pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Free speech  (Read 3449 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Aquilegia

« on: August 26, 2006, 01:47 »
0
I had a portfolio on Totally Photos, and some earnings. I think the photographers there have been 'Totally' ripped off, and I am concerned about what is happening to my images.
The approvers forum, where such questions should have been addressed before the site closed, was dominated buy a nice group, whose niceness choked any freedom of speech. Any questions and comments that were not complimentary to the site were jumped on and accused of being negative, we were continually exhorted to be patient and wait, until it was too late. The 'Rah rah' element there made Istock seem quite timid.
Now I have seen a similar comment in this forum, and it concerns me. I love coming here and reading forthright and honest views and criticism of the stock sites. It has opened my eyes to a few things I had not thought about.
That is what we are here to do, not to criticise each others writing style.  If we only write in an upbeat positive way the site will become stagnant and boring. Some people do take a negative view, it is in their personality. Good for them! It is another valid viewpoint to consider.


« Reply #1 on: August 26, 2006, 07:41 »
0
I had a portfolio on Totally Photos, and some earnings. I think the photographers there have been 'Totally' ripped off, and I am concerned about what is happening to my images.

TP has only been offline for a week or two - and maybe we should give them a bit of time to work things out. But I do understand the concern for your $ and images, i'm just suggesting we be patient.

The approvers forum, where such questions should have been addressed before the site closed, was dominated buy a nice group, whose niceness choked any freedom of speech. Any questions and comments that were not complimentary to the site were jumped on and accused of being negative, we were continually exhorted to be patient and wait, until it was too late. The 'Rah rah' element there made Istock seem quite timid.
Now I have seen a similar comment in this forum, and it concerns me. I love coming here and reading forthright and honest views and criticism of the stock sites. It has opened my eyes to a few things I had not thought about.
That is what we are here to do, not to criticise each others writing style. If we only write in an upbeat positive way the site will become stagnant and boring. Some people do take a negative view, it is in their personality. Good for them! It is another valid viewpoint to consider.

I assume your talking about me because of my comments in the Lucky Oliver thread. And it seems that i didn't really communicate very well my thoughts. I am in no way saying everyone has to post nothing but rosy, happy, the world is perfect comments. What i wanted to get across was that it is so easy to come to these forums and be negative (and believe me, i've done it myself)... what is more challenging and what i was hoping to communicate was that people maybe should think about the impact of their comments - and maybe just reconsider the tone of the comments because of how others might react. If you're considering XYZphoto and then read somewhere that site XYZphoto sucks and has an ugly website, I'll bet you won't go there to contribute. I know that i've read about some sites like that and made mental notes about not going there. All I ask is that you consider the impact of your comments before posting. Pretend you are the CEO of XYZphoto and think about how you'd feel if you read the comment you are about to post.

I posted several somewhat negative comments in the totally photos forum and i later regretted it because i didn't go to their managment with comments and questions first. If you think about it, it is much easier to come to a forum like this and say things and if you think about it, if you would write the comments as if you were sending them to the CEO of the company, i'll bet you'd say them in a bit nicer way than if you were just coming to a forum and vent... and that's the way i would like people to think about posting here. Doesn't in any way mean you can't vent or be negative, but if you spent a few more minutes composing your comments as if you were saying them directly to the CEO, I'll bet you'd word things a little more on the positive side.

« Reply #2 on: August 26, 2006, 09:45 »
0
maunger:

Sorry, but I have to disagree.

Everything we post shouldn't have to be done with rose-colored glasses on.

There are times for positive comments, and there are times for negative comments.

The biggest issue that I see is that people will post a negative comment as soon as they see it, but don't always post the positive comments.  So you end up with 10s or 100s of negative comments for each positive comment.  It would be nice if people would post the positives as well as the negatives.

Not a sermon, just a thought...

Greg Boiarsky

« Reply #3 on: August 26, 2006, 10:34 »
0
As it was my post that started this, I think I'll chime in.  I both agree and disagree with Maunger.  In general, it is my policy to be polite with negative criticisms.  You can be negative without screaming and whining and moaning.  In general, the polite approach works best and is most likely to engender a decent discussion without all the heat that can distort the argument.  What Maunger is saying is that we can both be critical AND polite at the same time.  Those of you who read my comments will recognize that I usually try for this approach unless I am provoked.

However, I also believe that sometimes a more radical response is called for.  Sometimes, you have to stir people up to get them out of their lethargy.  I believed this to be the case when I posted my comments about Lucky Oliver.  I really like that site; it runs well, and the people who run it seem to be energetic and intelligent.  However, no one was questioning their marketing strategy, one that I felt would potentially turn the buyer away by being too silly.  Silly sites don't get taken seriously, and they fold.

So, I guess what I'm saying is this:  We should not make blanket comments or commandments about how to post on this forum.  It is best to think before we post about what we hope to achieve by posting--and then post with regard to that intent.  This is not to say, however, that I think we should post inflammatory comments just to rile people up.  We should treat each other here with respect.
« Last Edit: August 26, 2006, 10:42 by Professorgb »

« Reply #4 on: August 27, 2006, 12:31 »
0
I think each of us have different experiences at each site (ok, come sites are a bad experience to everyone!), so I think the best way to put such experiences in the forum is "for me..." "in my case..." "I haven't..." instead of more absolute remarks as "The site is ____" (bad, slow, awful, etc). 

The other day at DT I saw a person saying he can never get replies from DT staff.  Well, I normally receive a reply in one or two days, so I said so, and some others did as well.  Aquilegia, according to her comments about TP forum, sees it as a sort of ganging up against criticism. 

I had a similar experience at CanStockPhoto, when someone started a thread about low earnings of subscription sales in a very rude tone and a lot of people took the site's side.  In the middle of the discussion I commented about the low views and low sales I experienced in my own portfolio and again some folks thrown stones at me (some were really rude), saying the site owner is great, dedicated, etc.  I'm not denying any of it - and maybe a comment I did about the site owner, after a post in which he said, to my understanding, that we was putting all his free time in it (is it a business or a hobby?), just showing the facts, suggesting that maybe the marketing strategy should be changed.  Anyway, in the end I wrote a private msg to the site owner with my explanations and my concerns, and how I felt that some compliments he received were not helping at all (maybe this was the real goal of such compliments?).  It was never answered, but anyway his attitude in the forum was by far more ethical than of at least one member who kept on disdaining my portfolio (and who, by the way, also had a much better performance at other sites than at CanStockPhoto).

Regards,
Adelaide

Greg Boiarsky

« Reply #5 on: August 27, 2006, 13:49 »
0
This is a great suggestion.  I reserve the right to be a bit more confrontational, though--but only if I really need to :D.

I think each of us have different experiences at each site (ok, come sites are a bad experience to everyone!), so I think the best way to put such experiences in the forum is "for me..." "in my case..." "I haven't..." instead of more absolute remarks as "The site is ____" (bad, slow, awful, etc). 

« Reply #6 on: August 27, 2006, 14:40 »
0
I think each of us have different experiences at each site (ok, come sites are a bad experience to everyone!), so I think the best way to put such experiences in the forum is "for me..." "in my case..." "I haven't..." instead of more absolute remarks as "The site is ____" (bad, slow, awful, etc).

But isn't that already implied?

When I say "Sushi tastes great...", doesn't it already mean "Sushi tastes great to me..."  Don't we already know that some people hate sushi?

Does every sentence have to include the fact that it is already the perspective of the poster?

« Reply #7 on: August 27, 2006, 20:24 »
0
But isn't that already implied?

Maybe.  But some people really need all the words being said (maybe it's the lack of eye contact and body language - who knows?). I take part in a critique forum in which people get upset if you point out directly a problem with an image, you must instead say good things first and then use "but" or "however".  :)

Regards,
Adelaide

« Reply #8 on: August 28, 2006, 02:21 »
0
I don't think there is a chance of this forum going politically correct or * ass of any agency Aquilegia. No worries :D. Just to make you feel better scope out my comments on iStock in other threads. There are still those of us who tell it how it is. And I don't think most of us are here to blatantly attack anyone without a reason or purpose or for sport. It's just that we're being censored on the agencies' forums, so we tell it here. So keep on saying what's on your mind.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
2903 Views
Last post August 03, 2007, 22:09
by monilu
7 Replies
5602 Views
Last post December 14, 2007, 14:04
by madelaide
2 Replies
1818 Views
Last post October 28, 2009, 10:34
by Fastmediamarco
224 Replies
37508 Views
Last post February 27, 2011, 19:37
by ShadySue
3 Replies
4495 Views
Last post June 15, 2011, 15:24
by lthn

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results