Stockphotomaniac, people have emailed me saying you are a competitor in fact. That's another conspiracy theory indeed

I don't think that staying anonymous is really constructive, so I would appreciate if you can give us a link to your portfolio. You have my word that we don't have any blacklist or things like that. Oh, wait, we do have one for frauds and so, but that's not the case here. You have to give me the reason of doubt and agree that it would not be outrageous to think you are in fact upset by something we did. So, if you are, drop me an email and we can discuss about it. We may agree or not agree, but at least let us try to help you.

Are all contributors treated the same on our site? I have to say no, certainly they are not. We TRY to treat them equally as much as possible but we are aware that some things are out of our reach, while for some other we purposefully treat them differently.
One of the very few things, probably the most important we apply purposefuly, is the approval ratio. Some of the readers may know that we were the first to introduce it, I don't know if there are other agencies applying it right now.

So, a contributor may upload more or less, depending on the approval ratio that he/she has. For the first 100 submissions all users enjoy the same amount, maximum. If you know this, sorry for repeating.

In regards to this conspiracy theory, once again, if we would approve all images Ron uploaded we would tell you. Why not? I don't really share all your opinions, sorry.
Think from this perspective: wouldn't it be an advantage to the rest of the community because his images will not take from the waiting time? Unfortunately, is not possible, we have to review them just for as any other users, because yes, he receives refusals too.

I did say in the other thread that we are considering providing certain advantages in exchange to some benefits for the community. The magnitude of these advantages is up to us, but we are keen to provide what's best for the community. I reiterrate that our policy is the following: if our members are happy, we are happy. If they earn, we earn.

I have received LOTS of preferential requests and never accepted a partnership that was good only for the agency and not for the community. This is subject to personal opinion, I am not trying to say we are perfect, but we try to provide what's best for our members AT a database level (not individually).

For example, at one point we noticed that older images were slightly favored by the search engine and immediately changed it. That's older images not members, so it affected your fresh images too, even if you joined 3 years ago.
Older images always earn more so building a gap between them and the new comers is something in our own disadvantage because we limit sustainable growth.

We are updating our search parameters constantly in order to maximize results, take advantage of the latest technology and minimize spam.

Saying that some user gets preferential treatment within the search results is not outrageous. There are LOTS of stock agencies doing that, it is a common technique to stimulate better photographers. Why don't we do it? First, we are a community-based site (whoever invented the term microstock had no idea what a community-based site is). Second, our policy enhances the image, not the portfolio. We believe that any photographer can provide a GREAT image, competing with old pros, that's part of the essence of microstock.

In regards to the math you provided, I have checked and the things I have assumed yesterday are correct, Ron uploaded more than the maximum amount due to a technical glitch. Before you accuse us that was intentional, let me tell you that our records show that ALL contributors uploaded without any restrictions for a few weeks at least and MANY users enjoyed it. The glitch date has no connection with Ron's registration date. They joined a lot earlier and they had many images waiting, just as they do now.

I have to apologize for this glitch as although it was good for many users, who took advantage of it, many of the others were affected. Even if one doesn't want to upload 100 images, this glitch allowed a user with a low approval ratio upload more. Saying it was not that bad, would mean that this upload rule is useless.
This was not such a disaster, as you can see the editors decreased the pending line significantly in the last days.

Because facts without proofs mean nothing, I have tried to select two contributors that can confirm this. In order not to be accused that I have hidden deals with them, there is one before the max. limit was changed to 40/day and one after that, who was also a featured photographer. I selected the first photographer based on the fact that he heard about us from this very forum. I asked for his agreement and he can also confirm these figures:

So, out of many contributors:
User Tritooth (http://www.dreamstime.com/Tritooth_info) submitted 113 images on 2007-03-05 (max. amount suppposed = 100 images)
User Janpietruszka (http://www.dreamstime.com/Janpietruszka_info) submitted 111 images on 2007-03-25. (max. amount supposed = 40 images).

The subscription accusation can be easily verified. Create an account, buy a subscription, download one of his photo than wrote us and we will refund your subscription.

In regards to your other accusations, I cannot prove some of them: as the royalties percentage Ron receives. I can tell you that he receives the same 50% but of course, you will not believe me. I said  that I've checked their account and they can submit 40 images AT THIS TIME, not to cover my back, but because this is when I checked it. I also mentioned there may be a glitch, once again, I was convinced all users were under that limit and it turned out none was!

Does Dreamstime treat all submitters alike? In this case, yes.

Hello everyone,

I received several notifications about this thread from members who feel this is a blatant attack.

As ever before we monitor independent forums activity and we try to add our input. Being independent can bring an extra amount of criticism that can help us to correct problems or flaws. Managing a huge site means there are compromises to be made. This applies to funds, budgets, features, marketing, advertising, manpower, support etc. Everything must be in a perfect balance in order to allow the business to be viable and support itself. Without the business part there will be no community at all. We are independent, we don't have any venture capital and we're proud to say that we are free to make the best decisions for our community. It is also for ourselves? Of course it is, but if you follow our strategy throughout the last 3 years you will see that the primary target were the customers: photographers and buyers. If they earn, the agency also earns.

Now, positive criticism means just that, not rude posts or flames. If this forum is moderated or unmoderated is not really relevant. You may launch accusations without any proof, it's your decision, but one simply cannot use that kind of language.

To reply to such rude statements would be a waste of time, time that would be otherwise focused on honest users. It will mean that we encourage such statements. So, until some proper apologies are posted, please consider my post as a clarification to honest users who may be misleaded by these arguments and not a reply to these flames.

I'll try to clarify all questions posted. If I miss any, please let me know.

1. 40,000 files in pending line - it happens from time to time that our predictions are exceeded and people submit much more images. We expected this when we lowered the daily maximum amount at 40 files per day. It seems this was not enough. Our editors team is expanded constantly as we need to keep the pace. We cannot add editors faster because they need to pass the training stage and they need time to start reviewing at full capacity or else serious problems can appear in the review process. 
Add to this the fact that most editors had a few days off because of Easter vacation. This is their right, I am sure everyone will agree. It happened before, after the Christmas break the pending was close to 45K and in less than a month it decreased significantly.

2. Favoring users and transparency. We always try to be as transparent as possible. This is not an obligation, it is our decision.
We did help Ron Chapple and assist his team in uploading the files. We explained how the system works, helped them with a few FTP details and that's about all. We did similar things for amateur photographers in the past, there is no secret. Not a single day passes without receiving emails from users who are completely newbies and need to learn everything from scratch.

The fact that over 100 of his images were approved yesterday doesn't mean they follow a different path. The max limit is applied when you finish submitting a file not when the editors review it. If no images were reviewed in the last couple of days, then the number of images waiting on the pending line multiplies with that number of days. That's if the contributor submitted images daily of course.

From what I remember they submitted images before the max amount limit was decreased. If not and the average is higher, it could be a glitch somewhere, but I have checked and they can only submit the max. amount at this time, just as any other users.

Ron has an approval ratio which is lower than 100%. I will see if they have no issues with us disclosing the exact number. Every photographer receives his share of refusals, including editors. There is not a single user on the site with a significant number of images online and with 100% approval ratio.

3. an image uploaded a while ago in the unfinished section will reach a different spot in the pending line than the one submitted today. this is no secret and has been explained on our forums. Thanks Ed for posting this sooner, I presume is clarified now.

Now, whether we make things easier for a photographer or not, is simply our decision. If the community receives certain benefits, we can agree to help a certain user. If that happens we'll NOT hide this, what would be the reason for that? Uploading on our site is a privilege not a right, no offense. Do any of you have an issue with any feature on the site or have specific questions? Drop us an email and we will be happy to assist you.