Author Topic: Shutterstock takes action against spammers! (Read 27833 times)

Anja_Kaiser · « **on:** November 24, 2016, 12:24 »

Shutterstock just decided to eliminate title spamming! They have a list of the worst offenders, about 20 ports got already deleted and they're currently asking others to change their titles within the next week. If they don't, they'll be out.

AnTiImAgeX · « **Reply #1 on:** November 24, 2016, 13:07 »

That's good news!!!

kaboom · « **Reply #2 on:** November 24, 2016, 13:08 »

It took them six months to react. And during these six months, all spammers were cashing in, while decent contributors were losing money. Now 20 accounts got deleted... like a drop in the ocean considering the number of spammers probably reached hundreds during six months of SS allowing this practice...

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #3 on:** November 24, 2016, 13:41 »

Quote from: kaboom on November 24, 2016, 13:08

It took them six months to react. And during these six months, all spammers were cashing in, while decent contributors were losing money. Now 20 accounts got deleted... like a drop in the ocean considering the number of spammers probably reached hundreds during six months of SS allowing this practice...

yes, LOL
like the lazy barnboy closing the barn door after the cows escaped
... or the captain sailing away with the loots after discovering there is a hole at the bottom of the ship .

all for show to the english, as latino say.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #4 on:** November 24, 2016, 13:52 »

The could usefully ban a few people at the top of the Christmas "best match", I notice.

spike · « **Reply #5 on:** November 24, 2016, 15:50 »

They could fire some of the reviewers or people who do contributor portfolio management. If I had a stock agency, and things like this happened for 6 months, I wouldn't be mad at the people who are abusing the system, I'd be mad I obviously hired the wrong and incompetent people. From the reviewers to the coders who couldn't identify spammy portfolios by writing a script in 30 minutes and the management who perhaps hasn't communicated the problem to the coders. In the end, I'd fire myself since I'm obviously a douche who can't run a company. But yeah, not happening. They wanted these spammy accounts so that they could pay out less royalties and "touch up" their Q3 results.

Minsc · « **Reply #6 on:** November 24, 2016, 16:28 »

This is very good news. I understand their dilemma and why they hesitated. I'm glad they're following through and taking out the worst offenders. I still see a few offenders, so let's see if they comply. If they're smart, they bretter.

Law-abiding contributors should see a bump in sales in the upcoming weeks.

Anja_Kaiser · « **Reply #7 on:** November 24, 2016, 17:02 »

They continue working on it - those 20 were just a first signal to everyone else spamming titles.
SS also asked us to get the message out (like "fix it in the next couple of days or get out") in different languages. So feel free to spread the word through social media in English and/or your native language.

kaboom · « **Reply #8 on:** November 24, 2016, 17:31 »

We should get the message out? Dont they have a list of spammers and their email addresses? Shouldnt they have this list ready a few months ago? Instead of waiting and letting the problem spread..

Many of our images lost their position in search due to spammers and the position will never recover. If they acted sooner, this didnt have to happen. It affected our monthly payouts for many months.

So yeah, it is good they finally started to do something but there is a bitter taste to it and many unanswered questions.

I also dont think the accounts will be deleted. They will probably be only disabled. And maybe when they change the description, they will be reinstated and all their images will be back in their former positions?...

Dumc · « **Reply #9 on:** November 24, 2016, 17:38 »

Quote from: Anja_Kaiser on November 24, 2016, 17:02

They continue working on it - those 20 were just a first signal to everyone else spamming titles.
SS also asked us to get the message out (like "fix it in the next couple of days or get out") in different languages. So feel free to spread the word through social media in English and/or your native language.

Why would we spread the word. SS should just ban them immediately. Phuckem.

PureArt · « **Reply #10 on:** November 24, 2016, 17:44 »

Quote from: Minsc on November 24, 2016, 16:28

I understand their dilemma and why they hesitated.

What dilemma?

Minsc · « **Reply #11 on:** November 24, 2016, 18:18 »

Quote from: PureArt on November 24, 2016, 17:44

Quote from: Minsc on November 24, 2016, 16:28
I understand their dilemma and why they hesitated.

What dilemma?

Because SS could lose sales / revenue. In some cases, the images at are the top because it actually does have commercial value, not solely due to its spammy title.

They could see possibly millions of less images in the SS portfolio. I know some people want to see the ban hammer get slammed down hard, but SS allowed this to happen. People take advantage of systems all the time and people took advantage of what SS gave them.

Allowing them to change the titles or get banned is a good alternative.

Hundstage14 · « **Reply #12 on:** November 24, 2016, 19:11 »

I really want a explanation from the company why several month nothing happens and the contributors were ignored.

Pauws99 · « **Reply #13 on:** November 25, 2016, 02:09 »

Quote from: Hundstage14 on November 24, 2016, 19:11

I really want a explanation from the company why several month nothing happens and the contributors were ignored.

You won't get one........

alno · « **Reply #14 on:** November 25, 2016, 02:39 »

Don't expect Shutterstock would eliminate ALL those accounts. This is their money finally and many spammy titles allow those images pop up in higher Google search positions than the same images uploaded to Fotolia or Depositphotos for example (Am I right that huge spam title problem is Shutterstock only?) It's a balancing between being modern and responsible and losing total income.

Hundstage14 · « **Reply #15 on:** November 25, 2016, 04:18 »

Quote from: Pauws99 on November 25, 2016, 02:09

Quote from: Hundstage14 on November 24, 2016, 19:11
I really want a explanation from the company why several month nothing happens and the contributors were ignored.
You won't get one........

most likely

but: I really want a explanation from the company why several month nothing happens and the contributors were ignored.

DavidZydd · « **Reply #16 on:** November 25, 2016, 04:19 »

Quote from: Irina Anosova on November 25, 2016, 02:39

Don't expect Shutterstock would eliminate ALL those accounts. This is their money finally and many spammy titles allow those images pop up in higher Google search positions than the same images uploaded to Fotolia or Depositphotos for example (Am I right that huge spam title problem is Shutterstock only?) It's a balancing between being modern and responsible and losing total income.

Google ignores keyword stuffing for at least 10-15 years. Moreover, google penalizes it. So, SS loses money with it.

The whole thing is about a few bigheads in the board want to see a bigger number in image count... I'm sure that they have no idea, what this company does, like in almost every big companies...

Microstockphoto · « **Reply #17 on:** November 25, 2016, 04:26 »

Quote from: spike on November 24, 2016, 15:50

They could fire some of the reviewers or people who do contributor portfolio management. If I had a stock agency, and things like this happened for 6 months, I wouldn't be mad at the people who are abusing the system, I'd be mad I obviously hired the wrong and incompetent people. From the reviewers to the coders who couldn't identify spammy portfolios by writing a script in 30 minutes and the management who perhaps hasn't communicated the problem to the coders. In the end, I'd fire myself since I'm obviously a douche who can't run a company. But yeah, not happening. They wanted these spammy accounts so that they could pay out less royalties and "touch up" their Q3 results.

well put !

panicAttack · « **Reply #18 on:** November 25, 2016, 04:55 »

is it possible to see atleast one banned account that was linked on this forum as spammer before they ban him/her?

gyllens · « **Reply #19 on:** November 25, 2016, 06:41 »

About time they did something! after all these years I didnt even know that titles counted that much in a search? or do they?

Anja_Kaiser · « **Reply #20 on:** November 25, 2016, 10:28 »

Quote from: Minsc on November 24, 2016, 18:18

Quote from: PureArt on November 24, 2016, 17:44
Quote from: Minsc on November 24, 2016, 16:28
I understand their dilemma and why they hesitated.

What dilemma?

I know some people want to see the ban hammer get slammed down hard, but SS allowed this to happen. People take advantage of systems all the time and people took advantage of what SS gave them.

Allowing them to change the titles or get banned is a good alternative.

SS let this happen, but actually the spammers already had two warnings: First an email was sent out and the "Shutterstock's position on repeated words (...)" thread was published on the 7th of June (!) - plus an "update" on it. So, they actually *knew* this wasn't allowed. (And it's common sense somehow, anyway.) If I had to decide, ... well.

@panicAttack: I don't exactly know which ones were posted in here, but some of those which were mentioned on FB yesterday actually disappeared. (This one e.g.: https://www.shutterstock.com/pic-517018450/stock-vector-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tree-tr.html?src=8iTfDcBidQCf9Jl-jY1UPg-1-0 Not only this particular image, but the entire port is gone - I checked that.) Yesterday was Thanksgiving in the US, though, I guess it'll yet take some time, as they started doing this manually. Wait and see.

YadaYadaYada · « **Reply #21 on:** November 25, 2016, 11:00 »

Quote from: Irina Anosova on November 25, 2016, 02:39

Don't expect Shutterstock would eliminate ALL those accounts. This is their money finally and many spammy titles allow those images pop up in higher Google search positions than the same images uploaded to Fotolia or Depositphotos for example (Am I right that huge spam title problem is Shutterstock only?) It's a balancing between being modern and responsible and losing total income.

No they don't rank higher than FT or DP, it hurts them. Google blocks spammy titles and sites. The Google SEO is smart enough to put them on the bottom. This has been since 2000 or before. Why do people here invent information that's not fact,to support the superstition claims?

https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/66358?hl=en

https://www.seroundtable.com/google-keywords-duplicate-16716.html

John explained that he is repeating the same keyword over and over again, to the point where it is making it hard for Google to "recognize what's really unique & compelling" on that specific site.

Pauws99 · « **Reply #22 on:** November 25, 2016, 12:31 »

Quote from: Hundstage14 on November 24, 2016, 19:11

I really want a explanation from the company why several month nothing happens and the contributors were ignored.

To be honest I rather think its a waste of your energy if they did give an explanation you may well not believe it. I may be too fatalist but I think to survive in this environment its best to focus on what you can control.

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #23 on:** November 25, 2016, 12:36 »

Quote from: Dumc on November 24, 2016, 17:38

Quote from: Anja_Kaiser on November 24, 2016, 17:02
They continue working on it - those 20 were just a first signal to everyone else spamming titles.
SS also asked us to get the message out (like "fix it in the next couple of days or get out") in different languages. So feel free to spread the word through social media in English and/or your native language.

Why would we spread the word. SS should just ban them immediately. Phuckem.

agree. more so that ss has this auto-delete duplicare keywords in the submission stage.
surely their IT can also use this method of eliminating portfolio with duplicating keywords in title and description, no???
they don't do that because ss really don't give a r@t$ass about it!!!

as like yyy has google SEO smart, surely ss can do the same... IF THEY WANT TO

Quote from: YadaYadaYada on November 25, 2016, 11:00

Google blocks spammy titles and sites. The Google SEO is smart enough to put them on the bottom.

YadaYadaYada · « **Reply #24 on:** November 25, 2016, 19:14 »

Quote from: etudiante_rapide on November 25, 2016, 12:36

Quote from: Dumc on November 24, 2016, 17:38
Quote from: Anja_Kaiser on November 24, 2016, 17:02
They continue working on it - those 20 were just a first signal to everyone else spamming titles.
SS also asked us to get the message out (like "fix it in the next couple of days or get out") in different languages. So feel free to spread the word through social media in English and/or your native language.

Why would we spread the word. SS should just ban them immediately. Phuckem.

agree. more so that ss has this auto-delete duplicare keywords in the submission stage.
surely their IT can also use this method of eliminating portfolio with duplicating keywords in title and description, no???
they don't do that because ss really don't give a r@t$ass about it!!!

as like yyy has google SEO smart, surely ss can do the same... IF THEY WANT TO

Quote from: YadaYadaYada on November 25, 2016, 11:00
Google blocks spammy titles and sites. The Google SEO is smart enough to put them on the bottom.

Yes, the fact that SS can't figure out how to see 99 duplicate words in a title means, something is wrong. Terribly stupid and wrong.

I'm happy that Jon finally woke up after we've been writing and complaining for months. Why none of this went up the chain or got action action means they are either trying to program and haven't got it done, remember the faulty email. Or the usual paralysis of corporate kicked in. People afraid to expose a problem and tell the truth. Perfect yes men, in meetings, don't raise questions. How they can't see this when even the weakest computer people, can do a simple search and see the obvious.

I don't have any hint that they would do this intentionally to harm us and favor low pay new people. It's counter to the agencys own interests to force poor products to the front of the site. Unless they want to drive customers away? As this goes, you can't polish a turd. Buyers won't buy poor quality, just because it's first.

Minsc · « **Reply #25 on:** November 26, 2016, 00:14 »

Looks like SS took down ~~all~~ most of the spammers. I was following a few portfolios with high ranking images that had spammy titles. They're no longer showing up on search results and their portfolios are gone from the site.

I think many contributors will see a small sales bump next week.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #26 on:** November 26, 2016, 01:16 »

Quote from: Minsc on November 26, 2016, 00:14

Looks like SS took down ~~all~~ most of the spammers. I was following a few portfolios with high ranking images that had spammy titles. They're no longer showing up on search results and their portfolios are gone from the site.

I think many contributors will see a small sales bump next week.

Wow! That's good.

Hundstage14 · « **Reply #27 on:** November 26, 2016, 07:23 »

Quote from: Pauws99 on November 25, 2016, 12:31

Quote from: Hundstage14 on November 24, 2016, 19:11
I really want a explanation from the company why several month nothing happens and the contributors were ignored.
To be honest I rather think its a waste of your energy if they did give an explanation you may well not believe it. I may be too fatalist but I think to survive in this environment its best to focus on what you can control.

I believe that to focus on things you can control is always a good action maxim, no matter what environment. (Under the premise you know what you can control and whether it is purposeful.)
And I assume that you wanted to tell me that you do not expect a statement and if only an unsatisfactory. My expectation is the same.

But: I really want a explanation from the company why several month nothing happens and the contributors were ignored.

Pauws99 · « **Reply #28 on:** November 26, 2016, 07:26 »

Quote from: Hundstage14 on November 26, 2016, 07:23

Quote from: Pauws99 on November 25, 2016, 12:31
Quote from: Hundstage14 on November 24, 2016, 19:11
I really want a explanation from the company why several month nothing happens and the contributors were ignored.
To be honest I rather think its a waste of your energy if they did give an explanation you may well not believe it. I may be too fatalist but I think to survive in this environment its best to focus on what you can control.

I believe that to focus on things you can control is always a good action maxim, no matter what environment. (Under the premise you know what you can control and whether it is purposeful.)
And I assume that you wanted to tell me that you do not expect a statement and if only an unsatisfactory. My expectation is the same.

But: I really want a explanation from the company why several month nothing happens and the contributors were ignored.

For what its worth my explanation is contributors were ignored but once buyers started complaining, and possibly defecting to the likes of Adobe something had to be done........

OM · « **Reply #29 on:** November 26, 2016, 07:35 »

Quote from: Pauws99 on November 26, 2016, 07:26

Quote from: Hundstage14 on November 26, 2016, 07:23
Quote from: Pauws99 on November 25, 2016, 12:31
Quote from: Hundstage14 on November 24, 2016, 19:11
I really want a explanation from the company why several month nothing happens and the contributors were ignored.
To be honest I rather think its a waste of your energy if they did give an explanation you may well not believe it. I may be too fatalist but I think to survive in this environment its best to focus on what you can control.

I believe that to focus on things you can control is always a good action maxim, no matter what environment. (Under the premise you know what you can control and whether it is purposeful.)
And I assume that you wanted to tell me that you do not expect a statement and if only an unsatisfactory. My expectation is the same.

But: I really want a explanation from the company why several month nothing happens and the contributors were ignored.
For what its worth my explanation is contributors were ignored but once buyers started complaining, and possibly defecting to the likes of Adobe something had to be done........

I remember thinking as much a couple of weeks ago. Only when the buyers start voting with their feet will something be done. Looks like the buyers started shuffling out the door.

Pauws99 · « **Reply #30 on:** November 26, 2016, 07:37 »

In the current market its buyers who wield the power...not as some think the agencies

OM · « **Reply #31 on:** November 26, 2016, 07:55 »

I noticed that Jon Orringer posted a FB message thanking SS contributors for their help in weeding out the title spammers.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #32 on:** November 26, 2016, 08:49 »

Quote from: Pauws99 on November 26, 2016, 07:37

In the current market its buyers who wield the power...not as some think the agencies

Isn't it always the end user who decides? Not consciously, perhaps, but simply by making spending decisions.
It's a curious fantasy among microstockers that proclaims they have the power because they control the supply. It's been shown time and time again that fragmentation of supply leaves the suppliers powerless.
We're just like farmers supplying supermarkets ... absolutely exactly like them. The supermarket competes with others over price, squeezes the farmers to beat the competition, and if the farmers aren't sqeezed hard enough to bring down prices the consumer goes to a cheaper supermarket.

Pauws99 · « **Reply #33 on:** November 26, 2016, 09:51 »

Its an interesting parallel in the UK some farmers have done very well by adopting a more vertical model with "farmers markets" or making their own end products. I'm sure for the more talented photographers this is more lucrative but don't think I'm dedicated/good enough. Also if you can create a restricted supply you can retain prices e.g Champagne, Melton Mowbary Pork pies etc.

Artist · « **Reply #34 on:** November 26, 2016, 10:40 »

Yes, same is on his twitter page too
https://twitter.com/jonoringer

Hope he take some strict action against such spammers.
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Tamara.Z

fotografer · « **Reply #35 on:** November 26, 2016, 12:13 »

Quote from: Artist on November 26, 2016, 10:40

Hope he take some strict action against such spammers.
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Tamara.Z

Looks like he already has. I just clicked on 3 of those imagesa and they are no longer availabe.

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #36 on:** November 26, 2016, 14:27 »

Quote from: Pauws99 on November 26, 2016, 09:51

Its an interesting parallel in the UK some farmers have done very well by adopting a more vertical model with "farmers markets" or making their own end products. I'm sure for the more talented photographers this is more lucrative but don't think I'm dedicated/good enough. Also if you can create a restricted supply you can retain prices e.g Champagne, Melton Mowbary Pork pies etc.

i don't think anyone is saying they are more talented, but asking for things to get back to norm
like what ss became #1 to most of us who chose to submit to the 7/10 entry criterion...
and to see there is no switch flipping once you hit that monthly average...
or see amazing garbage like title spamming getting approved while your proper standard stuff
is rejected for some strange reason like atilla used to do,etc..

we are not looking for some great miracle...
although the return of the $80, $28, $102 single earning ... would be wonderful...!!!

we're just looking to see things getting back to when Oringer was the sole proprietor with no
main shareholders' @ss to lick...

but perharps the last financial report meeting had some heads rolling when questions were being
asked...

or adobe did the trick to get ss to sit up...

whatever the reason, ( i am sure the vultures have already all short sold and taken profit
to go elsewhere to suck blook)...
so let's hope we see a good 2017 start to get back to ss ...

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #37 on:** November 26, 2016, 14:29 »

Quote from: Microstockphoto on November 25, 2016, 04:26

Quote from: spike on November 24, 2016, 15:50
They could fire some of the reviewers or people who do contributor portfolio management. If I had a stock agency, and things like this happened for 6 months, I wouldn't be mad at the people who are abusing the system, I'd be mad I obviously hired the wrong and incompetent people. From the reviewers to the coders who couldn't identify spammy portfolios by writing a script in 30 minutes and the management who perhaps hasn't communicated the problem to the coders. In the end, I'd fire myself since I'm obviously a douche who can't run a company. But yeah, not happening. They wanted these spammy accounts so that they could pay out less royalties and "touch up" their Q3 results.

well put !

definitely... it has to be the reviewers ...
as how else can these spammers get past the front door???
other than someone inside letting them all in from the back door without any curatorship.

unless it's some major shareholders retard child letting in their cousins cousins and best buddies..

panicAttack · « **Reply #38 on:** November 26, 2016, 14:38 »

i don't know it this because of removing spammers or something else (search engine) but my new files finally have great sales

Shelma1 · « **Reply #39 on:** November 26, 2016, 15:06 »

Looks like some spammers are editing their titles, but still cramming six mentions of words/phrases into them anyway:

https://www.shutterstock.com/pic-340671362/stock-vector-black-friday-sale-inscription-photorealistic-black-friday-design-template-black-friday-advertising-black-friday-banner-with-red-balloons-and-place-black-friday-text-vector-black-friday.html?src=8Pd3B_pK_7PMxvvbH9H3cg-1-1

cathyslife · « **Reply #40 on:** November 26, 2016, 16:12 »

Unless they algorithmically do something to stop it from happening, whether on initial submission or on edit, it will continue to happen. Once a cheater, always a cheater.

angelawaye · « **Reply #41 on:** November 26, 2016, 16:15 »

It is nice they are finally doing something. Only 4 days until the end of the month and it is still shocking to compare this year's November sales with last year's November sales. OUCH.

I'm still not uploading anything new though. I think they are still working on these spammers and it will take a couple more months until it is a "safe" again...

Pauws99 · « **Reply #42 on:** November 26, 2016, 17:52 »

Quote from: etudiante_rapide on November 26, 2016, 14:27

Quote from: Pauws99 on November 26, 2016, 09:51
Its an interesting parallel in the UK some farmers have done very well by adopting a more vertical model with "farmers markets" or making their own end products. I'm sure for the more talented photographers this is more lucrative but don't think I'm dedicated/good enough. Also if you can create a restricted supply you can retain prices e.g Champagne, Melton Mowbary Pork pies etc.

i don't think anyone is saying they are more talented, but asking for things to get back to norm
like what ss became #1 to most of us who chose to submit to the 7/10 entry criterion...
and to see there is no switch flipping once you hit that monthly average...
or see amazing garbage like title spamming getting approved while your proper standard stuff
is rejected for some strange reason like atilla used to do,etc..

we are not looking for some great miracle...
although the return of the $80, $28, $102 single earning ... would be wonderful...!!!

we're just looking to see things getting back to when Oringer was the sole proprietor with no
main shareholders' @ss to lick...

but perharps the last financial report meeting had some heads rolling when questions were being
asked...

or adobe did the trick to get ss to sit up...

whatever the reason, ( i am sure the vultures have already all short sold and taken profit
to go elsewhere to suck blook)...
so let's hope we see a good 2017 start to get back to ss ...

That wasn't really my point I was making a more general one that a mass market place is never going to be the place to sell the highest quality work in the long run and am am merely being realistic when I say I'm not a great photographer and and even worse self publicist. If I was I would look at higher value outlets setting up my own site etc. I certainly agree though that SS is not performing as it was.

PixelBytes · « **Reply #43 on:** November 26, 2016, 18:35 »

Quote from: cathyslife on November 26, 2016, 16:12

Unless they algorithmically do something to stop it from happening, whether on initial submission or on edit, it will continue to happen. Once a cheater, always a cheater.

Exactly. Or if they would severely penalize the spammed images in the search the problem would take care of itself.

YadaYadaYada · « **Reply #44 on:** November 26, 2016, 19:49 »

Quote from: Pauws99 on November 26, 2016, 07:26

Quote from: Hundstage14 on November 26, 2016, 07:23
Quote from: Pauws99 on November 25, 2016, 12:31
Quote from: Hundstage14 on November 24, 2016, 19:11
I really want a explanation from the company why several month nothing happens and the contributors were ignored.
To be honest I rather think its a waste of your energy if they did give an explanation you may well not believe it. I may be too fatalist but I think to survive in this environment its best to focus on what you can control.

I believe that to focus on things you can control is always a good action maxim, no matter what environment. (Under the premise you know what you can control and whether it is purposeful.)
And I assume that you wanted to tell me that you do not expect a statement and if only an unsatisfactory. My expectation is the same.

But: I really want a explanation from the company why several month nothing happens and the contributors were ignored.
For what its worth my explanation is contributors were ignored but once buyers started complaining, and possibly defecting to the likes of Adobe something had to be done........

HalfFull · « **Reply #45 on:** November 27, 2016, 11:51 »

This guy's port seems to be a live and kicking..... and spamming. As well as repeating words, he just pastes all his keywords into the title as well as the keywords box!

https://www.shutterstock.com/g/MIKHAIL+GRACHIKOV

Minsc · « **Reply #46 on:** November 27, 2016, 16:00 »

Here's a portfolio to look out for:

https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Malyshev+Maksim

He's got some good work, but the spammy titles has got to go. If you're on this board, please change it before you get kicked out by SS.

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #47 on:** November 27, 2016, 16:13 »

Quote from: cathyslife on November 26, 2016, 16:12

Unless they algorithmically do something to stop it from happening, whether on initial submission or on edit, it will continue to happen. Once a cheater, always a cheater.

true!
they're like mice... eventually they get smarter and realise the cat is not as smart as they are..
and come back.

i don't know what you can do really.
maybe instead of putting their port here,

Quote from: HalfFull on November 27, 2016, 11:51

This guy's port seems to be a live and kicking..... and spamming. As well as repeating words, he just pastes all his keywords into the title as well as the keywords box!

https://www.shutterstock.com/g/MIKHAIL+GRACHIKOV

Quote from: Minsc on November 27, 2016, 16:00

Here's a portfolio to look out for:

https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Malyshev+Maksim

He's got some good work, but the spammy titles has got to go. If you're on this board, please change it before you get kicked out by SS.

... where nothing can be done about it...
maybe do it at Oringer's twitter site or wherever he has his own web address.
not bother with ss site because the frontline ppl will surely delete it as the dirty cock inside the henhouse

Kamran · « **Reply #48 on:** November 28, 2016, 00:18 »

Great SS started taking action against them. My sales at SS are decreasing constantly and I have already stop uploading to them as new contents are burred so quickly.

Dumc · « **Reply #49 on:** December 09, 2016, 06:31 »

Is there a topic on SS forums to report spammers?

https://www.shutterstock.com/pic-509180824/stock-photo-soybean-backgroundsoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoy.html?src=Vid1LN8uT3YeJ2XPsVsmdw-1-0

Artist · « **Reply #50 on:** December 09, 2016, 07:26 »

Quote from: Dumc on December 09, 2016, 06:31

Is there a topic on SS forums to report spammers?

https://www.shutterstock.com/pic-509180824/stock-photo-soybean-backgroundsoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoysoy.html?src=Vid1LN8uT3YeJ2XPsVsmdw-1-0

http://forums.submit.shutterstock.com/topic/89637-update-on-title-spamming/

Dumc · « **Reply #51 on:** December 09, 2016, 07:32 »

Thanks

Dodie · « **Reply #52 on:** December 09, 2016, 18:50 »

Quote from: Dumc on December 09, 2016, 07:32

Thanks

We are not allowed to post links to other people's images any more. They deleted all posts with links from the above mentioned thread and they sent out PM-s to contributors that it's against the TOS. Didn't you get a PM from a moderator?

tickstock · « **Reply #53 on:** December 09, 2016, 19:16 »

Wow every search on there is dominated by spammers.

YadaYadaYada · « **Reply #54 on:** December 09, 2016, 19:25 »

Quote from: Dodie on December 09, 2016, 18:50

Quote from: Dumc on December 09, 2016, 07:32
Thanks

We are not allowed to post links to other people's images any more. They deleted all posts with links from the above mentioned thread and they sent out PM-s to contributors that it's against the TOS. Didn't you get a PM from a moderator?

Yes, but it appears that everybody who posted to the deleted thread got the notice. I know I didn't post a link to anything.

We are asking all members to be respectful of one another and to refrain from posting other contributor's images as well as talking about them without their knowledge and permission, as this is not permitted under our Terms of Agreement.

cathyslife · « **Reply #55 on:** December 09, 2016, 19:59 »

Quote from: YadaYadaYada on December 09, 2016, 19:25

Yes, but it appears that everybody who posted to the deleted thread got the notice. I know I didn't post a link to anything.

We are asking all members to be respectful of one another and to refrain from posting other contributor's images as well as talking about them without their knowledge and permission, as this is not permitted under our Terms of Agreement.

Spamming is also not permitted under their Agreement, but look what is happening. So smack down the people who are calling the cheaters out, but let the cheaters stay? Ug, I am beginning to hate this company.

Dumc · « **Reply #56 on:** December 10, 2016, 00:25 »

Quote from: Dodie on December 09, 2016, 18:50

Quote from: Dumc on December 09, 2016, 07:32
Thanks

We are not allowed to post links to other people's images any more. They deleted all posts with links from the above mentioned thread and they sent out PM-s to contributors that it's against the TOS. Didn't you get a PM from a moderator?

I didn't probably because no moderator's reading that topic because nobody cares. Anyway, I deleted it...

Dodie · « **Reply #57 on:** December 10, 2016, 05:00 »

Quote from: YadaYadaYada on December 09, 2016, 19:25

Yes, but it appears that everybody who posted to the deleted thread got the notice. I know I didn't post a link to anything.

We are asking all members to be respectful of one another and to refrain from posting other contributor's images as well as talking about them without their knowledge and permission, as this is not permitted under our Terms of Agreement.

No Yada, I don't remember posting any links either, I'm too lazy to gather such things but I posted something to another thread that may not be to their liking.

In fact, they deleted posts twice from that thread, the first time somewhere in the middle of the thread with Bar*y's intervention.

Btw, how come that you quote the exact text of the PM if you haven't got one?

zsooofija · « **Reply #58 on:** December 10, 2016, 06:24 »

Quote from: cathyslife on December 09, 2016, 19:59

Quote from: YadaYadaYada on December 09, 2016, 19:25
Yes, but it appears that everybody who posted to the deleted thread got the notice. I know I didn't post a link to anything.

We are asking all members to be respectful of one another and to refrain from posting other contributor's images as well as talking about them without their knowledge and permission, as this is not permitted under our Terms of Agreement.

Spamming is also not permitted under their Agreement, but look what is happening. So smack down the people who are calling the cheaters out, but let the cheaters stay? Ug, I am beginning to hate this company.

I wish they'd delete spammy images/accounts instead of honest contributors' post denouncing these accounts. The problem won't go away just because we're not allowed to talk about it.

Minsc · « **Reply #59 on:** December 10, 2016, 14:28 »

It looks like this guy's portfolio is gone with the exception of 3 images.

https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Malyshev+Maksim

This is the guy with Cat.Cat.Cat.Cat.Cat.Cat.Cat.Cat title.

Dumc · « **Reply #60 on:** December 10, 2016, 14:48 »

How many images he had online before being removed?

zsooofija · « **Reply #61 on:** December 10, 2016, 14:58 »

Quote from: Minsc on December 10, 2016, 14:28

It looks like this guy's portfolio is gone with the exception of 3 images.

https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Malyshev+Maksim

This is the guy with Cat.Cat.Cat.Cat.Cat.Cat.Cat.Cat title.

Those 3 images are also no longer available. It was about time.

Quote from: Dumc on December 10, 2016, 14:48

How many images he had online before being removed?

I don't remember exactly how many but pages for sure. I remember this account because it had A LOT of spam.

YadaYadaYada · « **Reply #62 on:** December 10, 2016, 16:51 »

Quote from: Dodie on December 10, 2016, 05:00

Quote from: YadaYadaYada on December 09, 2016, 19:25
Yes, but it appears that everybody who posted to the deleted thread got the notice. I know I didn't post a link to anything.

We are asking all members to be respectful of one another and to refrain from posting other contributor's images as well as talking about them without their knowledge and permission, as this is not permitted under our Terms of Agreement.

No Yada, I don't remember posting any links either, I'm too lazy to gather such things but I posted something to another thread that may not be to their liking.

In fact, they deleted posts twice from that thread, the first time somewhere in the middle of the thread with Bar*y's intervention.

Btw, how come that you quote the exact text of the PM if you haven't got one?

Bad wording or confusing on my post. I didn't post any links to spam on the thread, I did get the PM. I was guessing that they deleted the whole thread and notified all of us why.

Sorry Cathy and others, two wrongs aren't making it right. TOS for forums has always been the same. No writing about other people, no linking to their photos or ports to bad mouth them. They just stopped what isn't allowed. That's not favoritism.

Spam isn't allowed, they are working on that now. New editor doesn't allow so many repeating words in the title, but we can put a reasonable number that might be necessary. Looks like they are working on keyword spam next. That was broken the other day.

We all know they knew it was a problem. That warning email was sent to the wrong people, then the retraction. SS created more of a problem by making the title spam for search email notice. They knew then. No reason why they didn't keep watching until the forum complaints and facebook.

It's being delt with now. Lets be happy for that.

Dodie · « **Reply #63 on:** December 10, 2016, 18:12 »

I wonder if they will clean up BS too. For now there is plenty of spam there too.

Stock Photo ID: 102435965
Sun burst star or snowflakes vector logo icon set. Sun, star, summer, nature, sky, summer. Sunshine star logo. Sun icons. Sun logo. Nature sun star. Star vector icons logo. Star silhouette

Is this all purpose description OK? snowflake, sun, star, it doesn't matter. Where is the sky, summer, nature....

noodle · « **Reply #64 on:** December 11, 2016, 18:16 »

Your the dummy that put them in there in the first place
Sir Spamalot

Justanotherphotographer · « **Reply #65 on:** December 12, 2016, 03:48 »

Quote from: noodle on December 11, 2016, 18:16

Your the dummy that put them in there in the first place
Sir Spamalot

I am not so sure there ever where any as he's clearly the owner of the site he's linking to (1 day old account, same writing style as the, I assume, fake testimonials on the site)

sharpshot · « **Reply #66 on:** December 12, 2016, 06:09 »

Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on December 12, 2016, 03:48

Quote from: noodle on December 11, 2016, 18:16
Your the dummy that put them in there in the first place
Sir Spamalot
I am not so sure there ever where any as he's clearly the owner of the site he's linking to (1 day old account, same writing style as the, I assume, fake testimonials on the site)

This person made a few bland comments on other subjects to make them look more genuine, how sad is that?

mike935 · « **Reply #67 on:** December 13, 2016, 06:04 »

Six times Santa, six times Claus. Is it spam or not?

Christmas Santa Claus. Set funny Santa Claus in different poses. Collection isolated Santa Claus. Santa Claus in cartoon style. Funny Santa Claus different emotions. Santa Claus with gift sack.

https://www.shutterstock.com/pic-520221838/stock-vector-christmas-santa-claus-set-funny-santa-claus-in-different-poses-collection-isolated-santa-claus-santa-claus-in-cartoon-style-funny-santa-claus-different-emotions-santa-claus-with-gift.html?src=cqV1X-TS1IlsBZN5EVcHzQ-1-25

Is Shutterstock really interested to ieliminate spam or is it more interested in revenue increased 17%?

Look, what I have found:

http://seekingalpha.com/article/4019890-shutterstocks-sstk-ceo-jon-oringer-q3-2016-results-earnings-call-transcript

Shutterstock, Inc. (NYSE:SSTK)

Q3 2016 Earnings Conference Call

November 4, 2016, 8:30 am ET

...With that I would like to turn the call over to Jon.

Jon Oringer

Thanks, Rawson. Thanks everyone for joining us today for Shutterstock's third quarter 2016 earnings call.

This was a solid quarter for Shutterstock and we have a significant amount of momentum as we head into the final months of the year. Compared to the third quarter of 2015, revenue increased 17% with adjusted EBITDA margins of 21%, both excluding the impact of foreign currency movements.

Our image library expanded 61% to over 102 million images. Our video library expanded 64% to 5.4 million video clips, paid downloads grew 8% to $41 million and revenue per download was up 8% excluding the impact of foreign currency movements.

YadaYadaYada · « **Reply #68 on:** December 15, 2016, 13:23 »

Quote from: Dodie on December 10, 2016, 18:12

I wonder if they will clean up BS too. For now there is plenty of spam there too.

Stock Photo ID: 102435965
Sun burst star or snowflakes vector logo icon set. Sun, star, summer, nature, sky, summer. Sunshine star logo. Sun icons. Sun logo. Nature sun star. Star vector icons logo. Star silhouette

Is this all purpose description OK? snowflake, sun, star, it doesn't matter. Where is the sky, summer, nature....

Clean up BS would be to sweep it under the rug and close. Forward all links to SS. If they had report image and allowed us to do their work for them, because they can't seem to do that on their own, it would clean up fast.

mike935 · « **Reply #69 on:** December 17, 2016, 02:58 »

Shutterstock takes new action against spammers!
They include spammers into Winter Wonderland Collection on the home page!
https://www.shutterstock.com/collections/51953268-winter-wonderland.html
This picture with green trees:
Background of Christmas tree. Christmas tree seamless pattern. Winter watercolor landscape. Watercolor Christmas tree. Christmas background
https://www.shutterstock.com/pic-483421669/stock-photo-background-of-christmas-tree-christmas-tree-seamless-pattern-winter-watercolor-landscape-483421669.html
And more of the same artist:
Halloween Pumpkin icon Pumpkin icon vector Orange Pumpkin Smiling Pumpkin on a white background Simple flat style design Pumpkin isolated Pumpkin vector icon pumpkin gourd squash melon
https://www.shutterstock.com/pic-496566211/stock-vector-halloween-pumpkin-icon-pumpkin-icon-vector-orange-pumpkin-smiling-pumpkin-on-a-white-background-simple-flat-style-design-pumpkin-isolated-pumpkin-vector-icon-pumpkin-gourd-squash-melon.html?src=CjyDyXvOHgnXoo2SBQnrzw-1-2
In order to be on the home page of Shutterstock one needs to become spammer!

Dumc · « **Reply #70 on:** December 17, 2016, 04:20 »

SS has became pretty much dump yard for all kind of spammers and cheaters. Meanwhile, contributors with thousands, ten of thousands of photos getting their accounts suspended because someone stole their images and put them on a "free images" website.

mike935 · « **Reply #71 on:** December 29, 2016, 08:37 »

Quote from: Dumc on December 17, 2016, 04:20

SS has became pretty much dump yard for all kind of spammers and cheaters. Meanwhile, contributors with thousands, ten of thousands of photos getting their accounts suspended because someone stole their images and put them on a "free images" website.

Lithuania
https://www.shutterstock.com/pic-414610081/stock-vector-seamless-breakfast-pattern-with-flowers-donuts-fruits-berries-and-macaroons-vector-background-with-donuts-donut-donut-donut-donut-donut-donut-donut-donut-donut-donut-donut.html?src=Mtl9LJu8qHzlPJscaev2aw-1-0

Moldova
https://www.shutterstock.com/pic-468830090/stock-vector-donut-icon-donut-icon-eps10-donut-icon-vector-donut-icon-eps-donut-icon-jpg-donut-icon-donut-icon-flat-donut-icon-app-donut-icon-web-donut-icon-art-donut-icon-donut-icon-donut.html?src=Mtl9LJu8qHzlPJscaev2aw-1-1

Czech Republic
https://www.shutterstock.com/pic-424301821/stock-photo-fresh-hot-coffee-and-fresh-donuts-traditional-sweets-with-coffee-calorie-junk-food-fresh-unhealthy-breakfast-fresh-donutsfresh-donutsfresh-donutsfresh-donutsfresh-donutsfresh-donu.html?src=Mtl9LJu8qHzlPJscaev2aw-1-2

Russian Federation
https://www.shutterstock.com/pic-409250845/stock-vector-vector-donut-set-vector-donut-collection-donut-isolated-on-a-white-background-deserts-food-in-a-flat-style-sweet-donuts-with-frosting-and-caramel-topping-donuts-icons-donut-isolated.html?src=Mtl9LJu8qHzlPJscaev2aw-1-5

Ukraine
https://www.shutterstock.com/pic-492471874/stock-photo-a-donut-with-blue-icing-donut-on-a-white-background-donuts-logo-picture-with-donut-donut-donut-art-restaurant-menu-booklet-design-donut-color-donut-raster-illustration.html?src=Mtl9LJu8qHzlPJscaev2aw-1-35

Dumc · « **Reply #72 on:** December 29, 2016, 08:47 »

Go to shutterstock forum and report it there.

gyllens · « **Reply #73 on:** December 29, 2016, 10:22 »

Quote from: Dumc on December 17, 2016, 04:20

SS has became pretty much dump yard for all kind of spammers and cheaters. Meanwhile, contributors with thousands, ten of thousands of photos getting their accounts suspended because someone stole their images and put them on a "free images" website.

Correct! SS is a joke and they just plod on as if nothing is happening as if everything is OK. You never hear a word from them. Send them an email and it takes a week before getting a reply and thats if youre lucky.
They have over 100 million assets OUR assets not theirs but acting as if they own everything lock stock and barrel.

Meanwhile they are desperate in pleasing the shareholders nursing the third world and scewing up everything with bugs and glitches.

Its become an embarrassment!

kaboom · « **Reply #74 on:** December 29, 2016, 11:40 »

Quote from: Dumc on December 29, 2016, 08:47

Go to shutterstock forum and report it there.

Dont. I did a similar thing - my post was removed and I got a warning from forum moderator. Apparently they allow spammers spamming happily for many months but they dont allow other contributors to point it out. And thats why Im done with SS forums.

Dumc · « **Reply #75 on:** December 29, 2016, 12:02 »

Yea, it's disgusting.

Hundstage14 · « **Reply #76 on:** January 06, 2017, 06:22 »

Many spam-entries are gone. But not all. Looking at the first page of best match for "pattern" ...

angelawaye · « **Reply #77 on:** January 06, 2017, 23:34 »

It is becoming a dump yard. You can find some "treasures" in the dump yard but it takes time ... I can't believe how many duplicates people submit too.

mike935 · « **Reply #78 on:** January 30, 2017, 02:47 »

Is this designer shutterstock's pet? https://www.shutterstock.com/image-vector/halloween-pumpkin-icon-vector-orange-smiling-496566211?src=CjyDyXvOHgnXoo2SBQnrzw-1-7

Her spam work was in winter collection on front page and shutterstock does not touch her portfolio. I wonder what happen if we would do the same? Why she is untouchable? Is she sex minority or ukrainian?

nadalbg · « **Reply #79 on:** January 30, 2017, 05:11 »

That last link... I cant believe someone will want to put title like this, should be banned without chance to fix it.

mike935 · « **Reply #80 on:** January 31, 2017, 09:38 »

I've counted 5 times chocolate in title and 10 times in keywords.
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/chocolate-bar-background-nut-tower-386913631?src=HfSqHDrBoVB0yPVRNit6dQ-1-3
I asked Shutterstock support, could I do the same. They answered, no. Only few are allowed.

YadaYadaYada · « **Reply #81 on:** January 31, 2017, 13:24 »

Quote from: angelawaye on January 06, 2017, 23:34

It is becoming a dump yard. You can find some "treasures" in the dump yard but it takes time ... I can't believe how many duplicates people submit too.

and

Quote from: Dumc on December 29, 2016, 12:02

Yea, it's disgusting.

Glad they fixed most of it, but not done yet. Maybe a duplicate limit would be good? I mean how many subtle variations do buyers need? The lightbulb vector group was an example of far too many. Marijuana guy is another. It makes the SS site and search look like trash.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Shutterstock takes action against spammers! (Read 27833 times)

alno

gyllens

Justanotherphotographer

gyllens

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors