Worse, you're harming RM and other photographers as this besmirch RM-agencies.

They dont like but can do very little about it. Similars are not sister images. Look at Alamy!  they accept just about anything and everything and makes not secret about it either.
Getty used picture-scout for sister images but not similars unless people images with exactly the same product or message.

Look this can be debated for 1000 years.

The point I was making was that when we upload to in this case SS who hardly ever promotes new files the odds are theres many top sellers just vanishing among their 100 million files and pictures that could elsewhere earn quite a bit of money.

Since you highlight Alamy you might like to note this clause in their contributor contract:

You cannot submit identical or similar Images to Alamy as both Royalty Free and Rights
Managed. The licence type on Alamy for an Image must be the same as the licence type
for that Image and similar Images which you have on other agency websites.

No one is ever truly Anonymous. If a company cared enough they could get the IP of the computer that wrote The Forum post and then they would know who is putting up the post bragging about doing the wrong thing. As a professional photographer I wouldn't be bragging in a forum. You should donate that money to a good cause because Karma always comes around to get you!

This post has been a 'Scary Experience' for me...

Ah now I see why some are getting uptight! Read my OP!!  where do I mention RM?  the answer is: not even once. I say quote " they dont like if we upload files that are also in micro agencies"  may it be RM or RF doesnt matter they simply dont like it.
Of course after so many years in the photography gebit yes I do know the difference between rights managed and royalty free. These were uploaded as 105 mb Tiffs and RF!

The sole reason why I quickly removed these files from SS was A. SS dont bother to show new files anymore. B. Given the price these two shots sold for well I dont think they would be happy in seeing them sold for something like 0.38c.

Anywhw no harm done and maybe as many point out here in many threads. Good idea to read posts properly and not to jump to any conclusions.

Quite an odd thing to do: ask us to read your original post...after deleting it..! It's clear from your subsequent posts that the images were licensed with world rights which again suggests they were RM.

deleted!

Hopefully you 'deleted' the fake RM images which now you say where never RMs but you bragged about getting $6,000 for one sale. This discussion really ended up confusing for all of us...