Author Topic: Confirmed Identities on MSG (trial for a month?) (Read 46727 times)

tickstock · « **Reply #100 on:** May 29, 2013, 13:09 »

Quote from: lisafx on May 29, 2013, 13:01

My first reaction is "no". My second reaction is "Oh He11 no!".

I use my name by choice, and out of laziness. I've tried being anonymous a few times, although I have never been anonymous from Tyler. Mostly though, I am just me, because it's such a PITA to have to shift back and forth between accounts.

Also, because I have a certain sales level, I didn't (until Sean-mageddon) worry that I would be penalized by the sites because of my opinions. In fact, I figured my opinions would carry more weight with any agencies who might be reading. I assumed my sales level insulated me a bit. Well of course now we all know that no amount of sales completely insulates anyone.

I hope it's obvious from this thread that we will lose quite a few valuable contributors if anonymity is forbidden. It is also very obvious that it will sanitize the conversation to the point of rendering the site both boring and useless. Yes, it might get rid of the occasional troll, but it seems to me to be a case of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Surely most of us have the intellect to spot a troll and ignore him or her without draconian measures punishing every other anonymous poster. By the same token, most of us should be able to identify a valuable or intelligent post by its content, without having to check a portfolio to see if the person is "worthy" of being listened to. We aren't children and should not need our precious and delicate sensibilities protected to such a degree.

JMO.

Don't forget about Bobby Deal (that's his name right?), he was kicked out of Fotolia I think for what he said on this site. If I wanted to contribute to Fotolia there is no way I would say a bad thing on here with a link to my real name, username, or portfolio.

tickstock · « **Reply #101 on:** May 29, 2013, 13:11 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on May 29, 2013, 13:09

Quote from: JPSDK on May 29, 2013, 12:18
I think you should go for complete openness. That means that people can only join with their full names and adresses.

full name and address aren't enough

I believe we need also bank account number, paypal address, blood type, sexual orientation, race/ethnicity and of course if the person is vegetarian or loves meat

At least we should check an make sure everyone is a black diamond before they are allowed to post that they had a good month.

click_click · « **Reply #102 on:** May 29, 2013, 13:11 »

Quote from: lisafx on May 29, 2013, 13:09

... If you were making, say, $2,000 - $4,000 a month from a particular site, would you be reluctant to post something negative and have your account closed in retaliation?

Let me answer that for you Lisa:

YES!

If you have any questions regarding my response, kindly refer to Sean Locke for further clarification! That is all.

click_click · « **Reply #103 on:** May 29, 2013, 13:12 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on May 29, 2013, 13:09

Quote from: JPSDK on May 29, 2013, 12:18
I think you should go for complete openness. That means that people can only join with their full names and adresses.

full name and address aren't enough

I believe we need also bank account number, paypal address, blood type, sexual orientation, race/ethnicity and of course if the person is vegetarian or loves meat

Luis, I think you're onto something aren't you...

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #104 on:** May 29, 2013, 13:13 »

I have always used the same name here and at all the stock sites (except 123rf because they made my user name for me). I do have pretty strong opinions about forcing people's names to be visible, even to logged in users.

In an ideal world, there would be no problem with contributors expressing their views in public forums, even if they weren't supportive of an agency. It isn't an ideal world. Fotolia, among its flaws, has written that it reserves the right to close accounts for unsupportive behavior in public forums. It has done that. It deleted Bobby Deal's account (and he was clearly rude and negative, but I don't think that in any way justifies what Fotolia did). They threatened to close my account when I was actively advocating that contributors should withhold uploads when they introduced subscriptions (with rotten terms and royalties). I left to become exclusive at IS in August 2008 and some time after that (following a critical post here, I think over their games with payments in various currencies) they closed my account. When I contacted Fotolia on leaving IS exclusivity I was told they no longer wished to do business with me.

iStock has deleted site mail from my account (I think because they realized they'd embarrased themselves) and banned me from their forums for a mildly sarcastic remark about their failure to fix bugs (no personal insults or other poor behavior).

I would not want to give the agencies any more tools to hurt contributors than they already have. If you want to verify accounts, that's fine with me as long as:

1) no names are visible even to logged in users. Knowing that someone's verified as a contributor should be enough

2) Porfolio links are optional

I think you could solve rudeness and trolling problems via other avenues. Ban trolls and blowhards sooner, perhaps?

I'm quite happy to ignore the regular, repetitive trolls. I'd pay to have any quoting of an ignored user's post become invisible too - if you want to increase the premium member fee and make it a premium feature

Or perhaps mark on the home page posts with ignored users' posts (with a count of same) - that way I can ignore the threads that become tit-for-tat p*33ing contents.

I find I can gather the useful content and ignore those who contribute more heat than light as things are now. Having a portfolio doesn't preclude someone being argumentative - we have plenty of examples of that here.

tickstock · « **Reply #105 on:** May 29, 2013, 13:13 »

Quote from: click_click on May 29, 2013, 13:11

Quote from: lisafx on May 29, 2013, 13:09
... If you were making, say, $2,000 - $4,000 a month from a particular site, would you be reluctant to post something negative and have your account closed in retaliation?

Let me answer that for you Lisa:

YES!

If you have any questions regarding my response, kindly refer to Sean Locke for further clarification! That is all.

Or have everyone copy your work, to me that's the bigger concern although agency retaliation is a real possibility.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #106 on:** May 29, 2013, 13:21 »

Quote from: click_click on May 29, 2013, 13:12

Quote from: luissantos84 on May 29, 2013, 13:09
Quote from: JPSDK on May 29, 2013, 12:18
I think you should go for complete openness. That means that people can only join with their full names and adresses.

full name and address aren't enough

I believe we need also bank account number, paypal address, blood type, sexual orientation, race/ethnicity and of course if the person is vegetarian or loves meat
Luis, I think you're onto something aren't you...

nothing mate just thought absurd that Jens wanted to know my full name and address, actually I am afraid of stalkers because I have a cute profile picture at most agencies

Jonathan Ross · « **Reply #107 on:** May 29, 2013, 13:21 »

Hey T,

Looking at the response to the question on your votes I would say it is a strong support towards the YES as the people that are trolls and angry posters are going to be the first to vote against it so you probably have to decrease the NO votes by a good 25%-50%

This was a joke ya'll!

Cheers,
J

tickstock · « **Reply #108 on:** May 29, 2013, 13:23 »

Quote from: Jonathan Ross on May 29, 2013, 13:21

Hey T,

Looking at the response to the question on your votes I would say it is a strong support towards the YES as the people that are trolls and angry posters are going to be the first to vote against it so you probably have to decrease the NO votes by a good 25%-50% This was a joke ya'll!

Cheers,
J

Yikes, I don't have a clue what that means. I think you're calling me a troll but I'm not sure.

Mellimage · « **Reply #109 on:** May 29, 2013, 13:25 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on May 29, 2013, 13:21

...actually I am afraid of stalkers because I have a cute profile picture at most agencies

Seriously - not funny. not at all. sorry luis.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #110 on:** May 29, 2013, 13:27 »

Quote from: Mellimage on May 29, 2013, 13:25

Quote from: luissantos84 on May 29, 2013, 13:21
...actually I am afraid of stalkers because I have a cute profile picture at most agencies

Seriously - not funny. not at all. sorry luis.

you will need to laugh or I will stop liking your pictures in FB, I really like them

Poncke v2 · « **Reply #111 on:** May 29, 2013, 13:33 »

Quote from: tickstock on May 29, 2013, 13:09

Quote from: lisafx on May 29, 2013, 13:01
My first reaction is "no". My second reaction is "Oh He11 no!".

I use my name by choice, and out of laziness. I've tried being anonymous a few times, although I have never been anonymous from Tyler. Mostly though, I am just me, because it's such a PITA to have to shift back and forth between accounts.

Also, because I have a certain sales level, I didn't (until Sean-mageddon) worry that I would be penalized by the sites because of my opinions. In fact, I figured my opinions would carry more weight with any agencies who might be reading. I assumed my sales level insulated me a bit. Well of course now we all know that no amount of sales completely insulates anyone.

I hope it's obvious from this thread that we will lose quite a few valuable contributors if anonymity is forbidden. It is also very obvious that it will sanitize the conversation to the point of rendering the site both boring and useless. Yes, it might get rid of the occasional troll, but it seems to me to be a case of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Surely most of us have the intellect to spot a troll and ignore him or her without draconian measures punishing every other anonymous poster. By the same token, most of us should be able to identify a valuable or intelligent post by its content, without having to check a portfolio to see if the person is "worthy" of being listened to. We aren't children and should not need our precious and delicate sensibilities protected to such a degree.

JMO.
Don't forget about Bobby Deal (that's his name right?), he was kicked out of Fotolia I think for what he said on this site. If I wanted to contribute to Fotolia there is no way I would say a bad thing on here with a link to my real name, username, or portfolio.

But it wouldnt really matter because a Fotolia forum admin is posting here amongst us, using his real name I add and he knows who is who, just as the rest of us do.

rubyroo · « **Reply #112 on:** May 29, 2013, 13:41 »

Thanks so much LisaFX and JSnover for those wise and fair-minded comments. Much appreciated here.

It frankly creeps me out to see people who already have their names exposed through choice, advocating that everyone else should do so (i.e. have their choice removed). I'm not a fan of the mentality that says 'What is right for me is right for all'.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #113 on:** May 29, 2013, 13:45 »

Quote from: rubyroo on May 29, 2013, 13:41

Thanks so much LisaFX and JSnover's for those wise and fair-minded comments. Much appreciated here.

It frankly creeps me out to see people who already have their names exposed through choice, advocating that everyone else should do so (i.e. have their choice removed). I'm not a fan of the mentality that says 'What is right for me is right for all'.

I agree! I believe we are tied to a lot of crap from agencies without much choice, here we must be free to opt in/out on anonymity

lisafx · « **Reply #114 on:** May 29, 2013, 13:50 »

Quote from: rubyroo on May 29, 2013, 13:41

It frankly creeps me out to see people who already have their names exposed through choice, advocating that everyone else should do so (i.e. have their choice removed). I'm not a fan of the mentality that says 'What is right for me is right for all'.

^^Same here. I feel the same way about gay marriage and legalization of pot, although I am neither gay nor a pot user. Not everybody has to make the same choices as everybody else, and forcing them to is just wrong.

JPSDK · « **Reply #115 on:** May 29, 2013, 13:55 »

People who dare not come foreward and speak with their names are not worth listening to or taking into the debate.

There is a time when a man must do what a man must do.
And it starts with saying who he is.
If you are anonymous, you can say all kinds of s..... and it wouldnt reflect on you. It is free. And cost nothing.
If you use your name, you would have to mean what you say. And your statements would cost, as they should.

And then all this business with the agencies coming after you for opening your mouth.
So be it. If they do that, they operate on low business ethics and no pride... and they wont last.

pride is important and in pride lies your name.

cthoman · « **Reply #116 on:** May 29, 2013, 13:56 »

Quote from: rubyroo on May 29, 2013, 13:41

It frankly creeps me out to see people who already have their names exposed through choice, advocating that everyone else should do so (i.e. have their choice removed).

The paranoia and conspiracy theories of the anonymous creep me out a bit too.

All kidding aside, I don't care all that much either way. I think it would be an interesting experiment for the forum. It would be tough to implement though, since so many seem against it.

rubyroo · « **Reply #117 on:** May 29, 2013, 14:00 »

I agree with you there too Lisa.

JPSDK, perhaps you've never read a pseudonymous novel or poem, because the author would not be worth listening to.

Cthoman - there's nothing creepy about me I assure you.

rimglow · « **Reply #118 on:** May 29, 2013, 14:04 »

Quote from: lisafx on May 29, 2013, 13:50

Quote from: rubyroo on May 29, 2013, 13:41

It frankly creeps me out to see people who already have their names exposed through choice, advocating that everyone else should do so (i.e. have their choice removed). I'm not a fan of the mentality that says 'What is right for me is right for all'.

^^Same here. I feel the same way about gay marriage and legalization of pot, although I am neither gay nor a pot user. Not everybody has to make the same choices as everybody else, and forcing them to is just wrong.

What are you being forced to do? You can choose not to participate.

JPSDK · « **Reply #119 on:** May 29, 2013, 14:05 »

Quote from: rubyroo on May 29, 2013, 14:00

I agree with you there too Lisa.

JPSDK, perhaps you've never read a pseudonymous novel or poem, because the author would not be worth listening to.

Cthoman - there's nothing creepy about me I assure you.

I read Pauline Reage...

Mellimage · « **Reply #120 on:** May 29, 2013, 14:07 »

Quote from: JPSDK on May 29, 2013, 13:55

People who dare not come foreward and speak with their names are not worth listening to or taking into the debate.

There is a time when a man must do what a man must do.
And it starts with saying who he is.
If you are anonymous, you can say all kinds of s..... and it wouldnt reflect on you. It is free. And cost nothing.
If you use your name, you would have to mean what you say. And your statements would cost, as they should.

And then all this business with the agencies coming after you for opening your mouth.
So be it. If they do that, they operate on low business ethics and no pride... and they wont last.

pride is important and in pride lies your name.

Consider following example - someone says something using with his or her real name. The stuff turns out to be idiotic or just a mistake. It gets quoted outside the forum with the real name - spreads through the internet like wildfire. Person has meanwhile realized his mistake and apologized in forum for it. Forum members are fine have forgiven that person - the rest of the world does not know about that - and knows the person as an idiot - including people who have nothing to do with the forum task, but who may matter to that person in other areas of life.

tab62 · « **Reply #121 on:** May 29, 2013, 14:11 »

so if my neighborhood gets a few houses broken into do we make all the home owners put their name on the street, make them wear ID badges and have them be house by 9pm, with doors locked, or do we start a neighborhood watch to nail the few bad apples and not ruin the freedom of the neighborhood?

Maybe leave good alone and develop a 'Troll Patrol'? I know you folks are super smart and some can even drill do to the IP address to catch the troll! Once the troll IP address is found we shut it off at the site. I once saw a fishing website do that to trolls! Yeah, the troll will have to get a new IP address and handle but it will be fun nailing them in the troll hunting! Maybe we have a Troll killer of the month award lol!

Tom

leaf · « **Reply #122 on:** May 29, 2013, 14:15 »

Thanks for all the thoughts everyone. I've plussed a lot of posts, both for and against the idea.

A good point was made that creating just a dummy name isn't hard and would be rather hard to disprove. A portfolio link would be a better, more reliable solution but would be quite a bit of work to double check. perhaps the idea with both was to set the tone of a professional meeting place where we came with our real identities. If there was ever an issue with a poster, then things could be double checked to confirm their identity.

I have also toyed with the idea of having a special area for either those who are willing to show their identity or special area for those who don't want to reveal their identity. I think that could be an alright solution and would be quite easy to implement but would have the danger of multiple threads on the same subject for each group would be very confusing and nonconstructive. It is a solution that finds a bit of middle ground however.

I agree that there are a lot of respected and respectful members that are anonymous and it would be a shame to loose them. What is easy to forget however, is the people that may join the conversation if it were to become more transparent.

rimglow · « **Reply #123 on:** May 29, 2013, 14:15 »

Quote from: Mellimage on May 29, 2013, 14:07

Quote from: JPSDK on May 29, 2013, 13:55
People who dare not come foreward and speak with their names are not worth listening to or taking into the debate.

There is a time when a man must do what a man must do.
And it starts with saying who he is.
If you are anonymous, you can say all kinds of s..... and it wouldnt reflect on you. It is free. And cost nothing.
If you use your name, you would have to mean what you say. And your statements would cost, as they should.

And then all this business with the agencies coming after you for opening your mouth.
So be it. If they do that, they operate on low business ethics and no pride... and they wont last.

pride is important and in pride lies your name.

Consider following example - someone says something using with his or her real name. The stuff turns out to be idiotic or just a mistake. It gets quoted outside the forum with the real name - spreads through the internet like wildfire. Person has meanwhile realized his mistake and apologized in forum for it. Forum members are fine have forgiven that person - the rest of the world does not know about that - and knows the person as an idiot - including people who have nothing to do with the forum task, but who may matter to that person in other areas of life.

I think your scenario is a stretch.
Leaf's suggestion: "Everyone on the forum has to add a portfolio link and their real name to their profile (at least first name.. or possibly first name and last initial.. for example). Their name will be displayed under their user name but will NOT show publicly .. only to logged in users. The user name is all that will show publicly.'

JPSDK · « **Reply #124 on:** May 29, 2013, 14:19 »

Jesus man, there are confrontations here. I have never ever posted anything that got so many minuses so quickly.

I can see the advantages of an anonymous forum.
I can see the disadvantages of an anonymous forum.

But actually I dont think either is important.
Throughout history people have uttered their opinion, at revolutions, in KZ camps or in internet forums.
It has often happened they have been decapitated and put to death.
Serious things has happened. The worlds history was pushed in a direction. Revolutions and tea parties. Individuals died.
But nothing ever happened by anonymous statements, only chaos and undermining from all sides. The ruler continued to rule.
As well as you can come up with a great statement anonymously, your eneimies can do the same in your name, and contradict it and make everything meaningless.
When you are anonymous, you are free to speak, and can say everything. And such over the years everything will be said by anonymous people: obsenities, hatred and slander. There is no payback, noone can be held guilty.

I think the basic interaction between men is the rule of law: people can say anything to eachother, but it counts.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Poll

Is it a good idea or bad?

Author Topic: Confirmed Identities on MSG (trial for a month?) (Read 46727 times)

tickstock

tickstock

click_click

click_click

Jo Ann Snover

tickstock

luissantos84

Jonathan Ross

tickstock

Mellimage

luissantos84

Poncke v2

rubyroo

luissantos84

lisafx

JPSDK

cthoman

rubyroo

rimglow

JPSDK

Mellimage

tab62

leaf

rimglow

JPSDK

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors