But Ruth also stated that she probably could not be confirmed in this political environment these days.  The hyper partisanship means that great jurists cannot and will not want to go through the trauma of Senate trial.  Not good for the country.

Nope.  People forget that 600,000 lives were lost in the Civil War.

Moreover, was just watching RBG on CNN and one point was made:  Ruth was seeking to build a consensus.  Ruth understood the vital issue to go along to get along.  Keep her friendships because although the conservative justices may oppose you on certain issues in other cases it may be possible to persuade them to come around to your side.  The Decision in the VMI case, her proudest case, was unanimous.

RBG, unlike many recently, did not demonize the opposition.  Trump said today that Ruth know how to disagree but not be disagreeable.  She understood that even though Justices like Scalia would oppose her in many cases, both she and Scalia had one thing in common a reverence for the Constitution.  When asked about his relationship with RBG, Scalia stated that some things are more important than votes.

Ruth would definitely oppose the extreme elements in the Dem party that want to tear the system down.  RBG revered the Constitution and understood the very important point do not make enemies because in some cases they could become your allies.

Respect the other side was her motto even though you could vigorously disagree with them.  Because in politics at the Supreme Court and elsewhere opinions can change.

Senator Orrin Hatch, no liberal, voted for RBJ at her confirmation because he firmly believe although a liberal, Ruth was appointed by a liberal President,  Bill Clinton, and she deserved to get the job.

Wish we could go back to that standard today.

She was my law professor and I knew her.  She got me into her Supreme Court argument in the Goldfarb case.  She was a truly brilliant person/woman.

I want to offer a contrary point of view.  Have been in the stock photo market for more than 10 years.  I make more than $6500 a year but nowhere near 100,000.

But the real issue is what is your objective.  If your objective is to make a living in stock photography, forget it.  Back in my college days, I was a Photo major for one quarter.  Thankfully I got out early and then went on to be a lawyer.  I used my law earnings to fuel my passion.

Now in my retirement stock photography is a good gig.  I make enough to pay for my equipment and some travel costs.

Also when Shutterstock dropped its commissions, I had to decide what to do.  I stayed in because back in March, I sold a photo through SS Premium and my commission for that one sale was $1,000.  First sale through SS Premium and no sales since.

But I checked with SS Premium and every photo on SS can also be sold through Premium so I stayed in.

Moreover, I talked with a friend who is a middle person bundled in the stock market and has been in the market since the 1980s.  Her reaction to the SS Commission drop was �What can you do?�

Also when I mentioned the boycott and the contributors pulling out, her response was �good�, in effect less competition in the market place.

Bottom line again is what is your objective.  If it is to make a living in Stock, forget it.  But if it is to provide extra income, then it may be an option.

Will never put myself into an exclusive agreement with SS.  Can no longer trust them.

What I cannot understand is reducing commissions to the point many large contributors will disappear.  At the same time rejecting 90% of the images uploaded.

In the long term SS database will decline when companies such as Alamy and DT will continue to increase in size.  In the long run, this does hurt SS because it will no longer be the Top Dog in the stock market.

Cannot understand their business plan??

Could this be AI?

Have been selling a number of photos that have been recently uploaded so my experience is different.   But. I am a travel photographer so by definition my
Images are different.

I uploaded several times and because of the title issue rejected several times.

Then appealed and got the answer �Juanita� in Juanita Bay Park in Kirkland Washington was the reason.

So will try again and see what happens.

With regard to property release, upload as editorial.  The real problem comes when SS won�t accept the photo as editorial.

Problem with sentences, isn�t the period . a grammatical symbol and thus forbidden by SS title criteria

Seems like SS is on a Titles crusade.
 Funny because SS does not have titles only descriptions.

Trying to figure out what to do when submitted a photo of Alamo and accepted then to get around the title problem submitted a set of previously rejected
Alamo pictures with same accepted title.
And all are rejected again.

Driving me crazy because SS standards are
so unclear.

Only solace is that it seems others are having the same problem.

By the photos in question have all been accepted by numerous other sites.

Yes but I keep uploading because I make $200 to $250 a month there.  Yes it has gone down.  Last year was 250 to 300 a month.

Now 200 to 300 a month so don�t give up.