MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => iStockPhoto.com => Topic started by: cathyslife on April 27, 2011, 09:37
-
What happened? :)
-
It's broken today.
-
what are you talking about? ???
-
It's called the "iStock effect" or "iStock paradox".
Many, many years ago iStock had the power to create this everlasting effect that would cause all criticism turn into a indistinguishable white noise end eventually disappear into silence.
We have now (again), witnessed this (former) rare event one more time.
Experts are optimistic though that we will once again see this occurrence take place at least one more time within the next few years. Further scientific data will gathered so that mankind one day might understand the cause for this effect.
-
It's called the "iStock effect" or "iStock paradox".
Many, many years ago iStock had the power to create this everlasting effect that would cause all criticism turn into a indistinguishable white noise end eventually disappear into silence.
We have now (again), witnessed this (former) rare event one more time.
Experts are optimistic though that we will once again see this occurrence take place at least one more time within the next few years. Further scientific data will gathered so that mankind one day might understand the cause for this effect.
:)
-
It's probably F*ck-up Fatigue.
-
No, it's just broken. The connector is offline so today's crisis can't be loaded. They're working on it and you should get the whole backlog of crises (including some that have been stuck in the connector for months) once it's back online. If you still don't get a crisis after it's reconnected you should send a ticket to support.
-
No, it's just broken. The connector is offline so today's crisis can't be loaded. They're working on it and you should get the whole backlog of crises (including some that have been stuck in the connector for months) once it's back online. If you still don't get a crisis after it's reconnected you should send a ticket to support.
:)
-
No, it's just broken. The connector is offline so today's crisis can't be loaded. They're working on it and you should get the whole backlog of crises (including some that have been stuck in the connector for months) once it's back online. If you still don't get a crisis after it's reconnected you should send a ticket to support.
and of course for the sake of safety start a new thread in case the old crises threads cannot be restored.
You sure don't want to leave us without any complaints about iStock, do you?
-
The sense of humour connector also appears to be offline ....
-
What happened? :)
Thank you, but my sales at IS are a crisis in themselves :'( ;D
-
Thank you, but my sales at IS are a crisis in themselves :'( ;D
Unfortunately my too :(
February was my BME, and so far April looks like my worst month since Jun-2008. Though there is still a chance for a few ELs :)
-
It's probably F*ck-up Fatigue.
:D
In my case - sales have totally tanked there - but I'm bored with thinking about it and talking about it. Just focusing on things that do work and where my input will make some positive difference.
-
...sales have totally tanked there - but I'm bored with thinking about it and talking about it. ...
Ahh, do I see a little complaining? I think it's starting to work again ;D
-
Thank you, but my sales at IS are a crisis in themselves :'( ;D
Unfortunately my too :(
Me three. Sales drop is the worst I have ever seen in six years. Looks like I will finish the month with around half what I would normally expect at IS. Other sites are doing a bit better, but unfortunately not enough to compensate for the free fall at Istock.
-
The sense of humour connector also appears to be offline ....
I guess so.
-
...sales have totally tanked there - but I'm bored with thinking about it and talking about it. ...
Ahh, do I see a little complaining? I think it's starting to work again ;D
:D
Just dragged myself out to answer the question... I'll shut up again now :D
-
and of course for the sake of safety start a new thread in case the old crises threads cannot be restored.
You sure don't want to leave us without any complaints about iStock, do you?
Not in this lifetime. ;)
-
Thank you, but my sales at IS are a crisis in themselves :'( ;D
Unfortunately my too :(
Me three. Sales drop is the worst I have ever seen in six years. Looks like I will finish the month with around half what I would normally expect at IS. Other sites are doing a bit better, but unfortunately not enough to compensate for the free fall at Istock.
-----------------------------------
me 4. My sales are off 90% this week from where they were in Feb. My income from all other sites combined will likely exceed what I will earn from Istock this week and I've only been uploading to other sites for a few months while exclusive with Istock for more than 5 years... :-\
-
was to be expected.
-
April historically is my second best month of the year. This April is my worst month in two years. Sales and politics have become so bad at iStock I can no longer justify uploading. I am going to give another month or two and drop my crown if the trend doesn't change. Btw, I uploaded 300 new files in the last three months with no positive impact on sales.
-
June - August are my bottom months.
You probably won't see the upward sales until September. New images will take 3-6 months to get really going in my experience.
April historically is my second best month of the year. This April is my worst month in two years. Sales and politics have become so bad at iStock I can no longer justify uploading. I am going to give another month or two and drop my crown if the trend doesn't change. Btw, I uploaded 300 new files in the last three months with no positive impact on sales.
-
Me three. Sales drop is the worst I have ever seen in six years. Looks like I will finish the month with around half what I would normally expect at IS. Other sites are doing a bit better, but unfortunately not enough to compensate for the free fall at Istock.
Me four. My sales at Istock are projected to be 33% down compared to April 2010. I'm just grateful that SS appear to be taking up some of the slack.
-
I'm just grateful that Shutterstock appear to be taking up some of the slack.
Yes indeed. Also true for me (I'm very happy to say).
-
Well (IS), mine never was very good and is going downhill; DT is only site with any real sales and it is down from before; this month sucks
-
On the other hand, spring is here, (CT, USA) the trees are turning green and none of my kids have gotten into trouble for over a week! ;D
-
I'm just grateful that Shutterstock appear to be taking up some of the slack.
Yes indeed. Also true for me (I'm very happy to say).
Well, thatīs just the problem. Even if buyers are leaving iStock and others are taking up SOME of the slack, it takes money from the whole industry. Shutterstock mostly sells subscriptions and compared to the price per image on iStock thatīs way less.
On the other hand - we had a similar situation last year when a lot of people were complaining about a very bad April after a BME March (for almost all contributors) if I remember right.
-
^^^Shutterstock are one of the biggest pay per download sites now. They don't have those tiny blog pay per download commissions that istock have. My portfolio isn't behind a lot of exclusive content. I really don't mind if buyers go there, as I also have a much bigger portfolio there with all my recent uploads. I stopped uploading to istock over 6 months ago.
-
^^^Shutterstock are one of the biggest pay per download sites now. They don't have those tiny blog pay per download commissions that istock have. My portfolio isn't behind a lot of exclusive content. I really don't mind if buyers go there, as I also have a much bigger portfolio there with all my recent uploads. I stopped uploading to istock over 6 months ago.
All very good points.
My only problem is some of my istock buyers seem to have gotten lost on the way to shutterstock and never made it there. Maybe they are at thinkstock instead?
-
...On the other hand - we had a similar situation last year when a lot of people were complaining about a very bad April after a BME March (for almost all contributors) if I remember right.
It's true that March 2010 was spectacular for a lot of people, but I can't see any similarity between 2010 and 2011 beyond the presence of complaints.
What we're complaining about this year is what appears to be a massive own goal on iStock's part as Getty/H&F try to soak every last penny out of the business regardless of any long term damage they inflict. Last year it was complaining that April wasn't anything like as good as the amazing March.
-
It's true that March 2010 was spectacular for a lot of people, but I can't see any similarity between 2010 and 2011 beyond the presence of complaints.
What we're complaining about this year is what appears to be a massive own goal on iStock's part as Getty/H&F try to soak every last penny out of the business regardless of any long term damage they inflict. Last year it was complaining that April wasn't anything like as good as the amazing March.
Sort of makes me nostalgic for the complaints about ebb and flow and summer slumps from yesteryear...
Reminds me the old cliche where the dad tells the crying kid "I'll give you something to cry about". Looks like Getty gave us something to cry about.
-
Some valid points. All in all I think beside iStock grabbing a bigger part of the cake, our biggest problem for now are all the bugs on that site. Iīd love to see their real numbers - I bet they went way down since the beginning of the year. But I still feel that money is taken from the whole industry.
-
^^^Shutterstock are one of the biggest pay per download sites now. They don't have those tiny blog pay per download commissions that istock have. My portfolio isn't behind a lot of exclusive content. I really don't mind if buyers go there, as I also have a much bigger portfolio there with all my recent uploads. I stopped uploading to istock over 6 months ago.
All very good points.
My only problem is some of my istock buyers seem to have gotten lost on the way to shutterstock and never made it there. Maybe they are at thinkstock instead?
Some buyers have said that once they get fed up with a micro site they skip the rest and go right to free alternatives like Flickr.
-
^^^Shutterstock are one of the biggest pay per download sites now. They don't have those tiny blog pay per download commissions that istock have. My portfolio isn't behind a lot of exclusive content. I really don't mind if buyers go there, as I also have a much bigger portfolio there with all my recent uploads. I stopped uploading to istock over 6 months ago.
All very good points.
My only problem is some of my istock buyers seem to have gotten lost on the way to shutterstock and never made it there. Maybe they are at thinkstock instead?
Some buyers have said that once they get fed up with a micro site they skip the rest and go right to free alternatives like Flickr.
seriously? I've never heard that one before.
-
Some buyers have said that once they get fed up with a micro site they skip the rest and go right to free alternatives like Flickr.
Is Flickr really a free alternative to the micros? I had thought Flikr is a site to display photos. They aren't offering royalty-free licenses, are they? I know individuals who have been approached about licensing images on Flikr, but mostly they ask for money. Especially now that Getty has dangled the "pro stock producer" carrot under the noses of Flikr submitters.
I'd be very surprised if Flikr would be considered a viable option for most professional image buyers/users. Is this really such a widespread phenomenon?
-
Some buyers have said that once they get fed up with a micro site they skip the rest and go right to free alternatives like Flickr.
Is Flickr really a free alternative to the micros? I had thought Flikr is a site to display photos. They aren't offering royalty-free licenses, are they? I know individuals who have been approached about licensing images on Flikr, but mostly they ask for money. Especially now that Getty has dangled the "pro stock producer" carrot under the noses of Flikr submitters.
I'd be very surprised if Flikr would be considered a viable option for most professional image buyers/users. Is this really such a widespread phenomenon?
I'm just using Flickr as an example. But you don't sound familiar with Creative Commons
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/) which is what Flickr uses. If the image owner chooses they can set the CC license to allow images to be licensed commercially for free.
But my point is there are dozens of free sites. A risk is that if a micro site(s), or even contributors, drive buyers away from a specific micro site that you can't assume they will always go to another micro site. They may be irked enough to spend a little extra time searching for that good-enough free image.
-
Some buyers have said that once they get fed up with a micro site they skip the rest and go right to free alternatives like Flickr.
Is Flickr really a free alternative to the micros? I had thought Flikr is a site to display photos. They aren't offering royalty-free licenses, are they? I know individuals who have been approached about licensing images on Flikr, but mostly they ask for money. Especially now that Getty has dangled the "pro stock producer" carrot under the noses of Flikr submitters.
I'd be very surprised if Flikr would be considered a viable option for most professional image buyers/users. Is this really such a widespread phenomenon?
I'm just using Flickr as an example. But you don't sound familiar with Creative Commons
([url]http://creativecommons.org/licenses/[/url]) which is what Flickr uses. If the image owner chooses they can set the CC license to allow images to be licensed commercially for free.
But my point is there are dozens of free sites. A risk is that if a micro site(s), or even contributors, drive buyers away from a specific micro site that you can't assume they will always go to another micro site. They may be irked enough to spend a little extra time searching for that good-enough free image.
well that may be all well and good but navigating through some of these 'free' sties is often more trouble than it's worth so I'm surprised that "buyers" have the patience for that.
On the other hand, I had to do a presentation this week and had no budget for photos but I really needed some to spice up the presentation (why use a bunch of text on a slide when a good photo can say so much more?) Anyhow, I wandered over to the free image section of Dreamstime and was able to find all the images I needed right there in the free section. I also noticed that when I searched, they include, at the bottom of the page, additional images that are not free, just in case I dont find what I really need. also - when I downloaded images - on the download page they show other images, many times from the same photographer within the same series or similar images that I could purchase as well. Of course, I only took the free ones for this project, but I think that Dreamstime has an excellent approach to the market in this respect. heck, I may even donate an image or two to the freebie section there just to see if it will help get some traffic and sales to some of my other photos.
so.. my point is that if the buyers are looking for free stuff, Dreamstime could garner some new customers if they did a marketing campaign/push on their free stuff in hopes of getting some cross-over sales.
-
I'm just using Flickr as an example. But you don't sound familiar with Creative Commons
([url]http://creativecommons.org/licenses/[/url]) which is what Flickr uses. If the image owner chooses they can set the CC license to allow images to be licensed commercially for free.
Really? You got from that exchange that I am unfamiliar with Creative Commons? Interesting.
Actually, it is the ins and outs of Flikr I am unfamiliar with. I have never uploaded anything to Fliker, and my only experience with them is the numerous times I have had to send DMCA letters because someone uploaded my images as their own.
-
I'm just using Flickr as an example. But you don't sound familiar with Creative Commons
([url]http://creativecommons.org/licenses/[/url]) which is what Flickr uses. If the image owner chooses they can set the CC license to allow images to be licensed commercially for free.
Really? You got from that exchange that I am unfamiliar with Creative Commons? Interesting.
Actually, it is the ins and outs of Flikr I am unfamiliar with. I have never uploaded anything to Fliker, and my only experience with them is the numerous times I have had to send DMCA letters because someone uploaded my images as their own.
Do people just come here to argue and split hairs anymore? Here's what you said
Is Flickr really a free alternative to the micros? I had thought Flikr is a site to display photos. They aren't offering royalty-free licenses, are they?
Maybe you're being sarcastic and I didn't pick up on it but it sounds to me like you're not familiar with it.
Regardless of what the license is called if a designer can find a suitable image on Flickr under a commercial license they can use it.
If Flickr was useless for stock I don't think Getty would be recruiting people and licensing images through it.
-
Regardless of what the license is called if a designer can find a suitable image on Flickr under a commercial license they can use it.
Clearly with a caveat emptor and caveat vendor if some MR or IP issue was in a photo which was used commercially.
-
Look! since IS, fell apart, I have had twice as many ELs and three times more "demand sales" at Shutterstock and many report the same story, dont tell me thats coincidence, its not.
TS, forget it! Im dealing with buyers in two countries, Scandinavia and England, I get a small but reasonable view and I can tell you, Thinkstock, is regarded as the ultimate amateur place, the happy home of the weekend-snappers. Serious buyers dont even consult Thinkstock.
Fair enough I have a very nieched portfolio and I get private mails all the time, every single day from buyers wanting this and that within my nieche, they want special price for say 10 shots, a bit of this, a bit of that, etc. Ultimatly I can tell by the conversation that some have scouted around IS but not being able to find, since their best match nowdays only flaunt Vettas and agency files on first 5 pages and they are of very poor quality when it comes to industrial shots.
Some of these mails result in sales but others will mail me back saying, Oh its OK! we found them on Shutterstock, Fotolia, Dreamstime or whatever. This is not coincidence!
See, dont underestimate buyers, part of their job is to stay tuned to the market and whats happening, etc.
-
Although I'm not a fan of subscription sales --the demise of microstock--, including Thinkstock, the fact is that I'm seeing a lot of Thinkstock stuff at magazines that used to have other ms sites, especially Shutterstock.
-
So do I but it means nothing, its only the result of their recent PR-drives, etc. I would imagine the plan is to soon incorporate IS with Thinkstock and thats the greatest favour Getty can do us independants, once IS lose its identity, thats it.
Its a crying shame really, the IS we once knew stood for something much more valuable then money, namely security and stabillity but with this new management, its become quite the opposite.
-
I'm sorta jumping in late on this conversation about Flickr and this story I'm about to relate is exactly 2 years old April 2009), but I thought I'd toss it out there for everyone.
I was at an event where the guest speaker was Keith Bellows - Editor in Chief of National Geographic Traveler Magazine. A friend organized the event and seated myself and my wife at the same dinner table as Mr. Bellows. We got the conversation around to photography and how they commission and buy images. He surprised me by saying the first place they look is Flickr. They only send photographers out for specific images they can't find or know don't exist, such as a specific person at a specific location. He said if they needed an image of 'Joe's Winery' (his example) in Sonoma they could probably find it on Flickr. They would rather contact the photographer and negotiate directly with them. He continued on to say that with the millions of images on Flickr the they could surely find one good enough for the publication. They really didn't care who the photographer is, if the image suits their needs.
So if he's saying that two years ago I imagine there are other buyers out there doing the same thing.
Steve
-
Sure, flickr's great to find pictures from people who just walk around shooting and upload random things from their day. If that's what they want...
-
Two years ago many microstock sites were accepting pretty much everything, so the difference in quality between Flickr and commercial stock images was probably smaller than now.
That said, I think Flickr is still a good place to find special pictures that microstock sites don't want: the alternative, artistic kind.
-
I'm sorta jumping in late on this conversation about Flickr and this story I'm about to relate is exactly 2 years old April 2009), but I thought I'd toss it out there for everyone.
I was at an event where the guest speaker was Keith Bellows - Editor in Chief of National Geographic Traveler Magazine. A friend organized the event and seated myself and my wife at the same dinner table as Mr. Bellows. We got the conversation around to photography and how they commission and buy images. He surprised me by saying the first place they look is Flickr. They only send photographers out for specific images they can't find or know don't exist, such as a specific person at a specific location. He said if they needed an image of 'Joe's Winery' (his example) in Sonoma they could probably find it on Flickr. They would rather contact the photographer and negotiate directly with them. He continued on to say that with the millions of images on Flickr the they could surely find one good enough for the publication. They really didn't care who the photographer is, if the image suits their needs.
So if he's saying that two years ago I imagine there are other buyers out there doing the same thing.
Steve
Thanks for relating this story Steve. It is certainly a revelation to me. I guess with National Geographic being editorial, there's no need for releases, but with the prevalence of stolen images uploaded to Flikr, it seems risky to use them.
I would hope that commercial buyers would be more careful, but who knows?
@ Paulie, yes, I know that Getty recruits photographers through Flikr, but I would hope there is some sort of vetting process - at least determining image ownership, and releases if the images are going to be sold for commercial purposes. As I said, I have no personal experience uploading to Flikr, so I don't know for sure.
There was a thread here awhile back where micro submitters who also upload to Flikr were posting, and I recall that most of them got very few actual sales requests there, and most of those were lowball. Perhaps that has changed? I would love to hear from anyone with recent experience about this.
-
Sure, flickr's great to find pictures from people who just walk around shooting and upload random things from their day. If that's what they want...
... and often it is although there is much more than just that on Flickr.
That typically indy style is very hip and commercial. And it has been on and off right back into the 80s. And work done by people who are doing what they love without thinking initially about money is often some of the best. I spend hours looking at Flickr just because the work is often so interesting. And there are some very well known photographers with Flickr accounts too.
There is also lots of very stylish and cool work on Flickr. Much of it available to licence now via Getty RF or RM either directly or via the Getty request to licence (via Getty).
I wonder whether there is much cross-over between Creative Commons and paid content. IE people looking for CC content who end up paying to use work. My hunch from talking to people is that many buyers are not especially price sensitive within certain broad parameters.
-
Sure, flickr's great to find pictures from people who just walk around shooting and upload random things from their day. If that's what they want...
I'm guessing such as Nat Geog don't have much need for models in studios and setups. Horses for courses.
Years ago, a guy I met showed me a super photo he had which Nat Geog had sourced from his totally personal website, which looked as though the oft-mentioned "12 year old nephew" had done in FrontPage. No matter, it was the photo they needed, and they paid what I assume was the 'going rate'.
-
Thank you, but my sales at IS are a crisis in themselves :'( ;D
Unfortunately my too :(
Me three. Sales drop is the worst I have ever seen in six years. Looks like I will finish the month with around half what I would normally expect at IS. Other sites are doing a bit better, but unfortunately not enough to compensate for the free fall at Istock.
me 4, sales are 50% of march and about 65% of most months, the last 2 weeks have been the worst I've had since 2007 (including previous christmas and easter.)
-
Forgive me as I go a little off topic but this is a Nat. Geo story. About 20 years ago, during the age of transparencies, a friend was commissioned to go shoot tigers in India for a Nat. Geo assignment. As you know, you can not just pop into the nearest Starbucks and hire a tiger for a couple days of modeling; they, he and his guides. were in the woods for a bit of time. Every week, they had to send in their rolls of film via FedEx to this editor. Now understand, wildlife photographers on assignment for one specific species are going to photograph something, just to keep practiced with the light angles, timing, etc. So this photographer was photographing monkeys. Week after week, month after month, this editor was reviewing hundreds of rolls of film, thousands of transparencies, of mostly monkeys. Monkeys in the trees, monkeys swinging, monkeys scratching their private parts, and so on.
This photographer continued his assignment for months, after about three months he got a message to call the editor. During his telephone call, the editor told him "I don't want to see another *(& %^$* picture of a monkey unless it is in the jaws of a tiger"
I hope you enjoy this true story and think of it also when you are having a dry spell shooting the subject you desire.
-
True! I also had a bit of a nasty wit Nat-Geo, back in the 90s, filmdays, I did some work with an agency called Magnum and Nat-geo, wanted a lot of Industry-pollution, reportages, etc. I spent 1 month in South-America for them.
Well, time to invoice, I was told that, here, its an honor to work and one seldom discuss any money at all. Since you cant survive on honors, needless to say I stayed well away from them in future, Im skinny as it was.
-
That typically indy style is very hip and commercial.
True. And I like it.
I wonder if regular agencies are losing a lot of potential sales by not accepting that.
-
..... I did some work with an agency called Magnum....
Wow, I think that's the most impressive thing I have seen anyone say here. Their list of photographers is amazing.
-
I did some work with an agency called Magnum
I did an internship in the London office. One of the most inspiring experiences of my life, with hindsight. Although I was rather too immature at the time to fully appreciate it. The office staff were as serious and interesting as the photographers, is one of the things which struck me btw. I think people often forget that sort of thing.
-
..... I did some work with an agency called Magnum....
Wow, I think that's the most impressive thing I have seen anyone say here. Their list of photographers is amazing.
Well I wasnt exactly one of Robert Capa originals but was contracted for industrial environmental work for them now and then. It was OK but as I said rendered very little revenues.
-
Well I wasnt exactly one of Frank Capras originals but did industrial environmental work for them now and then. It was OK but as I said rendered very little revenues.
Um I think you mean Robert Capa. Frank Capra was a film maker (A Wonderful Life etc) :)
-
Well I wasnt exactly one of Frank Capras originals but did industrial environmental work for them now and then. It was OK but as I said rendered very little revenues.
Um I think you mean Robert Capa. Frank Capra was a film maker (A Wonderful Life etc) :)
[/quot
Ofcourse Robert Capa, changing it. btw, what a fantastic film that is, makes you feel good, one of my favorites.
-
Ha, reviving an old thread to point out a recent Lobo post.
Conversation on the targets announcement thread:
Posted By DebbiSmirnoff:
Please also note most contributors who voiced a negative opinion last time were merely banned so their voice could not be heard anymore
Posted by Lobo:
Wrong. People who couldn't conduct themselves with civility were banned. And that number was 7 over 3 weeks.
Huh, are these posts "uncivil"?
Posted by me ages ago:
Question on the Japanlypse thread:
"Who pays for the 'lypse'?
Me: "The participants pay for their air fare and hotel bills, we pay for the rest"
(These were deleted instantly and I got a warning)
Then a week or two later:
Question: "I've lost feature X: where has it gone?"
Me: "It's gone as an F4 'improvement'". (or F whatever that alleged 'improvement' was).
(It turned out that actually Sean had written a Greasemonkey script for that, which I didn't know; but honestly, were these answers "uncivil"?
Pots, kettles; glass houses, stones.
-
Lobo claims only seven people were banned? In what world?
-
Lobo* just took out a post altogether that he locked a short while ago - if I were CEO of iStock by dcdp. There was nothing rude or defamatory, just a list of specific suggestions about how to do things differently. They clearly aren't going to permit discussions of that sort, no matter how polite.
* I know lobo locked the post as I read the short "lock it" post he made. I don't know that he deleted the post afterwards, only that the post is gone.
-
Lobo* just took out a post altogether that he locked a short while ago - if I were CEO of iStock by dcdp. There was nothing rude or defamatory, just a list of specific suggestions about how to do things differently. They clearly aren't going to permit discussions of that sort, no matter how polite.
* I know lobo locked the post as I read the short "lock it" post he made. I don't know that he deleted the post afterwards, only that the post is gone.
Yup, I saw the post, saw the 'lock it' note, and now it's gone.
-
Oh boy. It's really getting bad over there. Dystopian even.
-
Lobo* just took out a post altogether that he locked a short while ago - if I were CEO of iStock by dcdp. There was nothing rude or defamatory, just a list of specific suggestions about how to do things differently. They clearly aren't going to permit discussions of that sort, no matter how polite.
* I know lobo locked the post as I read the short "lock it" post he made. I don't know that he deleted the post afterwards, only that the post is gone.
This from the Off Topic forum (Push for gold)
Posted By dcdp:
"If I were CEO of iStock, the first 5 things I would change would be ..."
Feel free to add your thoughts here
Posted by Lobo:
Sorry. I think you might want to hold off on starting any threads that are liable to just become an offshoot of the main thread. I get where you are coming from but at this point we are going to have to only have one thread going at a time.
-
Lobo* just took out a post altogether that he locked a short while ago - if I were CEO of iStock by dcdp. There was nothing rude or defamatory, just a list of specific suggestions about how to do things differently. They clearly aren't going to permit discussions of that sort, no matter how polite.
* I know lobo locked the post as I read the short "lock it" post he made. I don't know that he deleted the post afterwards, only that the post is gone.
This from the Off Topic forum (Push for gold)
Posted By dcdp:
"If I were CEO of iStock, the first 5 things I would change would be ..."
Feel free to add your thoughts here
Posted by Lobo:
Sorry. I think you might want to hold off on starting any threads that are liable to just become an offshoot of the main thread. I get where you are coming from but at this point we are going to have to only have one thread going at a time.
Yeah that was me. I chatted back and forth with Lobo about it and accept his reasonings for pulling the post. We may get it up again at a later stage, but for now he's told me he is canning it.
-
Lobo* just took out a post altogether that he locked a short while ago - if I were CEO of iStock by dcdp. There was nothing rude or defamatory, just a list of specific suggestions about how to do things differently. They clearly aren't going to permit discussions of that sort, no matter how polite.
* I know lobo locked the post as I read the short "lock it" post he made. I don't know that he deleted the post afterwards, only that the post is gone.
This from the Off Topic forum (Push for gold)
Posted By dcdp:
"If I were CEO of iStock, the first 5 things I would change would be ..."
Feel free to add your thoughts here
Posted by Lobo:
Sorry. I think you might want to hold off on starting any threads that are liable to just become an offshoot of the main thread. I get where you are coming from but at this point we are going to have to only have one thread going at a time.
Yeah that was me. I chatted back and forth with Lobo about it and accept his reasonings for pulling the post. We may get it up again at a later stage, but for now he's told me he is canning it.
well if it was an "offshoot" why didn't you just repost it in the main thread since it sounds like he is saying that he just didnt want multiple threads on the same topic.
-
Lobo* just took out a post altogether that he locked a short while ago - if I were CEO of iStock by dcdp. There was nothing rude or defamatory, just a list of specific suggestions about how to do things differently. They clearly aren't going to permit discussions of that sort, no matter how polite.
* I know lobo locked the post as I read the short "lock it" post he made. I don't know that he deleted the post afterwards, only that the post is gone.
This from the Off Topic forum (Push for gold)
Posted By dcdp:
"If I were CEO of iStock, the first 5 things I would change would be ..."
Feel free to add your thoughts here
Posted by Lobo:
Sorry. I think you might want to hold off on starting any threads that are liable to just become an offshoot of the main thread. I get where you are coming from but at this point we are going to have to only have one thread going at a time.
Yeah that was me. I chatted back and forth with Lobo about it and accept his reasonings for pulling the post. We may get it up again at a later stage, but for now he's told me he is canning it.
well if it was an "offshoot" why didn't you just repost it in the main thread since it sounds like he is saying that he just didnt want multiple threads on the same topic.
It covered RCs (1 of the 5 things I would change if I was CEO) but also covered a bunch of other things like EL and Vetta/Agency Royalty %, Agency ring ins, V/A Filters, Dollar Bin - so literally wasn't on topic with the RC thread and was an off-shoot.
His argument was that the present "discussion" was strictly about RCs and if my thread stayed it be a chance for people who were already angry about that to start complaining about everything else. I wanted the discussion to be productive not another gripe session, Lobo didn't believe that was going to happen in the present environment.
-
His argument was that the present "discussion" was strictly about RCs and if my thread stayed it be a chance for people who were already angry about that to start complaining about everything else. I wanted the discussion to be productive not another gripe session, Lobo didn't believe that was going to happen in the present environment.
I wonder what exactly Lobo considers a "productive" discussion. Complaints get deleted. Suggestions get ignored. So that would just leave the Woo-yayers.
-
I wanted the discussion to be productive not another gripe session, Lobo didn't believe that was going to happen in the present environment.
So we haven't just "sort of settled down".
Plus I guess he knows there aren't going to be any concessions which might benefit contributors, so what would be the point of discussing it?