MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Poll

Would you find this community more valuable if everyone shared their identity?

Yes
49 (36.6%)
No
70 (52.2%)
Depends
15 (11.2%)

Total Members Voted: 111

Author Topic: Should MSG require confirmed identities?  (Read 23809 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: October 14, 2011, 07:44 »
0
What I really don't like is people having multiple aliases here.  I suppose the poll will be biased by all those anonymous people with multiple registrations here.  If confirmed ID's stopped that, I think it would be a good idea.

If anyone has a multiple identity and it is discovered their second identity is removed.  I can see IP address of people posting so it generally isn't too hard to spot multiple accounts.  They could of course use a proxy but that gets to be a lot of work for what sort of gain?


Microbius

« Reply #26 on: October 14, 2011, 07:56 »
0
There are certain posters who are banned but then come back and cause trouble again. Iit might be good to not cut them as much slack as you have in the past.

That's what has sometimes confused me, when someone is banned then shows up straight away again with a different ID. Is there no way to ban an IP address rather than an MSG account?

Also agree with the firmer line on people who clearly can't control themselves after a warning. There are contributors who have personally insulted everyone else on the forum with outbursts several times and seem to have gotten temporary bans after each incident, then come back to do it again.

This is something totally different to calling others to task about what they have said or asking them to back up claims.

« Reply #27 on: October 14, 2011, 08:09 »
0
There are certain posters who are banned but then come back and cause trouble again. Iit might be good to not cut them as much slack as you have in the past.

That's what has sometimes confused me, when someone is banned then shows up straight away again with a different ID. Is there no way to ban an IP address rather than an MSG account?


When a ban is given, their I.P. address, email and username are all banned.  It is only effective if their IP address stays the same.  If they go to a cafe, school, work or their IP address is renewed there is really nothing anyone can to do to stop a person from signing up again.. except to ban them again.  Sooner or later though, the cat and mouse game gets tiring and the person usually quits signing up.

« Reply #28 on: October 14, 2011, 08:25 »
0
The biggest problem with this site is this very thing. Yes to the vote.

michealo

« Reply #29 on: October 14, 2011, 08:25 »
0
What about looking at the posters who have a large number of people ignoring them?

I suspect that they are the chief offenders

Microbius

« Reply #30 on: October 14, 2011, 08:44 »
0
When a ban is given, their I.P. address, email and username are all banned.  It is only effective if their IP address stays the same.  If they go to a cafe, school, work or their IP address is renewed there is really nothing anyone can to do to stop a person from signing up again.. except to ban them again.  Sooner or later though, the cat and mouse game gets tiring and the person usually quits signing up.

Okay got ya. Wow, it's scary how far some people have gone to post repeatedly after a ban!

« Reply #31 on: October 14, 2011, 08:55 »
0
Yes, absolutely! It could also be an identity that is private but confirmed by Leaf.
I wouldn't have a problem with that.

microstockphoto.co.uk

« Reply #32 on: October 14, 2011, 09:07 »
0
I never posted as anonymous and have no problem with confirmed identity - either public or only known to Leaf - but I understand that someone may wish to stay anonymous, especially towards agencies.

What is not acceptable is using anonymity for personal attacks or foul language, which is happening a lot lately, although not as often as in some other forums.

So I voted "depends". Confirmed identity only known to Leaf may be a good compromise. We uploaded our ID to so many sites, I wouldn't mind sending ID to msg as well, which I trust more than some agencies.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2011, 09:13 by microstockphoto.co.uk »

« Reply #33 on: October 14, 2011, 09:19 »
0
I think in theory this is a good idea. Privately checked by you is a good idea. I have been taking a long hiatus from this site because of the shenanigans, attacks and just plain moronic tones and arguments that have taken place in the past. This site can be very difficult for new users, as they are repeatedly treated as if their thoughts and opinions don't matter unless you have a portfolio that others find an acceptable level.

So whatever you come up with to help with the civility, I'm all for it.

« Reply #34 on: October 14, 2011, 09:23 »
0
Of those who like complete anonymity, I ask why? What is it that you are afraid of?

ShadySue

« Reply #35 on: October 14, 2011, 09:24 »
0
Yes, absolutely! It could also be an identity that is private but confirmed by Leaf.
I wouldn't have a problem with that.
Yup, or if Leaf chose another moderator or two just to ease the workload if if should become too much.
As explained on another thread I'm only quasi-anonymous, but don't want my own name openly on the forum.

« Reply #36 on: October 14, 2011, 09:28 »
0
I voted yes, but I am exclusive to an agency that does talk to the contributor if there is a problem.

Hmm. Istock's never, to my knowledge, been accused of victimising people for saying stuff off-site, it's true. But it's not noted for paying attention to contributors' concerns, either.

I don't know, when it comes actual individual situations (not major policy issues) you know you are going to get a response from an email or call to IStock, and in a reasonable time frame. It's hard for me to keep the two separate, but if I take a step back I have to admit that this aspect of contributor relations has been good at IS considering the size of their operation

This is a bit of a tangent, but that hasn't been my experience with iStock and being ignored on certain issues happened while I was exclusive. I don't mean every contact ended that way - many were fine - but there were certain areas of the organization that behaved very poorly, IMO.

Back on topic, if showing identity to the moderators - a buyer or a contributor account at a major site - to get the graphics under our names were all that being confirmed required, I'd be more inclined to say OK. The only remaining issue would be whether people trusted you (the admin) not to out them to an agency if they asked you for that information. I still don't know if the benefits outweigh putting you (admin) in that position - we can all tell a troll when we see one; don't need identities to figure that out.

« Reply #37 on: October 14, 2011, 10:20 »
0
I don't think it would have many benefits but it might certainly bring some drawbacks (those who want to stay anonymous because of the agencies as mentioned above)

I have no problems to provide any additional proof of my own identity to Tyler but I think we better don't have it mandatory in MSG.

« Reply #38 on: October 14, 2011, 10:24 »
0
Yes, absolutely! It could also be an identity that is private but confirmed by Leaf.
I wouldn't have a problem with that.

I wouldn't have a problem with that, either.

But I am a member on another forum where the owner asks for the true identity and keeps it private. And believe me, the tone on that forum is not more civilized than here.  ::)

« Reply #39 on: October 14, 2011, 10:29 »
0
Yes, absolutely! It could also be an identity that is private but confirmed by Leaf.
I wouldn't have a problem with that.

I wouldn't have a problem with that, either.

But I am a member on another forum where the owner asks for the true identity and keeps it private. And believe me, the tone on that forum is not more civilized than here.  ::)

what is it? I wanna join :)

« Reply #40 on: October 14, 2011, 10:32 »
0
Yes, absolutely! It could also be an identity that is private but confirmed by Leaf.
I wouldn't have a problem with that.

I wouldn't have a problem with that, either.

But I am a member on another forum where the owner asks for the true identity and keeps it private. And believe me, the tone on that forum is not more civilized than here.  ::)

what is it? I wanna join :)

You need to understand german  ;)

bettan

« Reply #41 on: October 14, 2011, 10:41 »
0
I am new here, just joined today. I would say its hard to take somebody seriously or give credibillity to someone hiding behind a pseudonym. For all we know, like myself, we could come here pretending we have ports of thousands of pictures, pretending we know everything but behind the scenes we are just, nothings.
I suppose using a pseudonym in a forum is ok as long as you dont intend to start telling members what to do and so on.

RacePhoto

« Reply #42 on: October 14, 2011, 10:52 »
0
Of those who like complete anonymity, I ask why? What is it that you are afraid of?

Mostly if they are being truthful, (1) fear of retaliation from some agencies, for what someone might write here. FT came out and said they would ban and remove anyone (as sellers) who posted negative comments, even if it was on a public forum and not their site.

I don't think any other agency looks for negatives by reading here and retaliates, but the sad part is curtailing freedom of speech by an agency with threats. Even sadder is that people are in fear of the agency that's supposed to be working for US, that we can't express opinions.

There's one agency that I'm positive has shills reading and responding and voting their rank up, but even they don't appear to retaliate for negative comments from members. They just have a new shill account disagree and write some flowery compliment how wonder the agency is and how much money they make there.  ::)

My opinion is anyone who can be anonymous will feel they (2) don't have a need to be honest or stand behind what they write here. Invites negativity, as others have pointed out, abusive attacks and irresponsible posts because They Are Anonymous! It opens up the avenues for claiming things that aren't true about sales or their portfolios. Like RPIs that are 20 times higher than even the best people on IS, from Fotolia? Big sales from some small sub agency with low prices... But won't show anything because (reason #3) a fear of copycats.

Copycats as in, my Microstock is so wonderful that people would copy it and steal my business. I'm skeptical that anyone does anything, so exclusive and such a niche that it isn't also covered by dozens of others already. 15 million pictures on SS and they have a controlled niche? I doubt that, but no one will answer, because they don't want the imitations, I'll never know? LOL  ;D

Oh yes #4 - duplicate accounts so they can write from their real name and have one persona and from the troll account and have the other. I don't see much difference because of what Leaf has posted. Personally a second account with a fake ID is no different from only one account that's anonymous. No accountability, no standing behind what someone may write. In my opinion the fake accounts are identical to anonymous accounts. Someone point out why they aren't?

An exclusive section for people with confirmed, real identities (real name or sellers pseudo from an agency) would be interesting and then the anonymous trolls could keep playing in the cat box and the real people would have a sanitized area to share with other real people.

« Reply #43 on: October 14, 2011, 11:08 »
0
First I wanted to thank you for maintain MSG as its been a fantastic resource for me over the last year.  Couple of different thoughts.

1) In the original post, Leaf, you suggest one benefit would be that agencies would be more likely to listen to contributors whose ID had been verified.  Unless they can see that information themselves, having you vouch for us as actual contributors will likely not make agencies any more receptive to our critiques.  

2) MSG is a great resource for contributors in part because people can, if they choose, to share information and opinions about the agencies without the risk of retaliation.  Anything you post on the internet is effectively forever.  Today what you post about an agency might not be a problem, who knows about tomorrow.

Call me a wimp, but if I were using my own name/identity, even if it was only shared with Leaf, I would engage in a lot more self censorship about what I say about agencies in general.  I also would never have undertaken the project of tracking partners.  No way to know how the individual agencies will react to having this info compiled and shared, so I would not have taken that risk.  

3) Lively debate on microstock topics is very important for us to grapple with new developments in the industry, as it will over time produce the best insights and critiques.  Unfortunately lively debate slips into crude/rude behavior very quickly, particularly on the internet.  For better or worse, I've never participated anywhere online that it was not present to some degree.

Not to discourage you from trying new ideas to address it, but I think the most effective solution is less tolerance for bad behavior.  There are a few people here who constantly post provocative messages, seemingly not to engage in productive debate, but designed to stir up a fight.  I'd encourage you to be more aggressive in addressing those individuals as their input would likely not be missed.   :)

bettan

« Reply #44 on: October 14, 2011, 11:17 »
0
First I wanted to thank you for maintain MSG as its been a fantastic resource for me over the last year.  Couple of different thoughts.

1) In the original post, Leaf, you suggest one benefit would be that agencies would be more likely to listen to contributors whose ID had been verified.  Unless they can see that information themselves, having you vouch for us as actual contributors will likely not make agencies any more receptive to our critiques.  

2) MSG is a great resource for contributors in part because people can, if they choose, to share information and opinions about the agencies without the risk of retaliation.  Anything you post on the internet is effectively forever.  Today what you post about an agency might not be a problem, who knows about tomorrow.

Call me a wimp, but if I were using my own name/identity, even if it was only shared with Leaf, I would engage in a lot more self censorship about what I say about agencies in general.  I also would never have undertaken the project of tracking partners.  No way to know how the individual agencies will react to having this info compiled and shared, so I would not have taken that risk.  

3) Lively debate on microstock topics is very important for us to grapple with new developments in the industry, as it will over time produce the best insights and critiques.  Unfortunately lively debate slips into crude/rude behavior very quickly, particularly on the internet.  For better or worse, I've never participated anywhere online that it was not present to some degree.

Not to discourage you from trying new ideas to address it, but I think the most effective solution is less tolerance for bad behavior.  There are a few people here who constantly post provocative messages, seemingly not to engage in productive debate, but designed to stir up a fight.  I'd encourage you to be more aggressive in addressing those individuals as their input would likely not be missed.   :)

provocative or just a bit too close to the truth?  for comfort I mean. I have been a member of the toughest forum in the world, makes the MSG look like a kindergaden and when the moderators decided to look into the members, it turned out that the most outspoken ones, controversial members,  was the most genuine of them all.

« Reply #45 on: October 14, 2011, 11:24 »
0
I am new here, just joined today. I would say its hard to take somebody seriously or give credibillity to someone hiding behind a pseudonym. For all we know, like myself, we could come here pretending we have ports of thousands of pictures, pretending we know everything but behind the scenes we are just, nothings.
I suppose using a pseudonym in a forum is ok as long as you dont intend to start telling members what to do and so on.

Who on earth are you?

lisafx

« Reply #46 on: October 14, 2011, 11:33 »
0
Tyler, I really strongly urge you not to require identity checks for people posting here.  The ability to post anonymously is the main reason this forum has such an open and free exchange of opinions.  If you take that protection of anonymity away, you will find far fewer honest discussions and the industry will have lost a valuable resource.  

Although I have tried posting anonymously, I find that I prefer posting as myself.  However I do find myself holding back and watching my words.  I very much appreciate the contributions of those who are able to post more freely under the cloak of anonymity.    

I applaud your attempts to moderate the forum and keep it free of trolls.  However, trolls quickly reveal themselves as such by the things they post.  Any intelligent person will ultimately judge a post by its logic, not the name associated with it.  You have already provided us the useful tool of the ignore button for dealing with nuisance posters.  

Please Tyler, don't risk these forums' honest flow of ideas and information in an effort to deal with some annoying or over the top posts.  Don't make the mistake of throwing the baby out with the bath water.

bettan

« Reply #47 on: October 14, 2011, 11:33 »
0
I am new here, just joined today. I would say its hard to take somebody seriously or give credibillity to someone hiding behind a pseudonym. For all we know, like myself, we could come here pretending we have ports of thousands of pictures, pretending we know everything but behind the scenes we are just, nothings.
I suppose using a pseudonym in a forum is ok as long as you dont intend to start telling members what to do and so on.

Who on earth are you?

For a beginner I am not doing too bad. Two mails already, telling me they liked my post. Why do you not like it? have I caused you any problems? if so I am sorry. An honest and steady flow of opinions can only come from people who declare themselves, in this forum that is. What they do on the micro sites is another matter but in a forum concerning the entire industry?  ofcourse you should post under your real identity. Goes without saying.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2011, 11:40 by bettan »

« Reply #48 on: October 14, 2011, 11:46 »
0
I am new here, just joined today. I would say its hard to take somebody seriously or give credibillity to someone hiding behind a pseudonym. For all we know, like myself, we could come here pretending we have ports of thousands of pictures, pretending we know everything but behind the scenes we are just, nothings.
I suppose using a pseudonym in a forum is ok as long as you dont intend to start telling members what to do and so on.

Who on earth are you?

For a beginner I am not doing too bad. Two mails already, telling me they liked my post. Why do you not like it? have I caused you any problems? if so I am sorry. An honest and steady flow of opinions can only come from people who declare themselves, in this forum that is. What they do on the micro sites is another matter but in a forum concerning the entire industry?  ofcourse you should post under your real identity. Goes without saying.

So you are not honest? According to your definition of yourself.

I never said that I don't like what you posted, I merely asked you to identify yourself. Please don't misrepresent me.

« Reply #49 on: October 14, 2011, 11:48 »
0
I have nothing against anonymity either. It's not for me, but I understand why people want it. Besides, are anonymous posters really the problem? You can act like a jerk with or without the cloak of secrecy. I know from personal experience.  ;D


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
6 Replies
1927 Views
Last post September 20, 2011, 14:30
by stockmarketer
File Confirmed!

Started by CD123 Adobe Stock

7 Replies
2347 Views
Last post January 23, 2013, 17:27
by Pauws99
337 Replies
23403 Views
Last post May 31, 2013, 15:17
by leaf
Deposit Photo's - 3% Royalty Confirmed

Started by stock-will-eat-itself « 1 2 3 4  All » DepositPhotos

85 Replies
21126 Views
Last post December 08, 2014, 15:47
by stock-will-eat-itself
57 Replies
10166 Views
Last post January 28, 2016, 04:25
by Carmen

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results