Click in the top menu bar: Portfolio - Catalog Manager etc.

Thanks, unfortunately catalog manager shows only accepted files. Rejected are nowhere to be found. New interface is extremely inconvenient for me.

"You have no rejected content". All files seen before disappeared.

Redesigning won't help them from decline.
Greed will kill their project and then all industry itself.

Firstly, they must solve content spammers problem, because it looks like that 100 millions of images out of 195 millions are similars and pure garbage.
Rules must be strict - immediate ban, with only ONE warning.

As for the second, to simplify things they must write script, which will delete all images, that are not downloaded for say 2 years or so.
This is logical solution.

But my life experience shows, that main heads of the projects in 99% cases are pretty much dumb golden boys (or big papa's girls) and it is almost useless to wait for adequate solutions from such "personalities". 

I disagree with deleting 2years old files... in our case, a lot of first sales of videos come from old files 2+ years. Which is funny.

I disagree with deleting 2years old files... in our case, a lot of first sales of videos come from old files 2+ years. Which is funny.

Agree, I just had a first DL for $24 on an oldie but goodie that sat for way over two years.

I'd love to see them get rid of the spammed keywords, the inch by inch duplicates or so minor changes that it's virtually the same image. Get rid of same images with filters or nothing but many variations of color balance adjustments, toning. B&W an exception. I suppose a background, soft focus, desaturated would also make for an exception. Ready to use.

When there were only 1 or 2 million images (hard to say that only part) the agencies could have stood up against including keywords for anything not in an image, or something so minor in the far background that it wasn't part of the composition. That way when a buyer searches for apple they actually see an apple not a tiny apple tree on the horizon. Or worse yet, how many times can we find a search with words used and not a speck of what's in some of the keywords?

Relevant search results, as many have pointed out in the past, would make any agency the King of The Hill. IS tried but didn't implement or follow through. Now it's just a PITA because needed words are not allowed. The rest don't seem to care.

Same as reviews, where we were at least fighting to have something good accepted, now everything passes. Is it really possible to have some agency, stand up and say, "we want accurate keywords only" and limit the true similar images, where someone mashes the shutter release and has 50 new photos. Don't buyers care enough to say, this is BS and a waste of time, slogging through mismatches and wrong words?