I don't see any difference at all between stocksy and other microstock agencies, the only one is the very special filtering of members, it's like a private club and it's better if the owner is your friend. Browsing some portfolios, I see many low quality photos with wrong cropping, inexpressive people etc. like always in microstock.
So, where is the real difference???  Maybe Offset will do it and in a more neutral way (no mafia).

Yes i would like to try also ! But i have already a blog working with wordpress, I guess I have to start from a fresh wordpress install.

Maybe it's a new sect.

Thanks you so much Zager.

I've just started yesterday to upload some stuff and also paid the 30$, just try for one year and see what will happen.
I'm also in Europe, but I think American people like landscapes from other countries, no?? And many subjects are not depending from specific countries, like nature landscapes and sceneries, animals, abstract...

Do you think it's better to send the pictures in Srgb or adobe rgb, as the destination is printed support???

Seems a little counterproductive to keep people in the dark about what kind of images they're looking for.  The contributors who've been rejected may have very well had images in their portfolio that met the required criteria, but the secrecy surrounding that criteria may have ultimately led to rejection.  Doesn't make sense to me.

+1  I like games, but not playing with people, it's very arrogant. I guess the contributor list is already done in advance and everything around is a masquerade.

Thanks KonaHawaii to continue the big work!! I'm sure many contributors want to test it.

Rejected from hell? You're lucky!

Yes it's normal, it's a royalty cut, a gift from the agency just in return for your efforts, and no it will not be lowered again, never, don't worry. 

In a certain way, he is lucky to quit Istock before the deep end, he has time to build another business with other agencies. Other big contributors might think to quit by themselves before the big crash.

Yes, welcome to Bigstock, a low earner who start a wonderful subscription metamorphosis, almost a miracle, thank you Shutterstock, next?

So, after the "Istock affair", who is just the beginning, here is my personal list and thinking about some "bad" agencies:

-Fotolia: lowered many times commission, change many times the contributor ranking system, and is capable of vicious tricks like simulating a glitch in the file editing section to force the extended license at 10$ and many more to come...of course.

_Dreamstime: no more price difference for subscription download of high level files, disappeared during one night...more to come...

- photodune: very low prices, extended license is a joke, and never make the effort to change the painful upload procedure for model releases, they don't care at all for contributors, only "blablabla" on the forum, just to simulate a concerned attitude, but nothing in action, nothing at all.

Depositphoto: forces very low prices extended licenses if you don't ask for opt out by email, almost only subscription sales at the lowest price in the market. Tendencies to be not clear in the explanations and is capable of vicious tricks like his guru model, Fotolia.

123RF:new commissions cut and more...some of yours know better about it.

So, you think that you want, but we must warn every contributors about these sleazy acts.

Beside these agencies, others never stop to purpose new licenses and new products for both the customer and the contributor, some with 50% commission.

Like in the biological life, there's always symbiosis associations and always pests. If we want a nice future for stock photography, we must work in a symbiotic way and find solutions to stop feeding the pests.

Sorry for my low English level.