Thanks to the person who had saved out the expunged post I mentioned earlier, in response to Lobo's nippy note about 'we won't be answering your questions in the forum: contact CR, Scout or artists@.

~~~~~~~~~~

"A few thoughts to consider regarding this plan to handle editorial issues with support tickets, Scout, and in private with CR in hopes it can be helpful..
 
There are several reasons why the very opposite should be done. Questions should be asked and answers should be provided here openly in the forum. It would IMO be best supervised by the istocklawyer since he/she/they must ultimately approve of the various responses offered or dneed to eal with the decisions of the assorted staff members mentioned in your post. (Scout, Artists AT..., CR support tickets, etc.) Please consider the following
1.This thread, Unreleased Copyrighted Material in Editorial, is a policy making decision not a massive critique of rejected images. The suggestions made apply more generally to the latter but questions being asked are about those former policies. They not just a reaction concerning their own files but a need for guidance on an ongoing, collective fashion and this is best handled as the thread was originally crafted.
 
Benoitb began the thread with an initial modest amount of info that was then followed with the istocklawyer who gave a more extensive introductory explanation with helpful examples for the mass of contributors to illustrate this policy. They should simply continue to address this policy right here just as they started-and in public by answering questions with examples whenever possible. The istocklawyer's answer was meant to be applied to an openly announcemed change made with Ed. content and so was made here in a forum so it should be continued while the matter is still in the formative stage and develping until the matter becomes fairly well known as a policy.
 
2. Open forum questions are the easiest method for contributors to be able to address their concerns. The other options you mentioned are available to those who prefer a more private, personal 'forum' but are troublesome and not perferred method of communication esp. when asking general questions that require more lspecific egal insight that a CR may be able to presently supply. Making life easier for contributors should be a priority so long as it doesn't interfere with the bottom line of people getting their jobs done.
 
3. A series of answers to particular questions can serve as a syllabus of sorts for others. This can serve as a teaching tool like the short examples given by istock lawyer did for those with concerns about the policy of editorial content. As the examples grow so does the knowledge base of the contributors and so decreases the need to ask such questions with each one answered publically where it can be accessible to all.
 
4. Instead of tying up Scout, or Artists AT istock dot com, or CR with support tickets, etc. with similar questions, an open forum can answer multiple people with similar concerns all at once. An open forum lessens the demand on office staff's need to address each contributor singualrly and multiplies their efforts thereby increasing istock's productivity. More productivity will result in a greater bottom line.
 
4. Also Mr/s. Lawyer may potentially be the only one able to make such legal determinations anyway and to centralize the answer process vs. a multi-headed approach where many must all learn the intricacies of law as relaed to editorial usage seems prudent.
 
5. In addition, a quick answer in the forum could quckly sqelch the ill feeling of being in the dark that many seem to feel from answers being delayed indefinitely. Contributors can wait for the ages for Scout. Don't read that as an attack. Its just a fact. Let's not even talk about Executive.  CR tickets can be troubling as for time too.
It would foster better will to grant a more immediate remedy than telling folks to take their manifold questions to the manifold ways of handling them suggested which all have longer delays attched to their methods. One open forum way works best for all distributing the info faster again increasing productivity.
 
6. Many would simply ignore contacting support becuase going the extra step is troublesome and ineffieicient. Nobody likes having to contact cust. support. While this may lighten the load of the staff from the need to answer a phone, a text, make an inspection, many valuable files would be lost to iStock's database and this harms us all.
 
7. The forums solve a basic problem which is encourntered with Scout and support tickets in particular. When sending info to Scout for ex. it is mainly oneway with info passed in long delayed text fashion whereby one is without the ability to truly interact in more 'real time' with him/her/them and more intimately describe an issue for clarification. Scout could quite easily decided something differently if they had the ability to quickly ineract with the contrib. because they can understand the issue better with clarifications made from an open forum. Open forums provide better clarity and unity of purpose cutting down frustration of differing opinions caused by lack of interactivity.
 
In short, with each answer handled here in the open and with examples, knowledge increases, communication increases, good will is fostered and the need to answer the same question or one closely related supplies the contributor base with time saving knowledge, and cuts down the time iS employees would have to spend doing the same thing with people separately which becomes inefficient. Allow questions and answers to flow freely here and we all benefit from the similar experiences of other's questions, make istock's staff free to handle other pressing issues, and provide goodwill in an open communication line.
 
IMHO.

~~~~~~~~~~~~
+1, say I.