|
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 - thesentinel
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 14
151
« on: June 27, 2009, 02:11 »
152
« on: June 26, 2009, 06:15 »
Coming from the UK where we have strong data protection laws I'm surprised.
Then you are misunderstanding the letter and the spirit of the data protection legislation.
Data Protection Act 1998
No, I was just trying to make a cheap point, but in my case not using privileged information.  ETA ( as well as making up a word that probably doesn't exist ! )
153
« on: June 26, 2009, 05:26 »
@whatalife: It's weird. I review the list we have of people dumping exclusivity pretty much every day and the list has been empty for sometime now. You might want to make sure you got your Exclusivity Cancellation request in. Currently I'm not seeing anything in our queue.
I seems to be acceptable policy for istock admins to unsolicedly discuss members account information, in the past 24 hours I also saw Rob bringing up a buyers purchasing details in open forum too. Coming from the UK where we have strong data protection laws I'm surprised.
154
« on: June 25, 2009, 13:48 »
So then Vetta images are dominating the front 20 or more pages of ALL Best Match searches, not just within that collection?
Wow, that is going to hit non-exclusives hard. At least the sales will be made up on other sites when the buyers go looking for micro priced images.
it was a typical snafu glitch and should be ok now.
155
« on: June 25, 2009, 05:10 »
As a side comment, does anyone have a good breakdown of the usage statistics for microstock sales split between print and screen use?
156
« on: June 19, 2009, 05:45 »
Unfortunately it seems like 900 000 images are already opt in. Can't understand why so many contributors would opt in..
We only have their word for that, and if true the I would suggest that a large percentage of them will have arrived there by the same route that no one reads the EULAs with software. For all the threads and discussions there have been it's mostly a case of preaching to the choir whilst the congregation is a garage sale.
157
« on: June 18, 2009, 02:46 »
No, I was expecting the strong minded exclusives to form a coalition to migrate en masse out of exclusivity in protest to show their disapproval to Getty's heavy handedness. If that doesn't move Getty to retract their action, it would at least shift the power with a great number of strong portfolios being made available elsewhere.
Shaking the tree that buyers would move elsewhere too, but Getty knows none of these strong hearts would dare move a muscle like this. NATO.
I have to wonder whether such a move would play directly into grubby hands of Getty, instantly improving their bottom line, somewhere some Suits would get a bonus. And history would indicate that 'elsewhere' will become a smaller place.
158
« on: June 10, 2009, 11:30 »
Sometimes I get quite an 'itch' when looking at the most rated files page!
159
« on: June 09, 2009, 12:48 »
I see all of MagtheHag's 4 posts here are ranting about alamy. Perhaps there should be an obsessed ranting newbies section for this sort of thing?
Great Idea sharpshot...OBTW...were you the one in grade school carrying the briefcase, wearing suspenders and giving the teacher an apple everyday?
To a British English speaker it looks like you're accusing him of wearing womens clothing!
160
« on: June 03, 2009, 08:57 »
Wasn't there a song a few years back, "My pickle jar brings all the boys to the yard", or something like that.
161
« on: May 10, 2009, 06:22 »
How much money would we need? Most of the sites start of small and grow slowly. None of the new ones have made much money but they probably don't cost much to run. If there was 1000 of us willing to put in $100, that might be enough to get it started.
Currently a minimum of 971 more to go then.
162
« on: May 08, 2009, 17:16 »
Thanks for the heads up, have reported my stolen images.
163
« on: May 07, 2009, 04:22 »
Maybe it would be a fitting thing to include an acknowledgment of his iconic status and sad departure in his profile. A true character who is fondly remembered by all, even I bet those who never agreed with anything he said !
164
« on: May 06, 2009, 10:21 »
The people that really run IS are actually the same people that really run StockXpert too.
And it would be in keeping with Getty tradition that the current friendly faces as IS and StockXpert will wake up one day to find they don't have a job due to rationalisation, all in the contributors interest of course.
165
« on: May 06, 2009, 08:11 »
In some ways I really feel for the iStock admins. I don't believe for a second they are on board with Getty's plan. They are doing their jobs, doing their best to defend the indefensible. I don't envy their position.
That is NOT what IS admins have stated on their forums. Here is what was stated in one of the threads by JJRD (see http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=87786&page=11):
"Let me be clear, very clear: we at HQ firmly believe that offering multiple collections & multiple offerings to our contributors is the very best thing to do for the future of the exclusivity program; we at HQ strongly believe that it can only lead to empowering our contributors in choosing what they feel is best for them."
He does not explicitly state that they believe THIS collection is the "very best thing," and as they are offering multiple collections within iStock, and launching the new "iStock exclusive" collection over at Getty, they can certainly believe those are good without saying that the new plan sucks arse.
An IS admin stated this in a thread about the new subscription offering which was titled "Subscription Shuffle" and which had the following statement a page or two prior to his:
"I have a sneaky feeling that iStock HQ had no say in this. I believe that if it were up to them nothing like this would have happened."
It is obvious to me that he was reacting to this statement (along with another one about why they released this information on a Friday afternoon).
But of course, you are free to believe whatever you like... 
I'm afraid that I never take things JJRD says as definitive, bless him.
166
« on: April 07, 2009, 11:15 »
Those phrases all have different meanings, subtle but different. That's the difference between tautology and refinement.
167
« on: April 05, 2009, 01:30 »
 Uh Oh
168
« on: March 19, 2009, 16:05 »
Now that the major production companies are putting the same old, same old but new images into micro in great volumes, the same problem could arise there.[/i][/size][/font]
Which is nice about iStock, because they are all independent, they can't fill the queue with their entire portfolio at once.
I think you're missing the point Sean.
In what way? The point he's addressing is the flooding of some agencies by production line co-ops and suchlike which is limited at istock by the low upload limits that are complained about so much here.
169
« on: March 14, 2009, 17:03 »
170
« on: February 25, 2009, 11:06 »
Well how could i understand you,your a women!
Maybe you should get a sex change, I'd imagine most people have an easier job of understanding her than you!
I think I understand Alastair (Mr. Shank) at least some of time. He's a Brit. They have a very different sense of humor from the rest of the planet.
I believe that most of the time his tongue is firmly planted in his cheek.
He is our new RJ Miz (may he rest in peace). Every forum needs one fellow like him, just to liven things up, don't you think?
I could put him on ignore as others have done but I would miss out on all the commotion he causes 
RJM may have been a bit of a curmudgeon at times but at least he contributed tutorials that some will have found of use.....
171
« on: February 22, 2009, 09:11 »
Keeping my feet on the ground but my head in the stars.
172
« on: February 21, 2009, 03:34 »
thesentinel: I don't really want to keep rehashing this, I have responded as well as I can to questions. and as I said in other posts, the comment really upset me.
if anyone else wishes to talk about this. I think sitemail or email would be more appropriate. at this point, I just want to concentrate on my images and my latest novel.
Well I guess that's similar to an admin locking a thread then. Can also you not see that when you post "I have chosen not to participate in any IS forums from now on." one day and then are posting there again within two days does reduce your credibility somewhat. Whilst you have by no means been the first to have experienced significant swings over the years I think as a 'frequent flyer' poster and an initial degree of light-heartedness you had a gained a great deal of sympathy which you then started losing with increasingly emotional, for want of a better word, outbursts. I hope you do find yourself in a 'better place' soon as when you're there you're a fun person to have around.
173
« on: February 20, 2009, 03:40 »
^ if you read the posts that the user pieman has made over the past couple of years, he is referred to and responds to Lobo. I did not accuse him of anything, but pieman made a defamatory statement about me, which I feel is unacceptable. If pieman is not Lobo, then someone is pretending to be Lobo. frankly that would be a welcome realization because I did not think the Lobo I have known would make those types of comments, comments with the sole purpose of shutting someone down. and I said that in my post.
if it is him, he obviously can't stand me, which is too bad. for the record, one of the so called informants is a pseudo admin and was just being helpful. especially since the comment pieman made was unprovoked.
I have no personal grudges against anyone.
I hardly think what was said was defamatory, in the whole spectrum of opinion about the emotional posts you have been making there are bound to be those who think you have lost credibility, just as there are those who will be contacting you agreeing with you, and just as there will be those who will have formed differing opinions over the way you've handled yourself here.
174
« on: February 07, 2009, 17:04 »
But the Poll results on the side bar now show StockXpert in 3rd position 
175
« on: February 06, 2009, 05:58 »
What is it with pcs and screen fonts?
As a mac user I'm always surprised at how varied the same sites can look on various friends pcs, and now on istock they change a style sheet and all hell breaks out with so many pc users having such different results... why is this?
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 14
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
