Rude appeals/Emails

[Alex - Spot-This !]

We just got that nice appeal...

You deleted my 5 pictures... Seriously you guys are real assholes... If you are not happy then edit them yourself next time !!! YOU DON'T GIVE A SHIT TO ALL THE TIME AND MONEY I SPEND ON MY SHOTS !!! Seriously go fuck you and all your family too

well well...

[MarkLawrence]

How totally motivating!! SMH

From a layman's perspective - not a crew member, I hope the BAN is long and permanent!!!

[Runway28L]

Unbelievable. I do get a bit disappointed whenever I get a photo rejection, especially after it was 16,000-18,000th in the queue (although I'm glad I don't have to deal with that much). But the fact that some of these people take things so personal when they get a rejection is totally mind-blowing. If they are having a hard time getting photos accepted, can't they just post a pre/post screen thread and ask for help first?

Hats off to the Team for the massive queue reduction. Great job guys!

Amen.

[LX-A343]

Just to give you an idea. We rejected this photo here ...


... and got this appeal:

You deleted my 5 pictures... Seriously you guys are real assholes... If you are not happy then edit them yourself next time !!! YOU DON'T GIVE A SHIT TO ALL THE TIME AND MONEY I SPEND ON MY SHOTS !!! Seriously go fuck you and all your family too

Seems, there are indeed people in desperate need of a life. And yes, I posted this photo including his name in the copyright bar on purpose.




EDIT: I have been asked to post a photo without the name of that idiot.

[Alex - Spot-This !]

And it seems that very same guy can't live without JP as he just created a new account... which just got life banned as well...

[Diego727]

Hi,
Lately we have noticed an increase of people writing to us in a total inappropriate way. I'll be short about it so :

JetPhotos offers you a FREE service and it would be nothing without the hard work of 40 people from the VOLUNTEER crew. These people are offering you their time but before being crew they are spotters, humans just like you. You have absolutely NO reason to talk to us in a rude manner. Not only does it show a total lack of basic education but it's also very demotivating to us and it wastes a lot of our time that we should be using on screening instead. For these reasons from now on :

- Rude appeal : Automatic Reject

- Rude email : No reply other than a link to this thread

Note that for the worst cases a ban (permanent or not) will be issued without warnings.


Sorry about this message but enough is enough, we're really tired of it. Also please note that we're only talking about a very little number of persons and that 99% of the people do know how to communicate in a polite and civilized way.

Have a nice day

Alex

Hi Alex,

I totally agree with you.

But i think that some spotters are frustrated because rare rejections, for example I got 8 rejections only this weekend, all of them because "Too much or too little contrast" when I go back to my pictures and check the levels on histogram the contrast looks good and totally centered, and to be honest I can´t found any reason to reject the photo but you do it anyways, I don´t care at all, only what I can do is try to "fixed" and uploading again, but I have very loooong time uploading photos to jetphotos and probably I will do it for ever, because i like the page and I really enjoy show my photos in jetphotos. But I agree partially with other people that sometimes I don´t understand what are you looking for, looks like some screeners just reject photos because they like to reject photos.

Don´t take this words on the bad way, just trying to help jetphotos to be better every day as you can help me to be a better spotter every day, and I know that be screener is not easy, but you have to think on the spotter too and if the photo looks good you don´t have to reject it.

Should be a great idea to change the "too much or too little contrast" in too much contrast and apart too little contrast, because talking with other spotters this rejection reason it really confuse the spotters, and talking with some of your screeners that they are my friends looks that they are confused too.

Have a good day.

[dlowwa]

Hi Alex,

I totally agree with you.

But i think that some spotters are frustrated because rare rejections, for example I got 8 rejections only this weekend, all of them because "Too much or too little contrast" when I go back to my pictures and check the levels on histogram the contrast looks good and totally centered, and to be honest I can´t found any reason to reject the photo but you do it anyways, I don´t care at all, only what I can do is try to "fixed" and uploading again, but I have very loooong time uploading photos to jetphotos and probably I will do it for ever, because i like the page and I really enjoy show my photos in jetphotos. But I agree partially with other people that sometimes I don´t understand what are you looking for, looks like some screeners just reject photos because they like to reject photos.

Don´t take this words on the bad way, just trying to help jetphotos to be better every day as you can help me to be a better spotter every day, and I know that be screener is not easy, but you have to think on the spotter too and if the photo looks good you don´t have to reject it.

Should be a great idea to change the "too much or too little contrast" in too much contrast and apart too little contrast, because talking with other spotters this rejection reason it really confuse the spotters, and talking with some of your screeners that they are my friends looks that they are confused too.

Have a good day.

Or... you could simply post one or two of your rejections in the forum to get some direct feedback. Would be more helpful than just another rejection reason listed, no?

[Diego727]

Or... you could simply post one or two of your rejections in the forum to get some direct feedback. Would be more helpful than just another rejection reason listed, no?

I did it before, and it doesn´t work at all, I just give a idea to improve the site, i told you don´t take my words on bad way, if I upload my photos in jetphotos is because i like the webpage.

[ErezS]

Or... you could simply post one or two of your rejections in the forum to get some direct feedback. Would be more helpful than just another rejection reason listed, no?

Dana, You see that many colleagues have a hard time with this reason, so why do not you split this reason to two different reasons that are more obvious?
Many times many colleagues have asked for this, so why insist on the single, unclear reason for so much peoples?

By the way, in the site from which you came here, this reason is split into two, they write clearly whether if it's too much, or if it's too little.

[mahagonny]

Hi to all
I do not think that knowing who the screener is is so important. it would be much more important, instead, to give to those who upload an endowment of tools that avoid many rejections and therefore many angry people who react in an inconsiderate way.
I do not hide that even I get very angry when I see a photo rejected and I do not understand how I can correct the mistake. But I have never used rudeness; not all, however, have this balance, especially in these times when anyone believes he has the right to write what goes through his head, without reflecting on this.
Sorry my bad english.
Regards

[mahagonny]

Just to give you an idea. We rejected this photo here ...
[ATTACH=CONFIG]19724[/ATTACH]

... and got this appeal:


Seems, there are indeed people in desperate need of a life. And yes, I posted this photo including his name in the copyright bar on purpose.




EDIT: I have been asked to post a photo without the name of that idiot.

crazy! Unfortunately there are too many people with a $ 1,200 cost cell phone that they believe to be Henry Cartier Bresson

[dlowwa]

I did it before, and it doesn´t work at all

When was that? You haven't posted any request in the past year that I can see.

[glidescopeAviation]

Hi
I'm not condoning threatening appeals or emails and those who do decide to behave that way should be taken off the site.
However it is also easy to understand how some members become so frustrated. I myself recently find myself losing a little faith with some screening decisions. Having had some recent rejections for various reasons I find it difficult to swallow when I see photos accepted that blatantly don't adhere to the guidelines. Especially the little contrast reject. Next thing the "top shot" depicts an aircraft that almost blends into the sky behind it, and today I've seen a picture with clearly the wrong info.
I get that it's not easy giving up time to screen (I've been a screener myself) but it would be nice to have more consistent screening too.
The screeners can be so judgemental at times but as the original poster states you're human too so why the attitude that being a screener makes you better than the rest of us? I also find it frustrating that we can't use others pictures in the forums as it would make it easier to get our point over.
I don't have any issue with rejections I don't feel the need to prove myself to the screening team or anyone else. But to then see other photos accepted that clearly don't adhere to the guidelines is a bit of a kick in the teeth.

[dlowwa]

Having had some recent rejections for various reasons I find it difficult to swallow when I see photos accepted that blatantly don't adhere to the guidelines. Especially the little contrast reject. Next thing the "top shot" depicts an aircraft that almost blends into the sky behind it, and today I've seen a picture with clearly the wrong info.

..But to then see other photos accepted that clearly don't adhere to the guidelines is a bit of a kick in the teeth.

Honestly, in most case where this argument is brought up, in turns out that there is a misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the guidelines, or a lack of understanding the context. An example would be someone complaining that a recently accepted image was much noisier than theirs that was rejected without realizing the accepted image was a scan from 1993 (this has actually happened).

The screeners can be so judgemental at times but as the original poster states you're human too so why the attitude that being a screener makes you better than the rest of us?

Where has any member of the team stated that?

I also find it frustrating that we can't use others pictures in the forums as it would make it easier to get our point over.

That is simply to avoid publically involving someone else who may not wish to be involved. You are free to contact us privately with example of images that are not your own, if you feel they support an important point you would like to make.

I don't have any issue with rejections I don't feel the need to prove myself to the screening team or anyone else.

Not being sarcastic, but this seems contradictory. If you don't care about rejections or proving yourself, why do you submit images here, and complain about screening decisions in the forum? To me it would seem you do care - which is not a bad thing (neither is a post like this, since it shows you do care enough to ask questions)

As I've stated above, you are free to contact me privately if you have concerns about images other than your own. While there are a few images that admittedly probably shouldn't have been accepted, you'll probably find that most of the images you claim 'blatantly don't adhere to the guidelines' actually in most cases do. Look forward to hearing from you.

[glidescopeAviation]

Honestly, in most case where this argument is brought up, in turns out that there is a misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the guidelines, or a lack of understanding the context. An example would be someone complaining that a recently accepted image was much noisier than theirs that was rejected without realizing the accepted image was a scan from 1993 (this has actually happened).

The image I'm referring to is a recent one. I know older shots will not be of the same standard as we can produce today


Where has any member of the team stated that?

I NEVER said they stated it. I said it was an attitude that can come across


That is simply to avoid publically involving someone else who may not wish to be involved. You are free to contact us privately with example of images that are not your own, if you feel they support an important point you would like to make.

Yes I do get that, I simply stated it doesn't make things easier


Not being sarcastic, but this seems contradictory. If you don't care about rejections or proving yourself, why do you submit images here, and complain about screening decisions in the forum? To me it would seem you do care - which is not a bad thing (neither is a post like this, since it shows you do care enough to ask questions)

I submit to simply share I don't particularly care if they're accepted or rejected, I've been spotting and photographing aircraft for 32 years, long before Jetphotos or any other site ever existed, And I'm not complaining about being rejected. I said that some consistency is needed - to reject shot "A" for a particular reason and then accept shot "B" which clearly violates the same guideline(s) this is for the benefit of every member including the screeners.

As I've stated above, you are free to contact me privately if you have concerns about images other than your own. While there are a few images that admittedly probably shouldn't have been accepted, you'll probably find that most of the images you claim 'blatantly don't adhere to the guidelines' actually in most cases do. Look forward to hearing from you.

And again I acknowledge that from time to time this can happen. It's easy to miss some small details. I was referring to the more obvious instances.
Anyway I suppose we have to agree to disagree on some matters. We all have our own views. I'm not here to cause arguments or stir things but simply to air my opinion. Nobody has to agree with me and that's fine.
Wish you all a good day /evening