Well, I am happy you believe that. Good for you!

Quote from: farbled on August 02, 2018, 21:46

Lol, if you say so. I literally have said I don't think there is a "cap" and I have stated what I believed already. But hey, keep going! I used the phrase flat-earther because you seem to live in your self imposed denial where anything that contradicts your narrative gets discarded, but I guess it went over your head. No worries. No cap my friend. And wherever you went to get that background in stats, well, you may want to look at refunds. I think they did you a disservice 

Have at it. Arguing with you is pointless. You think you are smarter than you actually are. Done for tonight, good luck.

I just used simple logic to prove the cap theory wrong, indeed.
I'm glad you agreed with logic and got convinced.

You can drop that dictionary now. 

Quote from: Zero Talent on August 02, 2018, 21:55

Quote from: farbled on August 02, 2018, 21:46

Lol, if you say so. I literally have said I don't think there is a "cap" and I have stated what I believed already. But hey, keep going! I used the phrase flat-earther because you seem to live in your self imposed denial where anything that contradicts your narrative gets discarded, but I guess it went over your head. No worries. No cap my friend. And wherever you went to get that background in stats, well, you may want to look at refunds. I think they did you a disservice 

Have at it. Arguing with you is pointless. You think you are smarter than you actually are. Done for tonight, good luck.

I just used simple logic to prove the cap theory wrong, indeed.
I'm glad you agreed with logic and got convinced.

You can drop that dictionary now. 

Well your theory is WRONG man, your logic is totally up the spout and knows nothing. What do you think? haha!  you think this little forum is the only one place in the world where they discuss capping, orchestrated algorithms etc, etc. Well youre wrong there as well.

You know why you dont want earnings capped or fooled around with?  I tell you: because everyones dream, everyones dream-agency is falling apart and the " do good" agency is not doing so good anymore, the so called most honest agency in the world turned out no more then any other agency.

Now if two x-employees of SS say not to me but to others, full-time photographers that earnings are controled, portfolios are controled!  well then you can imagine that theyre not going to believe YOU!!  are they?  just another supplier who is so good with stats. yeah sure man!....and you have been with micro-stock long enough now to know the score to see and judge for yourself that something is wrong, badly wrong and instead of believing that this "God sent to suppliers"  agency is nothing but just another agency!  crushing your dreams maybe. Well sorry about that!.....btw! I know you behind that pseudo of yours and you should really know better!

Quote from: Video-StockOrg on August 02, 2018, 23:39

Quote from: Zero Talent on August 02, 2018, 21:55

Quote from: farbled on August 02, 2018, 21:46

Lol, if you say so. I literally have said I don't think there is a "cap" and I have stated what I believed already. But hey, keep going! I used the phrase flat-earther because you seem to live in your self imposed denial where anything that contradicts your narrative gets discarded, but I guess it went over your head. No worries. No cap my friend. And wherever you went to get that background in stats, well, you may want to look at refunds. I think they did you a disservice 

Have at it. Arguing with you is pointless. You think you are smarter than you actually are. Done for tonight, good luck.

I just used simple logic to prove the cap theory wrong, indeed.
I'm glad you agreed with logic and got convinced.

You can drop that dictionary now. 

I used a simple logic to prove that cap theory exists too... it is called statistics and math. We took that in school, remember?

No one on here has the statistics to prove "capping" exists or otherwise which is why the argument keeps going at best we can say it is possible that some people might be capped and not everyone is capped. The rest is a guess.

Hmmm, it looks like you are not "done for tonight", as promised a moment ago! You are "better that that", indeed.

So, cap or no cap?

Quote from: derek on August 03, 2018, 00:44

Quote from: Zero Talent on August 02, 2018, 21:55

Quote from: farbled on August 02, 2018, 21:46

Lol, if you say so. I literally have said I don't think there is a "cap" and I have stated what I believed already. But hey, keep going! I used the phrase flat-earther because you seem to live in your self imposed denial where anything that contradicts your narrative gets discarded, but I guess it went over your head. No worries. No cap my friend. And wherever you went to get that background in stats, well, you may want to look at refunds. I think they did you a disservice 

Have at it. Arguing with you is pointless. You think you are smarter than you actually are. Done for tonight, good luck.

I just used simple logic to prove the cap theory wrong, indeed.
I'm glad you agreed with logic and got convinced.

You can drop that dictionary now. 

Well your theory is WRONG man, your logic is totally up the spout and knows nothing. What do you think? haha!  you think this little forum is the only one place in the world where they discuss capping, orchestrated algorithms etc, etc. Well youre wrong there as well.

You know why you dont want earnings capped or fooled around with?  I tell you: because everyones dream, everyones dream-agency is falling apart and the " do good" agency is not doing so good anymore, the so called most honest agency in the world turned out no more then any other agency.

Now if two x-employees of SS say not to me but to others, full-time photographers that earnings are controled, portfolios are controled!  well then you can imagine that theyre not going to believe YOU!!  are they?  just another supplier who is so good with stats. yeah sure man!....and you have been with micro-stock long enough now to know the score to see and judge for yourself that something is wrong, badly wrong and instead of believing that this "God sent to suppliers"  agency is nothing but just another agency!  crushing your dreams maybe. Well sorry about that!.....btw! I know you behind that pseudo of yours and you should really know better!

Here you go again.
Another one who blames others for his own failures
Another one  who finds easier to follow a cult than to look in the mirror and face reality.

Make up your mind folks: are your revenues capped or just controlled?

I can guarantee that 90-100% of the capping theorists here are nowhere near $2,500 per month from Shutterstock. 

I can guarantee that 90-100% of the capping theorists here are nowhere near $2,500 per month from Shutterstock. 

Quote from: derek on August 03, 2018, 10:21

Youre not BIG enough to have experienced it! havent been doing it long enough to experience it. I cant remember but I think that somewhere along 2.5K a month was the barrier after that you were included in the capping brigade.

I can guarantee that 90-100% of the capping theorists here are nowhere near $2,500 per month from Shutterstock. 

Quote from: Zero Talent on August 03, 2018, 10:40

Quote from: derek on August 03, 2018, 10:21

Youre not BIG enough to have experienced it! havent been doing it long enough to experience it. I cant remember but I think that somewhere along 2.5K a month was the barrier after that you were included in the capping brigade.

Capped or controlled?? hehe! whats the bloody difference?  nobody should control youre earnings.  But hey!  you carry on in this world of yours thinking youre working with honesty and rightfullness.....btw, how come people accept something called " hit the wall" ??  but not capping, to me thats just about the same! also these are the words of an x-employee!! ( not photographers)  get that into your head please!

2.5k/month on SS is the threshold for capping? That's very interesting! You just added something new to this discussion, indeed!

Let's see what the implications of your statement are.
The implications are that the likes or Herg (with only a "few downloads over several days") or even farbled (some of the most vocal members of the "capping cult") have no idea what they are talking about. If it is 2.5K/month, they have so much, so very much growth to do, before hitting that ceiling! So it's not the capping for them, it is them.
Is this what your are saying?

On the other hand, "capping and "controlled" are not the same. "Capping" is a subset of "controlled", indeed. But"controlled" can very well mean that some ports, images, categories, etc are favored by the popularity algorithm. That's "controlled" (as some understand it), but not "capped".

The popularity algorithm is definitely "controlled" by SS and it is clearly impacting individual sales in a positive, or negative way.
Moreover, the popularity algorithm is "controlled" on a regular basis. SS is constantly attempting to tweak it as well as possible, in order to maximize customers satisfaction with the results of their searches (and maximize global revenue for SS)
That's totally different that "capped" and there is nothing evil about it!

Of course how silly of me youre absolutely right in everything you say! thank God you have such an insight in SS and all their contributors!  whatever would we do without you!   no need for any further conversation its lost its alure!

Interesting indeed but what I struggle with is why would SS want to do that? So maybe your right that theres strange things happening with the Algorithm(s) I wouldn't be surprised if over time they haven't become so complex no one understands fully how they return  the results they do. For example the perceived  need to give customers a changing variety of images could easily push images back and forth if something sells "too much" or "two little" over a period thus evening out sales over a period.

Bad July?, be prepared for even "better" August, because the customer side of SS doesnt even load properly. (EU)