comunications

[qaz 9]

am interested to know as a newcomer [and before i continue at Alamy] do other contributors have communication problems with support, I recently wasted much time on at least two occasions talking to someone called Anand who keep answering my queries with completely irrelevant information, like his replies are going out to the wrong person, and this is not corrected after i politely point out the problem to him. thanks

 

thanks

[Alamy 594]

Sorry you feel this way, but having looked through your correspondence with our MS team we don't think this topic is very fair.

 

We'll avoid copying and posting the 3 mails you sent us, but they are quite confusing in the way they are written. The two email replies you've had from Anand are perfectly suitable for your initial questions and the third email reply from Asha was simply asking you to clarify your initial question.

 

Alamy

[Allan Bell 2,612]

Personally I have found MS to be very helpful if the question/s is/are couched in simple terms.

 

Allan

[Foreign Export 305]

I've always found MS very helpful - and even if I didn't I wouldn't use a forum as a means of securing a solution

[Tony C 12]

I am very new myself and have only contacted MS once about something I needed help with and they responded very quickly and professionally with the information I needed.

[Brian Yarvin 455]

I've always thought that communications with Alamy as a company were excellent. That's one more positive vote.

[qaz 9]

ive now contacted MS through the forum and got the nonsense cleared up, indeed, they can be prompt and very helpful but i'll still try to keep my enquiries to a minimum

 

i finally pointed out a couple of issues to MS through the forum and believe they agree [although they did'nt acually say] that one was simply an inapropriate reply and the other a matter of coinfusion due to Alamys "in house" terminology being used in there reply

Edited November 4, 2014 by qaz

[qaz 9]

anyone know what this reputation rating is about, ive already got myself a negative one , and is there a spell checker here

 

thanks

[dustydingo 873]

Yes, most of us know what the "reputation" rating is about, and no, no spell checker in posts per se.

 

dd

[Martin P Wilson 1,142]

anyone know what this reputation rating is about, ive already got myself a negative one , and is there a spell checker here

 

thanks

 

You will have got the negative rating because some people felt you were out of order bad mouthing member services on the forum, where as their post suggest, they cannot defend themselves without publishing your private messages to them. Most of us have had nothing but good service from member services. if you notice other people have green positive repuations for posts disagreeing with your original post. I don't use red flags but I agree with the sentiment they reflect.

[NYCat 2,667]

anyone know what this reputation rating is about, ive already got myself a negative one , and is there a spell checker here

 

thanks

 

A lot of people would rather hear a specific criticism instead of seeing red marks showing up. This seems to be a system we are stuck with so I am in the habit of giving green ones to cancel out the red. The forum may not have been the most appropriate place to post your distress but I think you were just frustrated by your communication problems. Some questions to Alamy are answered with form replies but they will also sometimes go to a good deal of trouble to help. I hope your questions have been answered now.

 

Paulette

[NYCat 2,667]

qaz, I hope you don't mind if I make a suggestion about your keywords. I looked at the one image that has gone live for you and I noticed you wrote "women" twice. You think you meant to add "woman" since it is only one woman. I think some of the keywords referred to things in the background and that might not be a good idea. Most of the time you will want to only describe the main subject so as to avoid inappropriate views. I'm trying to be helpful -- not critical -- so I hope this doesn't bother you.

 

Paulette

[spacecadet 4,051]

ive now contacted MS through the forum and got the nonsense cleared up, indeed, they can be prompt and very helpful but i'll still try to keep my enquiries to a minimum

 

i finally pointed out a couple of issues to MS through the forum and believe they agree [although they did'nt acually say] that one was simply an inapropriate reply and the other a matter of coinfusion due to Alamys "in house" terminology being used in there reply

Perhaps there's a language barrier?

[KWheal 157]

I find member services very helpful. A lot of times I do get a "cut and paste" answer but when I re e mail back asking for better details I normally get a good reply

Kevin

[Foreign Export 305]

Please ignore my last post - I used the wrong quote

Edited November 4, 2014 by Foreign Export

[Foreign Export 305]

Now ignore my last post please - my ipad is confusing me!!

 

I did mean to say that whilst one wouldn't take the reputation markers too seriously they do keep civility in the forum

 

But if Paulette gives greenies to balance reds - but doesn't really mean a green - then it does undermine another contributors view.

[Paulstw 237]

If you think Alamy are bad try the other guys who don't even reply. Always felt I'm speaking to someone at a desk with Alamy. 

[NYCat 2,667]

Now ignore my last post please - my ipad is confusing me!!

 

I did mean to say that whilst one wouldn't take the reputation markers too seriously they do keep civility in the forum

 

But if Paulette gives greenies to balance reds - but doesn't really mean a green - then it does undermine another contributors view.

 

I see your point. I could give you a red one I suppose but what would you know from that? You wouldn't be any wiser as to what I was objecting to. I've just seen the red ones cause damage in the forum so I am waging my own private war against them. I am glad you spoke up with your viewpoint. I much prefer that to getting a red one.

 

Paulette

[dustydingo 873]

But if Paulette gives greenies to balance reds - but doesn't really mean a green - then it does undermine another contributors view.

 

That's silly  . . . someone giving a red just as surely, by your logic, undermines another contirbutor's view (cancelling out a green).

 

And it's not just Paulette who stands thus accused: many of us cancel out coward arrows.

 

dd

[TokyoM1ke 124]

I really do wonder why they bother with reds and greens... they're allocated pretty arbitrarily after all. You can tell that from this thread!

[qaz 9]

Well....the replys and views are heartening , so i can expect reasonable CS assistance in future....good.

 

yes i will remove a few of those keywords. i appear to have overdone it...thanks.

 

the reputation sytem is intersing but i cant say i will be getting excited or even concerned about it.

 

If a moderator doesnt mind such a post here i am more than happy to post my original question and the confusing replys i received, so the poor fellow Anand can defend himself and anyone else can grasp the issue before they staart dishing out more red flags

 

and yes it may well be a language problem or an inapropriate  cut and past reply, but like i said it got sorted evenutually after customer service finally saw the exact reply's i was referring to

Edited November 4, 2014 by qaz

[qaz 9]

well i take it then no one wants to actually see the correspondence concerned....disappointing but it means no one will have to changes sides:) when they see my complaint is valid

[mickfly 526]

You had an answer to your original query on here from the Alamy team, who were kind enough not to post your 'private' messages so I don't think you should post theirs.
If English is not your first language, it may be a simple misunderstanding.

[qaz 9]

qaz, I hope you don't mind if I make a suggestion about your keywords. I looked at the one image that has gone live for you and I noticed you wrote "women" twice. You think you meant to add "woman" since it is only one woman. I think some of the keywords referred to things in the background and that might not be a good idea. Most of the time you will want to only describe the main subject so as to avoid inappropriate views. I'm trying to be helpful -- not critical -- so I hope this doesn't bother you.

 

Paulette

i just got round to following Paulette's  advice to remove some keywords from "women sitting reading" pic [it wont have registered yet taken yet though], .....what do u think, i could adjust it sumore but on other stock sites ive seen so many people really piling them on...so is this good or no?

 

 

======================================================================================================================

 

pls don't award me any positive points, i prefer to keep those nice red ones to remind me of the generous folks I've already met...and no, I'm not a teenager                           

Edited November 18, 2014 by qaz

[John Mitchell 4,932]

 

qaz, I hope you don't mind if I make a suggestion about your keywords. I looked at the one image that has gone live for you and I noticed you wrote "women" twice. You think you meant to add "woman" since it is only one woman. I think some of the keywords referred to things in the background and that might not be a good idea. Most of the time you will want to only describe the main subject so as to avoid inappropriate views. I'm trying to be helpful -- not critical -- so I hope this doesn't bother you.

 

Paulette

i just got round to following Paulette's  advice to remove some keywords from "women sitting reading" pic [it wont have registered yet taken yet though], .....what do u think, i could adjust it sumore but on other stock sites ive seen so many people really piling them on...so is this good or no?

 

 

======================================================================================================================

 

pls don't award me any positive points, i prefer to keep those nice red ones to remind me of the generous folks I've already met...and no, I'm not a teenager                           

 

 

Quality (i.e. preciseness) is more important than quantity IME when it comes to keywords. I'm continually going back and tinkering with them. Piling 'em on is definitely not a wise idea on Alamy. Your images will just end up in irrelevant search results. Would supply geographical location, though, for documentary images such as the stray cat and woman reading on bench. This info has to be in the keywords because the location field is not searchable.