It's interesting that so many top contributors will accept 25% commissions, low prices and very low EL prices from a low selling site.  I can understand why others then join them.  It just fills me with fear for the future of microstock.  

We shouldn't always assume that the top contributors get the same c****y conditions as the rest.
Theoretically a new site could offer excellent terms to some top contributors, like upload bonus, 50% or more commission and see what would happen:
the muppets see Yuri's port on such a theoretical site and would instantly queue to upload their stuff there, even if the site paid them 10 cents for an EL. The muppets cannot think independently, they have to follow somebody but don't understand that what applies to Yuri, doesn't always have to apply to them or to other people - different league, different rules. Few weeks later other sites cut commissions and prices in order to stay competitive with the low-ball agency and the muppets can only change their avatars to "contributor against proposed commission changes" . The urge to earn a few bucks more makes them blind and they fail to see the relationship between the cause and the effect.

Photodune seems pretty open to conversation and critique
http://www.microstockgroup.com/photodune/photodune-in-open-beta/

Well, these guys can hardly ban anyone or retaliate in any way, because many people who have been critical simply don't want to do business with them.

Not counting the ELs, maximum possible commission on photodune is miserable 2,25 USD for 20 Megapixels.

Veer XL: 5,25 USD - L: 3,50 USD
My today's downloads on DT: Level 3 TIFF: 8,91, Level 2 XL: 4,20
ISTOCK XXXL: 6-7 USD

No comments.

More likely you'll caniballize your sales elsewhere and encourage other agencies to cut commisions furthermore.
Don't complain about falling commissions if you are willing to supply ridiculous sites like photodune.

11,25 USD for ELs... c'mon
Last month VEER paid me 35 USD for an EL, I get regular ELs on SS for 28 USD.
Photodune's offer is a joke.

In the application you're supposed to prove that you won't be wasting their time by continuously submitting images that won't get approved or that nobody will buy. You're supposed to prove that you understand more or less what stock photography is.

The lower left corner is out of focus, which kind of spoils the whole image for me.
I am not sure about its microstock potential anyway.
The toning limits its sale potential, on microstock colourful images tend to sell much better.

How about a conspiracy theory to play with. It's in their best interest to not have people reach the next level. Could the best match be configured to throttle people back in the search who are on target to hit the next level?

Why bother with the best match when theoretically they might not report the sales correctly?
A "bug", a "glitch" or "turning off the tap", why not? Money is not what will make the contributors happy after all.
We won't find out until somebody tests them or there is an audit.
I don't have any confidence in their integrity, but that's just me.

  Beeps on startup can be as simple as poorly seated ram.

Jbarber is right. Each mainboard has several possible sequences of those beeps. If you consulted the mainboard manual, you could find out what those beeps meant. Some problems can be rectified. Loose RAM is one of possible causes.

I agree with click_click.
The location with the lighthouse is fantastic, my kind of place (BTW, where is it?).
There was great potential, unfortunately the composition is not convincing at all, doesn't have the necessary impact.
The horizon is tilted...

Apparently they have noticed that they are sinking.

It's a bug.
If you're logging in using the field in the upper right corner, try the other field on the left where it says "Remember me" or something like this. It worked for me two times.

It did work. The server seems to have some issues at the moment.
Nice tutorial, thank you rimglow.

On weekends I sell mostly my bestsellers.