pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Got a warning for calling Jon Oringer's photos "suck"  (Read 3869 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: March 02, 2021, 10:35 »
+1
Just got a warning from Shutterstock.  I was phasing out of the forum anyway after un-licensing my portfolios there recently.  So, whatever.  Good luck to all who are still with Shutterstock.


« Reply #1 on: March 02, 2021, 11:14 »
+3
Just got a warning from Shutterstock.  I was phasing out of the forum anyway after un-licensing my portfolios there recently.  So, whatever.  Good luck to all who are still with Shutterstock.

Of all the reasons you gave them, they chose the best one!
Obviously, some admins have a good sense of humor!

 ;D

« Reply #2 on: March 02, 2021, 11:30 »
+5
Just got a warning from Shutterstock.  I was phasing out of the forum anyway after un-licensing my portfolios there recently.  So, whatever.  Good luck to all who are still with Shutterstock.

Of all the reasons you gave them, they chose the best one!
Obviously, some admins have a good sense of humor!

 ;D

Jon is a fellow contributor.  He should be angry about the changes Shutterstock made last year too!!  lol

Brasilnut

  • Author Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock & Blog

« Reply #3 on: March 02, 2021, 11:54 »
+2
Bunch of snowflakes

H2O

« Reply #4 on: March 02, 2021, 11:57 »
+4
Well done.

Jon Oringer is nothing more than low life scum as we say in the UK.

« Reply #5 on: March 02, 2021, 12:04 »
+5
Well done.

Jon Oringer is nothing more than low life scum as we say in the UK.

FWIW, we say that same thing here in the US.

Other variants here: pond scum, scum sucker, etc. 

English is a rich, beautiful language, ain't it?  ;D

« Reply #6 on: March 02, 2021, 12:05 »
+7
Just got a warning from Shutterstock.  I was phasing out of the forum anyway after un-licensing my portfolios there recently.  So, whatever.  Good luck to all who are still with Shutterstock.
Soon you will be banned and your account closed noone will miss you.

« Reply #7 on: March 02, 2021, 12:36 »
+2
Up here in Canada we call it a POS :)

« Reply #8 on: March 02, 2021, 14:09 »
+2
From his port it seems like he stopped shooting stock a long time ago.
Maybe his work didn't suck in that era  :D

https://www.shutterstock.com/g/shutterstock

SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #9 on: March 02, 2021, 15:20 »
0
From his port it seems like he stopped shooting stock a long time ago.
Maybe his work didn't suck in that era  :D

https://www.shutterstock.com/g/shutterstock

Yeah, they're pretty old school. Check out the ID number! :)

https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/street-signs-20

« Reply #10 on: March 02, 2021, 15:30 »
+2
Just got a warning from Shutterstock.  I was phasing out of the forum anyway after un-licensing my portfolios there recently.  So, whatever.  Good luck to all who are still with Shutterstock.
Soon you will be banned and your account closed noone will miss you.

I'm all for good relationship between contributors and an agency.  I just gave my honest opinion on his portfolio.  I thought his photos sucked in terms of skill and artisticity despite them being from nearly 20 years ago.  But that wasn't the main point of my post on Shutterstock.  My point was that Jon probably wasn't those who pride in their creations in photos and videos.  I thought he probably thinks we should be happy making some money on the side from photos that would've been collecting dust in our hard drives.  If he was one of us creators who pride in our works, he wouldn't have done what he has done in the midst of pandemic to hurt us.  That' was my point of the original post on Shutterstock.  Although his photos lacked professional skill and artisticity, I can see that he gets why and what would sell in stock photos.  That's why he has been a successful businessman growing his Shutterstock into multi billion dollar corporation.  He has made all the right decisions for the company and for us for so many years, until last year imo.  So, I'm not trying to trash him at all.  I was trying to understand and find a clue of why Jon Oringer did what he did last year with Shutterstock to hurt us contributors.  I just hope that he'll correct his mistakes he made last year and roll back changes Shutterstock made to pre-covid days when most of us were happy working with Shutterstock.
« Last Edit: March 02, 2021, 15:33 by blvdone »

« Reply #11 on: March 02, 2021, 18:28 »
+4
Up here in Canada we call it a POS :)


Yeah, we do that too.

Great language, this English!  Thanks, Brits. :D :D :D

« Reply #12 on: March 03, 2021, 01:58 »
0
"I was trying to understand and find a clue of why Jon Oringer did what he did last year with Shutterstock to hurt us contributors". I think Billionaires tend to have a different make up to most of us which drives them to continue pile up money when a more rational person would say "OK thats enough now". Whether its good for society we have such people to create wealth is another debate.

« Reply #13 on: March 03, 2021, 03:52 »
+2
I am sorry... but who is Jon Oringer?
I thought it was Devil character in the movie Devil's advocate... ;D   

« Reply #14 on: March 03, 2021, 03:53 »
+11

 I just gave my honest opinion on his portfolio.

People need to stop justifiying being rude and insulting by saying "I just gave my opinion!!!".

There are a lot of forum rules on Shutterstock, one is "be polite" another "Provide honest, constructive feedback without being disrespectful or mean" How is saying someone's profile "sucks" constructive? Next rule says "Refrain from using the forum to call out other contributors work in a negative light", which is exactly what you did. Jon Oringer certainly did not come to the forum to ask for your opinion on his (test) portfolio. You made a thread specifically for calling out his work in a negative light. And then there is a rule saying "Refrain from making defamatory remarks about Shutterstock, our contributors, our customers, or our competitor", which you have broken in many of the 446564 threads you post daily.

I don't like Oringer any more than anyone else here does, but you broke several rules, you got a well deserved warning, stop whining.



SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #15 on: March 03, 2021, 05:03 »
+3

 I just gave my honest opinion on his portfolio.

People need to stop justifiying being rude and insulting by saying "I just gave my opinion!!!".

There are a lot of forum rules on Shutterstock, one is "be polite" another "Provide honest, constructive feedback without being disrespectful or mean" How is saying someone's profile "sucks" constructive? Next rule says "Refrain from using the forum to call out other contributors work in a negative light", which is exactly what you did. Jon Oringer certainly did not come to the forum to ask for your opinion on his (test) portfolio. You made a thread specifically for calling out his work in a negative light. And then there is a rule saying "Refrain from making defamatory remarks about Shutterstock, our contributors, our customers, or our competitor", which you have broken in many of the 446564 threads you post daily.

I don't like Oringer any more than anyone else here does, but you broke several rules, you got a well deserved warning, stop whining.

Surprised he's not got a temporary ban or at least a warning for: "You should work on your photo skill rather than wasting your time posting craps you stupid redneck MFer".

Maybe he got a warning, you never know. Seems a bit of a step up from an 'opinion'.

« Reply #16 on: March 03, 2021, 05:18 »
0
I do agree in Polite and be constructive even if it is bad feedback. And you always can use humor to point that out.
This reminds me of how two state figures used it in my country while one defined the government's work to fight COVID.
 "your work looks like the fine flower of the rubble" - which is also a title from a book.


« Reply #17 on: March 03, 2021, 06:32 »
+1

 I just gave my honest opinion on his portfolio.

People need to stop justifiying being rude and insulting by saying "I just gave my opinion!!!".

There are a lot of forum rules on Shutterstock, one is "be polite" another "Provide honest, constructive feedback without being disrespectful or mean" How is saying someone's profile "sucks" constructive? Next rule says "Refrain from using the forum to call out other contributors work in a negative light", which is exactly what you did. Jon Oringer certainly did not come to the forum to ask for your opinion on his (test) portfolio. You made a thread specifically for calling out his work in a negative light. And then there is a rule saying "Refrain from making defamatory remarks about Shutterstock, our contributors, our customers, or our competitor", which you have broken in many of the 446564 threads you post daily.

I don't like Oringer any more than anyone else here does, but you broke several rules, you got a well deserved warning, stop whining.

Surprised he's not got a temporary ban or at least a warning for: "You should work on your photo skill rather than wasting your time posting craps you stupid redneck MFer".

Maybe he got a warning, you never know. Seems a bit of a step up from an 'opinion'.

This Uncle Pete HodagMedia guy has been rude to me on Shutterstock forum and here.  I'm not the one who attack somebody first.  I'm only reacting to somebody being rude attacking me.  That MFer only posts meaningless crap.

« Reply #18 on: March 03, 2021, 06:44 »
+1

 I just gave my honest opinion on his portfolio.

People need to stop justifiying being rude and insulting by saying "I just gave my opinion!!!".

There are a lot of forum rules on Shutterstock, one is "be polite" another "Provide honest, constructive feedback without being disrespectful or mean" How is saying someone's profile "sucks" constructive? Next rule says "Refrain from using the forum to call out other contributors work in a negative light", which is exactly what you did. Jon Oringer certainly did not come to the forum to ask for your opinion on his (test) portfolio. You made a thread specifically for calling out his work in a negative light. And then there is a rule saying "Refrain from making defamatory remarks about Shutterstock, our contributors, our customers, or our competitor", which you have broken in many of the 446564 threads you post daily.

I don't like Oringer any more than anyone else here does, but you broke several rules, you got a well deserved warning, stop whining.

I believe the forum is a place to whine and let them know how we feel.  No need to play nice after they deliberately took our money to prop up their stock price and increase their stock option payout by millions of $$$.  I would be nice if they were nice to us contributors.  So, stop playing nice to the devils making our lives harder.  They only exploit our weakness.  They struck first.  We strike back.
« Last Edit: March 03, 2021, 06:46 by blvdone »

« Reply #19 on: March 03, 2021, 07:55 »
+2
Just got a warning from Shutterstock.  I was phasing out of the forum anyway after un-licensing my portfolios there recently.  So, whatever.  Good luck to all who are still with Shutterstock.

Whilst I understand your obvious anger (as most of us are also angry) with what shittysucks have done I think your constant posts on their forum will earn you a lifetime ban sooner or later, and also you stand a good chance of having your account closed too.   

Shystersticks really don't like open criticism and get quite pissy with their detractors.

« Reply #20 on: March 03, 2021, 10:51 »
+6
I'm feeling slighted.  I said Jon wouldn't know good photography if it jumped up and bit him in the ass, and didn't get a warning.  *pout*


« Reply #21 on: March 03, 2021, 11:19 »
+2

 I just gave my honest opinion on his portfolio.

People need to stop justifiying being rude and insulting by saying "I just gave my opinion!!!".

There are a lot of forum rules on Shutterstock, one is "be polite" another "Provide honest, constructive feedback without being disrespectful or mean" How is saying someone's profile "sucks" constructive? Next rule says "Refrain from using the forum to call out other contributors work in a negative light", which is exactly what you did. Jon Oringer certainly did not come to the forum to ask for your opinion on his (test) portfolio. You made a thread specifically for calling out his work in a negative light. And then there is a rule saying "Refrain from making defamatory remarks about Shutterstock, our contributors, our customers, or our competitor", which you have broken in many of the 446564 threads you post daily.

I don't like Oringer any more than anyone else here does, but you broke several rules, you got a well deserved warning, stop whining.

This is so lovely. You are such big fanboy of Shitterstock!  ;D

« Reply #22 on: March 03, 2021, 11:49 »
+5

 I just gave my honest opinion on his portfolio.

People need to stop justifiying being rude and insulting by saying "I just gave my opinion!!!".

There are a lot of forum rules on Shutterstock, one is "be polite" another "Provide honest, constructive feedback without being disrespectful or mean" How is saying someone's profile "sucks" constructive? Next rule says "Refrain from using the forum to call out other contributors work in a negative light", which is exactly what you did. Jon Oringer certainly did not come to the forum to ask for your opinion on his (test) portfolio. You made a thread specifically for calling out his work in a negative light. And then there is a rule saying "Refrain from making defamatory remarks about Shutterstock, our contributors, our customers, or our competitor", which you have broken in many of the 446564 threads you post daily.

I don't like Oringer any more than anyone else here does, but you broke several rules, you got a well deserved warning, stop whining.

This is so lovely. You are such big fanboy of Shitterstock!  ;D
Sure... ::)
(I am woman, by the way...)

« Reply #23 on: March 03, 2021, 12:30 »
0
Try do the same with any other contributor.Let's see if you get another warning point.

« Reply #24 on: March 03, 2021, 13:05 »
+3
Well they do Suck!

« Reply #25 on: March 03, 2021, 17:29 »
+1
The amount of attacks I got from other contributors for posting it on Shutterstock was insane.  Those people are turning other cheek to Shutterstock.  Something I wouldn't do.  After what Jon did to us last year reducing our pays instantly, honestly assessing his photos as "suck" was nothing.  He's not an active contributor not dedicated to the art of creating stock photos/videos to pay some bills anymore.  Do any of those people think he's crying because I called his photos "suck"?  Come on man.
« Last Edit: March 03, 2021, 17:33 by blvdone »

« Reply #26 on: March 03, 2021, 18:25 »
+3
The amount of attacks I got from other contributors for posting it on Shutterstock was insane.  Those people are turning other cheek to Shutterstock.  Something I wouldn't do.  After what Jon did to us last year reducing our pays instantly, honestly assessing his photos as "suck" was nothing.  He's not an active contributor not dedicated to the art of creating stock photos/videos to pay some bills anym ore.  Do any of those people think he's crying because I called his photos "suck"?  Come on man.

You gave them so many other reasons to do it, but they chose the funniest: berating Oringer, the contributor! Lol!
I can definitely imagine some smiles in the admin community.  :D
The joke is on you, I'm afraid.  ;)
« Last Edit: March 03, 2021, 18:27 by Zero Talent »


« Reply #27 on: March 03, 2021, 20:16 »
+5
Personally I think it's their new CEO Stan P who's the big ass wipe in this company. I think he's shot SS in the foot with his new subscription business strategy. The place is a sheet hole now not just for contributors it seems, but customers too. 

« Reply #28 on: March 03, 2021, 20:52 »
+3
Personally I think it's their new CEO Stan P who's the big ass wipe in this company. I think he's shot SS in the foot with his new subscription business strategy. The place is a sheet hole now not just for contributors it seems, but customers too.

I agree, but Oringer made him the CEO, I think.  So, it's both of them who decided to hurt us contributors in the midst of pandemic to instantly pump up their stock price.

« Reply #29 on: March 04, 2021, 07:55 »
+8
Oringer's Twitter comments last June when the new paycut was announced was entirely supportive of the move.  He said so multiple times. At one point he had a pretty good rant against the contributors complaining.

« Reply #30 on: March 04, 2021, 08:14 »
+4
Oringer's Twitter comments last June when the new paycut was announced was entirely supportive of the move.  He said so multiple times. At one point he had a pretty good rant against the contributors complaining.

Yup.  He basically tweeted telling contributors to GTFO if you don't like Shutterstock's new move last tyear.

« Reply #31 on: March 05, 2021, 08:44 »
+2
Yup, if you've been following J on twitter you will see that he's gradually become worse and worse with regards to the "little people" over the last couple of years.

P.S. His latest tweet? "1.6 million contributors from around the world - Shutterstock is the OG creator economy." he could just be trolling at this point!

« Reply #32 on: March 05, 2021, 08:55 »
+3
As a side note, it may not be entirely his fault. One of the more robust findings in psychology is that when people get too much money they act more like what we would colloquially call f***ing a**holes. Heres a couple of links but the phenomenon has been demonstrated in loads of studies in many different ways.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797610387613

https://www.businessinsider.com/ted-talk-monopoly-makes-people-mean-2014-8?r=US&IR=T

« Reply #33 on: March 05, 2021, 09:04 »
+2
As a side note, it may not be entirely his fault. One of the more robust findings in psychology is that when people get too much money they act more like what we would colloquially call f***ing a**holes. Heres a couple of links but the phenomenon has been demonstrated in loads of studies in many different ways.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797610387613

https://www.businessinsider.com/ted-talk-monopoly-makes-people-mean-2014-8?r=US&IR=T

He should just sell all his SSTK stocks and retire. 

« Reply #34 on: March 05, 2021, 11:30 »
+1
Hahaha!  but you're right his port is terrible!  how childish as if they haven't got better things to do. Shows you the present mentality of the place!

« Reply #35 on: March 05, 2021, 11:34 »
+2
They called him our fellow "contributor".  LOL!! ;D

« Reply #36 on: March 05, 2021, 14:35 »
+1
Hahaha!  but you're right his port is terrible!

Be a man, like blvdone, and say it on the SS forum!  ;D


« Reply #37 on: March 05, 2021, 15:02 »
0
Hahaha!  but you're right his port is terrible!

Be a man, like blvdone, and say it on the SS forum!  ;D

 ;D ;D ;D  yeah right!!

« Reply #38 on: March 15, 2021, 06:08 »
+2
The amount of attacks I got from other contributors for posting it on Shutterstock was insane.  Those people are turning other cheek to Shutterstock.  Something I wouldn't do.  After what Jon did to us last year reducing our pays instantly, honestly assessing his photos as "suck" was nothing.  He's not an active contributor not dedicated to the art of creating stock photos/videos to pay some bills anymore.  Do any of those people think he's crying because I called his photos "suck"?  Come on man.

You're correct, his photos do suck. If you said that about another contributor such as me you'd never get a warning. SS have treated contributors really badly in the last year so the snowflakes who run it should take at least some flak especially the leaders /CEO, after all, they are paid more than enough and they should be answerable to not just shareholders but contributors as well. SS work for contributors NOT the other way round.

« Reply #39 on: March 15, 2021, 06:31 »
+1
The number of attacks I got from other contributors for posting it on Shutterstock was insane.  Those people are turning other cheek to Shutterstock.  Something I wouldn't do.  After what Jon did to us last year reducing our pays instantly, honestly assessing his photos as "suck" was nothing.  He's not an active contributor not dedicated to the art of creating stock photos/videos to pay some bills anymore.  Do any of those people think he's crying because I called his photos "suck"?  Come on man.

The problem for contributors that agree with you are banned from the SS forum. I was banned from the forum over 6 months ago and was a new contributor then but knew it would take longer to reach the $35 payment before I could leave SS.
« Last Edit: March 15, 2021, 07:22 by duns123 »

« Reply #40 on: March 15, 2021, 06:47 »
+3
Personally, I think it's their new CEO Stan P who's the big ass wipe in this company. I think he's shot SS in the foot with his new subscription business strategy. The place is a sheet hole now not just for contributors it seems, but customers too.

Yes, The new CEO's the real culprit for the new regime at SS. J. O. had left by then although J.O. could veto any future changes at SS, he chose not to and instead insulted contributors by saying on Twitter last year 'If you don't like it, take your work and go. It's diabolical What's wrong with the guy?

« Reply #41 on: March 15, 2021, 06:53 »
+1
As a side note, it may not be entirely his fault. One of the more robust findings in psychology is that when people get too much money they act more like what we would colloquially call f***ing a**holes. Heres a couple of links but the phenomenon has been demonstrated in loads of studies in many different ways.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797610387613 [nofollow]

https://www.businessinsider.com/ted-talk-monopoly-makes-people-mean-2014-8?r=US&IR=T [nofollow]

These studies are calling us lower class now? what an insult from these so-called experts. but it seems to mean that these CEOs are basically emotionless cyborgs or robots, no wonder J Benzos' wife divorced him.
« Last Edit: March 15, 2021, 07:18 by duns123 »

« Reply #42 on: March 15, 2021, 15:27 »
+1
Hahaha!  but you're right his port is terrible!

Be a man, like blvdone, and say it on the SS forum!  ;D

he cant hes banned for life

H2O

« Reply #43 on: March 16, 2021, 06:38 »
+3
Just been looking at the Forum on Shutterstock, it's full of, if's and maybe's, all trying to figure out why some have been paid a few cents for a On Demand images and the difference between subscription prices.

There is a lot of anger over there, with some of them sending emails to SS, getting rubbish replies, if they reply at all, etc. . .

Basically it just comes down to robbery by Jon Oringer and his side kick Stan Pavlovsky, this is what happens when you have a unregulated Capitalist market; down the ages most business owners have exploited there work force, first offering a decent remuneration and then as the years go on, once they have cornered the market, offering slave wages.

This is apart from the striking, unethical and immoral position that this puts Oringer in, a man of no conscience, which many business leaders and politicians seem to sympathies with.

To compete against the likes of China and other totalitarian regimes, Capitalism would be advised to move on from this model of business.

We basically need a new enlightenment.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #44 on: March 16, 2021, 09:59 »
+3
Hahaha!  but you're right his port is terrible!

Be a man, like blvdone, and say it on the SS forum!  ;D

he cant hes banned for life

I forgot, he was banned for life on SS forums, long ago. And after that, Leaf banned him here... six (or more) of his accounts, "forever", years ago. We'll be saying farewell, until the next time we meet when Tyler notices. Until then I'm not saying anything.

« Reply #45 on: March 16, 2021, 14:50 »
+3
Just been looking at the Forum on Shutterstock, it's full of, if's and maybe's, all trying to figure out why some have been paid a few cents for a On Demand images and the difference between subscription prices.

There is a lot of anger over there, with some of them sending emails to SS, getting rubbish replies, if they reply at all, etc. . .

Basically it just comes down to robbery by Jon Oringer and his side kick Stan Pavlovsky, this is what happens when you have a unregulated Capitalist market; down the ages most business owners have exploited there work force, first offering a decent remuneration and then as the years go on, once they have cornered the market, offering slave wages.

This is apart from the striking, unethical and immoral position that this puts Oringer in, a man of no conscience, which many business leaders and politicians seem to sympathies with.

To compete against the likes of China and other totalitarian regimes, Capitalism would be advised to move on from this model of business.

We basically need a new enlightenment.

You basically want a new entitlement.

« Reply #46 on: March 17, 2021, 08:07 »
+4

We basically need a new enlightenment.

We do but good luck with that in this sad, mean, depressing time we're living in.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
17 Replies
6019 Views
Last post July 07, 2008, 18:12
by chellyar
6 Replies
4930 Views
Last post August 26, 2009, 13:20
by cascoly
25 Replies
27689 Views
Last post May 26, 2015, 05:40
by cathyslife
0 Replies
1510 Views
Last post February 25, 2017, 01:33
by akaza
3 Replies
1531 Views
Last post February 23, 2020, 20:47
by rinderart

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle