|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Artemis
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 ... 20
176
« on: March 18, 2011, 10:36 »
I voted 'no change'....
the past couple of weeks my sales really plummeted like i'd never seen before; the past 3-4 days they're almost back to normal, slightly below.
Maybe this shift doesnt affect me much because i havent uploaded anything since september..
177
« on: March 17, 2011, 10:37 »
*Yadayadayada...*
What is important to realize is that today's release is the most important change we ever made to how iStockphoto serves files to clients, all over the world.
And what is critical to understand is that we always keep a severe and rational eye on Best Match with the interests of contributors and clients alike. We are all in this together and we want to assist you in licensing as many relevant assets as possible... for the benefit of all involved.
The new code that we released today is faster and more robust... most of you should be able to realize that even at this very early stage. What is critical to understand here is that it is 100% scalable and will adapt, over time, to the needs of the clients. And what is good for iStockphoto clients is ultimately good for us as a community of contributing artists.
*Yadayadayadayada sniff sniff small violin*
The most important change ever made at istock on how to serve files, but not important enough to communicate with us in advance!?!
The mob got angry again, quick lets post some soothing tearjerking words?
*yaaaawn* its getting really old. Putting your ass on the line is waaaaaay overdue mista JJ.
178
« on: March 16, 2011, 16:14 »
They fixed the search... but shuffled the Best Match. I had some long time page-1 sellers that are now off in la-la land.
Ditto, what a nightmare... I heard new files get punished severely too compared to before. O..o..o istock istock istock *shakes head*
179
« on: March 14, 2011, 13:41 »
The main difference i noticed for my uploads is it became impossible to get images with selective focus through; and anything not razorsharp either (much, much stricter than before).
180
« on: March 13, 2011, 22:44 »
*big snip*
Which makes me think all the more that it's high time for: a) a formal, third-party audit of IS and, b) per the findings of said audit, pursuing/filing a class-action lawsuit.
Absolutely! An audit can't be that tough to get organized. Many peeps seem in for it, no one seems willing to get it started... I have no clue how and where to start. No one here is an accountant? (or married to one or something?)
181
« on: March 13, 2011, 18:04 »
Yeah, it's acting very, very strange; i still thought we were talking about the issues like horse + leg giving strange results but this is way waaay more serious  I'm with you in having the worst week(s) since a long time...luckily Shutterstock and Dreamstime are doing better than ever here covering up for the damage. but i sincerely feel for the exclusives right now... I may hope their programming/IT/whatever team is working 24/7 to get this fixed, istock is broken up to it's core right now. (but most likely they have the weekend off, right?)
182
« on: March 13, 2011, 17:10 »
Something else, mentioned before...
Wow, I knew the search was broken, but i didnt realize HOW broken! Searching anything with more than 1 term is totally screwed up and usually gives just 1 page with results. (for example all my "dog" searches did)
A miracle we even get sales at all...
183
« on: March 13, 2011, 13:26 »
Ah, someone even more cynical than me (if that's possible, LOL):
As a non-exclusive my opinion counts for nothing here - but if asked (which I won't be) I would not trust any of the 'so-called' Community voices elected here. They, to a man, will be so honoured to be in the 'Getty family' all you will see is a sycophantic 'tow-the-line' message to the exclusive members but they'll be rewarded with a special bonus (or shres options) to stuff the rest of you and not rock the boat. And you can bet they will be more than eager to sign an NDA as well. The very fact that this 'list' is only open to exclusive iSP contributors should be warning to you all - a captive (completely finacially reliant) and sycophantic group. Smart move iSP, really, a smart move.
Note: I do not agree with their speculations.
What a bunch of bull..... JoAnn already posted in the istock forums she's not willing to sign a DNA, ( i'm relieved about that.) Again, if this goes through IMHO this really is the way to go: Maybe we're better off having the conference call be with a team comprised of a lawyer, an accountant and a programmer that are not contributing to ISP as artists - a group of our choosing. Time to follow through with the union concept in that we form a group to hire the three that will sign the NDA but not be hindered in the forums.
184
« on: March 13, 2011, 12:19 »
I like Paul Cowan's suggestion that the five have a list of questions they can answer in advance of the meeting.
Since this is a spinoff of the fraud thread, it's fair to assume that this conference relates only to that issue. If it covered any other issues, then the five should refuse to sign the NDA. Finally, if possible the group should include a lawyer and a programmer.
And an accountant.
Maybe we're better off having the conference call be with a team comprised of a lawyer, an accountant and a programmer that are not contributing to ISP as artists - a group of our choosing. Time to follow through with the union concept in that we form a group to hire the three that will sign the NDA but not be hindered in the forums.
That sounds like a very decent plan imho!
185
« on: March 13, 2011, 12:18 »
This really is making me a bit uneasy, like we're playing chess with TPTB overthere at iS...
There can be so much behind this move (whether it is to silence 'our' outspoken 5, or do they feel threatened by all the court and audit talk, or do they genuinely think they are doing the right thing behind the screens and want to clear out the sky a little, is it only about the fraud, or the long term plans as well, etc etc...)
At least we know (hope) that the ones selected do their homework and read very, very, carefully before signing this DNA and preferably have it checked by a legal person as well.
... really dont know what to think about this all; somehow i hope Sean or jsnover refuses; just in case the agenda behind this is a dirty one.
186
« on: March 13, 2011, 09:11 »
Strange, they dont call at least one experienced, high-ranked independant.
The one we all thought of has not chipped in on this issue, either on iStock or here (unless I blinked and missed him), which is interesting in itself, IMO.
Exactely! Been wondering about that too... maybe his legal team is on it and he can't comment? or his sweetheart deal is so sweet it soothes everything for him? or or..?
187
« on: March 13, 2011, 08:51 »
Its been mentioned in the other istock thread, but i thought this deserved a thread of it's own: From mr. Thompson: "OK, heres what were going to do.
Were going to take a few people (maximum 5?) and ask them to sign NDAs. Then we'll have a conference call this week about what's going on. They can be the ears of the entire community and see if we're doing anything out of the ordinary.
I'm going to lock this thread. Someone can start a new one where they nominate people they'd like to speak with us. They will need to be exclusive members. Nominate away.
KKT"
(end of now-locked clawback thread)
Nominations of exclusives can be made here:
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=313542&page=1I'm not sure what to expect from this. Are they going to open the books to these select few and actually prove everything is ok? Are they going to reveal their future plans? I dont see much use in it if the rest of us don't get any details at all... And i think this one is a very genuine concern: Posted By lostinbids:
There is part of me that thinks if 5 prominant members of the community sign a NDA get told what is going on and then can't share it with the rest of us we loose those 5 prominant members voices' in the forums.
188
« on: March 12, 2011, 18:37 »
ditto!
istock always was #1 in royalties by far. Now it slipped down to #2 behind SS, and interestingly, what i lost on istock i gained on SS and DT, which is great! (for an independent...)
189
« on: March 12, 2011, 12:11 »
In a tweet he mentioned that his last day at iStock was 25th Feb.
24th Feb - SoCoAddict
Tomorrow is my last day as a senior designer at @iStock. Talk about an incredible five years. #startingtofeelstrange
Yet another talented, interesting and long standing iStocker exiting the company.
What is going on here? Are Getty slashing iStock costs while they ramp up expenditure on Thinkstock and Photos.com, or are people simply walking away in disgust (and in significant numbers).
I guess that debunks rogermexico's claim that people just don't quit iStock!
Yeppers  I still wished i could be a fly on the wall there in Calgary....
190
« on: March 12, 2011, 10:59 »
Im pretty sure they stopped reviewing the flags. I reported a picture with really blatant keyword spam almost a year ago and its still there unaltered. When i asked in the forums if the system still is in place no admin ever bothered to reply.
191
« on: March 12, 2011, 08:12 »
Nope, because they dont get my stuff anymore.
192
« on: March 12, 2011, 02:55 »
Received Blufish' card today. Hahahahahahaha! not the prettiest pic but definitely the funniest! (he's trying so hard to pose like a pro, but the setting is.. euhh.....  )
193
« on: March 11, 2011, 07:49 »
One kkthompson has deemed fit to make a short statement;
"I realize this is frustrating, but it is for us as well. Not being able to speak about it or explain our position makes everyone a little crazy.
BUT, when we are able to make a statement--believe me--you will understand why we're doing what we're doing.
Please be patient. That discussion could still be months away.
Kelly"
Still no apology of course __ or letter of resignation either.
...and utter,utter, bullsh*t. There doesnt exist a valid reason for doing this.
194
« on: March 11, 2011, 02:40 »
I dont believe in the 'selling scenario' either. Selling the most well known and best selling milk cow in the industry and let it become a competitor again? makes no sense to me...
close it down so the MS customer base hups over to the competitors (not TS)? makes just as little sense... then again very little of what they do makes sense of course...
195
« on: March 10, 2011, 19:24 »
I like the idea of requesting an audit (pretty sure some stinking puddles would be opened). Would it really be that expensive if we do it with a couple of peeps? It sounds pretty do-able and about the only thing we can do without having to get very organized in a mass-pull-portfolio action or something alike...
I made a comment about an audit in the angry-thread but I don't actually know how we could even go about doing that. Is that possible if they're a private company?
It always used to be part of the contract (and i presume it still is) that you could pay for an audit to check sales figures.
I'm really a virgin when it comes to this sort of stuff... if we request an audit would they have to open their whole financial books? What info would we get..? Only whether there are irregularities, or more detailed info? Many more questions but worth looking into imho...
196
« on: March 10, 2011, 19:15 »
... and still people overthere are screaming for answers and asking for fair treatments and hoping istock will try to gain it's contributors trust back. Geez c'mon, isnt it obvious by now... THEY DONT GIVE AN EFF! The community is as good as gone and thats how they want it to be, the more divided and scattered we are, the better for them and the more they can get away with.
They make me vomit; every vein screams to ditch the greedy arrogant *insult removed* and stick by my principles, but for now i cant go without the income. ARGH! (no new stuff for them tho)
I like the idea of requesting an audit (pretty sure some stinking puddles would be opened). Would it really be that expensive if we do it with a couple of peeps? It sounds pretty do-able and about the only thing we can do without having to get very organized in a mass-pull-portfolio action or something alike...
Maybe we should post in an accountant forum for some more info..
197
« on: March 10, 2011, 16:49 »
I received yours yesterday madelaide! Lovely pic!
198
« on: March 09, 2011, 23:49 »
I didn't know about Goldmund either. Interesting to see people taking a stand.
Sensor Spot is the only one I was aware of. Who are the other (now) ex-Inspectors (taking a stand)?
http://www.istockphoto.com/sensorspot
I didn't know about him either. when did that one happen? was he public about it? interesting stuff. hard not to worry these days.
Not sure exactly when, and no. I don't think it was public, so to speak. The little I do know I'd rather not share here because it may not be meant for public consumption.
*snip*
Aww darn, i love that sort of juicy gossips; dying to find out now! PM me! i wont tell anybody!  Feels like a heart under the belt to see not all badges are yeppering whoo yaying cheerleaders 
199
« on: March 07, 2011, 18:46 »
Pixart's card arrived a couple of days ago here. Love the pic AND the message
200
« on: February 20, 2011, 12:23 »
Thanks viscerali! I did at first but when it said 'gray line on the right' i thought it was just a site error. I shouldnt do these things when im just awake 
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 ... 20
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
