I have complained to Alamy about this before, and they say they're being "transparent".

I suppose they are more honest than some sites, in that they let us know how much they are charging customers, but it's confusing.

Thinking about it, any legit stock site has a goal of keeping people from being sued by photographers for using stolen images.  They are where to go for legally cleared photos.

Here he is.

https://forums.submit.shutterstock.com/topic/92172-without-editorial-using/

No... The sloppy web design doesn't inspire confidence.  You might entice buyers, but not experienced contributors.

I have a personal prejudice against web pages that move around while I'm trying to look at them.  Keep it simple, so you can keep the code tight.  The submitters' side should be designed to look good and work well on a desktop computer, no matter how you plan to market the other side.

If your platform isn't solid, too many things could go wrong.  You don't want to frustrate your contributors, or confuse your buyers.

The "business" part of owning a microstock site is complicated, and you'll need a very good bookkeeper.

Maybe start out with just a site for yourself and a couple of friends.  Or just a specific topic.  Keep it small until you get the hang of it.  Don't issue a general solicitation for contributors until you know you have the whole process smooth. 

As well as being prepared for not much happening, think about what you will do if a lot starts happening. Will you be able to expand rapidly, without glitches?  Will your data storage costs rise faster than your income?

There's a lot to think about.

You asked about this on the Shutterstock forum, and were told not do to it.  You did anyway.

Even if you think a stock site is being stupid about something, it DOES NOT WORK to try to make them change their mind by doing stuff you know they don't approve of.  You won't change their mind, you can't force them do to something just because you want it.

Any site, not just Shutterstock.

Seriously, using anything from wikimedia commons is just asking to get booted. 

For anyone else who wants to know how, since Shutterstock support probably won't tell you, here's how to disable your images altogether.

From your dashboard, go to the drop down under your name in the upper right corner of the page, and select "account settings"

On the right side, about half way down on that page, will be buttons to opt out of selling extended license, etc.

Opt out of image sales.  Save settings. (big red button, bottom left)  You're done.

This doesn't delete your images, so you can opt back in, if Shutterstock gets their s*** together.

Dammit, Shutterstock.  I've been with you for over a decade.

Today, I disabled all my images. (we'll see if they actually vanish like they're supposed to, or I have to be more aggressive)

There's a lot of abuse I'll put up with as a stock contributor, but don't devalue my work by giving it away.

I was actually making money from, them, too.

Wasn't there a discussion on Shutterstock's forum yesterday, about the great big security gap in their deal with Facebook?

I guess they don't want it discussed publicly.  Might affect stock prices, or something.

Take drawing classes.

Yes, I think they've made some adjustment to it to allow unlisted keywords to be marked correct. I just uploaded something else and a "mark as correct" option appeared.

Other sites have discovered a problem with that, though.  People marking random typos as correct.  Eventually, the dictionary becomes useless.  Best practice is to have the program collect unknown words that have been checked as correct, and get someone to add the good ones to the dictionary.  Of course, that means more work, and someone to pay to do it.  But, it's what works best over time.

I've stuck with Shutterstock through all this corporate crap because, in spite of their continuing descent, they have still been my best earning site.

Also, I'll admit to a little nostalgia.  My first site was Shutterstock, back in 2006. 

However, it looks like the diminishing returns will pass the point this year.  If I can't stand to upload, I can't keep fresh stuff in the flow, and earnings will drop further.

At least they're making it easier for me to let go.

They hate their contributors.  They're hoping all the professionals will leave, and they can fill up their gallery with stuff from people who don't actually need to get paid.

I support my claim with their recent Craigslist ads, suggesting that just anybody can make money uploading pictures to Shutterstock.

Trademarked.  Milton Bradley is fierce about protecting their trademarks.