2011, 19:09 »

Does iStock really think they will calm the masses by doing this conference call with 5 exclusives then have them sign a NDS? Why in the world would they even do that if those 5 weren't able to tell anyone else what is going on? That is so ridicules. I feel sorry for the 5 that do go along with this...they will find their in boxes full of PMs asking what was discussed...If it is a security issue they do not want to tell the community about, then why would they tell any one about it, especially if those could not repeat it?

caspixel · « **Reply #71 on:** March 13, 2011, 19:15 »

I wonder if the NDA will contain a clause about not suing or arbitration or something like that.

visceralimage · « **Reply #72 on:** March 13, 2011, 19:32 »

iMHO, this is a very poorly conceived move on IS part. Any five contributors that are selected are going to be active contributors, contributors with large port. on IS and contributors that have lost thousands during the past frauds not including the losses incurred because of the poor management and non-functioning IT department.

I would not be able to contain myself on such a call; i might start calm and collected but I am sure near the middle of the call my line would be disconnected. Despite the purpose of the conference call; how could it not turn into a "bitch fest"

cathyslife · « **Reply #73 on:** March 13, 2011, 19:35 »

Here we go again.

istock announces more clawbacks. Uproar in the forums and threats of lawsuits and audits. Whoa, we better do something. kk posts in forum on the weekend. Invites contributor participation, insinuating that something is actually going to happen. Hundreds of posts ensue.

Oh, the drama. Really, these people should be in Hollywood, writing a reality show.

What ever happened to contributors uploading images, selling, and getting paid. Really, it's a simple concept. Look what greed has done.

blackwaterimages · « **Reply #74 on:** March 13, 2011, 19:50 »

Aside from the fact that I think this is a less than transparent, strategic move by iStock - I can't imagine anyone thinking this through and being willing to take it on. They'd be tied to whatever the NDA says, held responsible by the iStock community, likely unable to share much of anything (good or bad) and forever tied to the iStock admin in that "remember - we did you a favor..." kind of way. Nothing good will come of this and its just further manipulation by Bruce's band buddies who've graduated to running iStock. What a huge mess that's become. I'm embarrassed to have ever endorsed iStock on any level.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: istock organises conference call with selected few (Read 82663 times)

Phil

PeterChigmaroff

jamirae

Jo Ann Snover

Blufish

gostwyck

visceralimage

KB

nruboc

caspixel

nico_blue

gostwyck

jsmithzz

lisafx

lisafx

caspixel

cathyslife

SNP

loop

ShadySue

donding

caspixel

visceralimage

cathyslife

blackwaterimages

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors