Quote from: caspixel on March 14, 2011, 12:35

Too funny that rogermexico is now talking about more contributor panels. The talk of class action lawsuits and audits in particular must have them running scared. Clearly they have something to hide. If I were a contributor I would not be mollified by these empty attempts to placate. They have the forums for to communicate with contributors, why do they suddenly need contributor panels? This just means more and more critics are going to have to sign NDAs. And how is anyone even going to know what they are being told is the truth.

You guys need to go for the jugular and follow through on the threats to get any real action. I bet an audit would show some really interesting things...

The audit is what I really want.  If they want to have panels, then fine -- I think those are helpful, especially with regard to site functionality. Ideally, the panels would be composed of buyers and contributors (a unique and unheard of concept, I'm sure .  But as far as the fraud, yeah . . . I'm interested in getting Sean's et al impression of the plans, but what about the money problems of the last 6 months? We need an independent audit, just so we have a good place to start over again.

But according to iStock, they already do extensive research with regards to site functionality and other features, right? According to them, in the whole course of implementing the new F5 designers, users, and contributors (?) were consulted on the new design and asked to test the new features. Or was that a lie too?

Too funny that rogermexico is now talking about more contributor panels. The talk of class action lawsuits and audits in particular must have them running scared. Clearly they have something to hide. If I were a contributor I would not be mollified by these empty attempts to placate. They have the forums for to communicate with contributors, why do they suddenly need contributor panels? This just means more and more critics are going to have to sign NDAs. And how is anyone even going to know what they are being told is the truth.

You guys need to go for the jugular and follow through on the threats to get any real action. I bet an audit would show some really interesting things...

Actually, we talked doing this early last month when we were chatting about something else - it's not a new thought.

Quote from: caspixel on March 14, 2011, 12:35

Too funny that rogermexico is now talking about more contributor panels. The talk of class action lawsuits and audits in particular must have them running scared. Clearly they have something to hide. If I were a contributor I would not be mollified by these empty attempts to placate. They have the forums for to communicate with contributors, why do they suddenly need contributor panels? This just means more and more critics are going to have to sign NDAs. And how is anyone even going to know what they are being told is the truth.

You guys need to go for the jugular and follow through on the threats to get any real action. I bet an audit would show some really interesting things...

Actually, we talked doing this early last month when we were chatting about something else - it's not a new thought.

Talked about more contributor panels or about an audit?

Quote from: caspixel on March 14, 2011, 12:35

Too funny that rogermexico is now talking about more contributor panels. The talk of class action lawsuits and audits in particular must have them running scared. Clearly they have something to hide. If I were a contributor I would not be mollified by these empty attempts to placate. They have the forums for to communicate with contributors, why do they suddenly need contributor panels? This just means more and more critics are going to have to sign NDAs. And how is anyone even going to know what they are being told is the truth.

You guys need to go for the jugular and follow through on the threats to get any real action. I bet an audit would show some really interesting things...

Actually, we talked doing this early last month when we were chatting about something else - it's not a new thought.

I assume you are talking about the contributor panels. Frankly, I don't see what it will solve or how it will improve anything. It's not like they were ever prohibited from contacting contributors about anything in the past and they can certainly use their forums to communicate things as well.

They are hearing the war drums beating louder and louder with each successive c*ck up. Now, with people screaming about audits they figure they better make good on what was supposed to be an empty promise.

Panel, schmanel.

I want an independent audit. Then, per the findings of said audit, I want to take IS to court. Class-action style, if the findings of the audit support such course of action.

The panel and anything short of an independent audit is nice in theory, perhaps, but leads me to believe even more firmly that IS is hiding something and scared of the lot of us seeking to tear back the curtain and see just exactly what they've been doing [wrong].

If I knew how to go about beginning such a course, I'd be all over it. My hope is that folks like Sean and Nico and others with the most money to lose will band together and make this happen. We are all (or would be) behind you to support such an effort and help out in any way that we can.

Panel, schmanel.

I want an independent audit. Then, per the findings of said audit, I want to take IS to court. Class-action style, if the findings of the audit support such course of action.

The panel and anything short of an independent audit is nice in theory, perhaps, but leads me to believe even more firmly that IS is hiding something and scared of the lot of us seeking to tear back the curtain and see just exactly what they've been doing [wrong].

If I knew how to go about beginning such a course, I'd be all over it. My hope is that folks like Sean and Nico and others with the most money to lose will band together and make this happen. We are all (or would be) behind you to support such an effort and help out in any way that we can.

Could not agree more!  +1

Quote from: cclapper on March 14, 2011, 12:57

Again with the notion that the dollar amount lost has any relativity to the right to speak up. <sigh>

This is about business not universal suffrage. In business your right to act/speak/vote is entirely relative to "the dollar amount" that you are invested. If you own more shares than someone else then you get a bigger say (via votes). If you own 50.1% of a business then you can do anything you want and the other shareholders can do nothing about it.

Simmer down, this is a forum. I'm posting on a forum. 

Quote from: caspixel on March 14, 2011, 12:35

Too funny that rogermexico is now talking about more contributor panels. The talk of class action lawsuits and audits in particular must have them running scared. Clearly they have something to hide. If I were a contributor I would not be mollified by these empty attempts to placate. They have the forums for to communicate with contributors, why do they suddenly need contributor panels? This just means more and more critics are going to have to sign NDAs. And how is anyone even going to know what they are being told is the truth.

You guys need to go for the jugular and follow through on the threats to get any real action. I bet an audit would show some really interesting things...

Actually, we talked doing this early last month when we were chatting about something else - it's not a new thought.

  Well. i don't do much chatting with the people who run Istock. All i want is an honest system that is run according to rules that don't change to benefit only one side of the equation. Maybe this will help. maybe not. But there's already too much of an in crowd there who only wants to do whats right for them. I'd rather see an audit by an independent arbitrator who can go all the way into the details of the operation and make sure that Istock is not playing more games than we already know about. There should also be a clear policy going forward about fraud in the future, and a true accounting of any underlying fraud insurance that may already exist, and real figures on who is paying what. I would think that exclusives care as much about that as non exclusives, but it wouldn't be the first time that they end up with a better deal for exclusives.

Quote from: sjlocke on March 14, 2011, 12:54

Actually, we talked doing this early last month when we were chatting about something else - it's not a new thought.

I assume you are talking about the contributor panels. Frankly, I don't see what it will solve or how it will improve anything. It's not like they were ever prohibited from contacting contributors about anything in the past and they can certainly use their forums to communicate things as well.

Yes the panels.  There seems to be a disconnect between the people writing the software, and those using it, and there is the thought that getting the two together might improve the experience (aside from obviously fixing anything that just generally isn't working right).

Simmer down, this is a forum. I'm posting on a forum. 

Sorry __ that was supposed to be my 'gentle and patient' voice. I was just concerned because the same point had been mentioned several times.

Can't say I'm particularly bothered about the 'Secret Squirrel Club' as I don't really see what it is likely to achieve. In my view the contrast between Istock and all other agencies regarding the recent fraud issues is profound. On that basis alone I consider the problem to be Istock's negligence and Istock's problem to deal with __ preferably very quickly. This hand-wringing exercise should not be necessary.

If Istock can't even provide such basics as a working search facility (apparently after months of trying) and real-time statistics (which they just gave up trying to achieve couple of years ago) then why should we credit them with any confidence in their site security?

Wait a minute. So now this panel is going to do IT's job for them, for free? Aren't the people who have been hired study the interactivity and how best to make it work? While I certainly agree that you, Sean, have more of a grasp on it all than they do, frankly, a panel isn't needed for that. You are needed for that. They can hire you as a consultant to fix the bloody mess.

That is a great point! Now they get consultants for FREE, WHILE they STILL take their massive commission. The guys in the backroom are having a great laugh about his.

The only thing that is going to make them change their behavior at this point is an audit, which may potentially lead to a lawsuit.

I think of it more as a user focus group.  But whatever, I guess.  I have no problems sitting down in a chat or whatever and pointing out where I am having usability problems.

that is what I was thinking, too.  a focus group.

I think of it more as a user focus group.  But whatever, I guess.  I have no problems sitting down in a chat or whatever and pointing out where I am having usability problems.

But you can post them on the forums? And have been for months, no? What makes these panels any different? Except, oh, you might have to sign an NDA and get some super special 'iStock secrets'.