Graphics Scamming

[TheFreakShow]

Maybe GFX artists can ask for a non refundable deposit?

 

[Killa808]

What is LuxBux.Biz?
=======================
LuxBux is an advertising and get-paid-to business program.
You will get paid for watching videos, viewing websites, reading ads, receiving e-mails and completing sign-ups on various websites.

What Can I Advertise?
=======================
You can advertise your websites, webpages, referral links, products, blogs, e-mails, written ads, sign-up pages and much more!

Visit our shopping centre for full details here:
http://www.luxbux.biz/index.php?view=prices

Can I Advertise For Free?
=======================
Yes, every new account comes with a good amount of free advertising credits to get you started.
You can use our traffic exchange to list your website or visit other websites to earn visitor credits.

Another way is to post your websites and referral links in our online discussion boards:
http://luxbux.biz/forum/

How & What Do I Earn?
=======================
- Watch videos and earn Gold Coins (exchangeable for advertising or cash)
- Visit a website and earn up to $0.02
- Read an ad and earn up to $0.02
- Receive an e-mail and earn $0.002
- Register on a website and earn $0.10
- Visit websites in our traffic exchange system and accumulate free hits!

Can I Refer Friends?
=======================
Yes, you can. Best of all, you get to keep them forever.

You will earn 50 up to 100% profits from your referrals work, for life!
We also credit you with 1,000 traffic exchange hits and 100,000 banner views for every member you refer.

Your referral link will look like this:
http://www.luxbux.biz/index.php?view=join&ref=your_luxbux_username

Can I Rent Referrals?
=======================
No, you can only own them.

Can I Buy Referrals?
=======================
Yes, but availability is limited.

You can see for yourself by visiting our shopping centre here:
http://www.luxbux.biz/index.php?view=prices

Can I Give Referrals?
=======================
Yes, we provide an option for you to transfer your selected referrals to another account.

Where Do I Cashout?
=======================
We pay our users via Paypal.com or Payza.com.
$1.00 minimum for free members and as low as $0.01 for upgraded members.

Any Withdraw Fees?
=======================
No, never from us.
Although, online payment processors might charge you a transaction fee.

Do You Delete Inactives?
=======================
No, this is to assure all your earnings, purchases, and all other account information is left as is.

Can I Delete My Account?
=======================
Yes, but only per your request.

When Do I Get Paid?
=======================
Usually within a few hours for free and upgraded members.
If we have a waiting list, upgraded members will have priority over free members.

Terms: Free members will receive payment within 0 - 7 business days and premium members within 0 - 24 hours.

We @ LuxBux takes good care of our users.
==============================================
- We do NOT tolerate scam plans, pyramid schemes or anything else that may give our members false hopes.
- We stay true and open to our community, whether you have questions or concerns, we are here to support you.

[url="http://www.luxbux.biz/index.php?view=join&ref=Killa808]What are you waiting for? Join us today and witness for yourself![/url]

 

[xDePloY]

Definiate support. Happens way too often! Also MM/OMM can always hold gold until the art is done till satisfaction or something.

 

[Dial]

This is just fucking terrible. Your comparison of it being like a firecape makes no sense. With graphics, you have no idea what you're going to get. There are so many instances where I hire someone to make something for me, but I've never used that person before, and it looks like utter shit so I don't pay for it nor do I use it.

It should be against the rules to use it and not pay for it. But if you're not going to use it? If this became a rule, you're going to ban a lot of people.

Funny how it's only people who run graphic services that support this, and a few other randoms.

 

[Lazy23]

This is just fucking terrible. Your comparison of it being like a firecape makes no sense. With graphics, you have no idea what you're going to get. There are so many instances where I hire someone to make something for me, but I've never used that person before, and it looks like utter shit so I don't pay for it nor do I use it.

I think referring back to the OP the firecape analogy is more along the lines, If you order a firecape once the user gets it for you, you can't turn around and say you won't pay because you no longer have use for the firecape. If you did that you would get banned, same applies to graphics.

I'm not talking about if a person doesn't like the work and cases like that, as in those cases I would expect the artist and user to work together till the buyer is happy. But the fact at the moment you can request something then simply back out once it's done simply because you don't need it anymore and not have to pay something for the artists time, surely that can't be right?

 

[mage3158]

same applies to graphics.

It really doesn't. If the artist can't meet expectations of the buyer he should not be obligated to pay. What this suggestion basically does is make it go from buying the artwork, to paying the artist for their time... which in the real world doesn't make much sense.

 

[Lazy23]

It really doesn't. If the artist can't meet expectations of the buyer he should not be obligated to pay. What this suggestion basically does is make it go from buying the artwork, to paying the artist for their time... which in the real world doesn't make much sense.

It makes more sense, because in the real world you would actually pay for the artists time and not an end product. But that's not even the point I'm trying to make.

This concept the that the buyer has to pay for something he doesn't like isn't what I posted about. If only you would have read my post.

I'm not talking about if a person doesn't like the work and cases like that, as in those cases I would expect the artist and user to work together till the buyer is happy.

I'm talking about if the artist is asked to do a piece of work and after he sends it to the buyer, the buyer simply claims he doesn't need/want it. Nothing to do with him not liking it, nothing to do with not meeting expectations. In the current set of rules one can simply decline the order for no reason, which in turn results in a waste of time for the artist. This is where the firecape example comes in, if I order a firecape, once it's done I can't say I'm not paying because I've changed my mind and no longer need/want it.

So that's where I feel a rule should be put in place where if the buyer claims he no longer needs/wants the work, he has to pay the fee agreed or be banned.

 

[mage3158]

It makes more sense, because in the real world you would actually pay for the artists time

Wrong. If you're commissioned to do artwork and it isn't satisfactory, don't expect to be paid.

I understand what you're saying though, but it's such a fine line. All someone would have to do to avoid that is say "well it doesn't meet my needs". And if you change it to be very strict... well let's say I wouldn't be commissioning any artist here for any expensive work.

 

[Lazy23]

Wrong. If you're commissioned to do artwork and it isn't satisfactory, don't expect to be paid.

I don't really know how it works for graphic designers in the real world so I don't really want to get into this. But I was under the impression that one would charge by the hour or have an initial lump sum paid for the work, and in the latter case if the buyer wasn't happy with the result they would have to pay extra (either by the hour or another lump sum) to get whatever changes they need done. Like I said, that's just my impression of how I think it works; but I could be very wrong.

I understand what you're saying though, but it's such a fine line. All someone would have to do to avoid that is say "well it doesn't meet my needs". And if you change it to be very strict... well let's say I wouldn't be commissioning any artist here for any expensive work.

I get what you're saying. I would like the rule implemented nevertheless just so those who claim they no longer need the work do get punished. As I doubt many would research the rules intensively beforehand, to claim they weren't satisfied instead of saying that they don't need it.

In terms of drawing the line, for me personally. If you order a piece of work, you have the artists previous work there to give you an idea of more or less what their capabilities are. So for me I would suggest something like this, obviously this is open to ideas.

1. Artist/Buyer agree to what they want, agree a fee, buyer gives a list or something to the artist of what they wanted included.
2. Artist produces results, buyer can now discuss with the artist any changes wanted. This can go on as long as the buyer wants and/or the artist is willing to do changes. If the artist refuses to do changes it will come back to bite them in ass in the last stage, likewise if the buyer doesn't give the artist a chance to fix the work.
3. If either the buyer or artist feel that the desired result expected is unobtainable or if the artist/buyer feel too much time has been spent on the piece. The work is put towards a panel of mods/knowledgeable GFX artists with: the requests the buyer had, the different changes the GFX artist done/final piece & the fee agreed. Then from the previous work of the artist, plus the list above, the panel will come to a verdict anywhere between the buyer being unreasonable and the artist not doing a good job. They then will come to a an agreement over how much of the initial agreed sum should be paid. This could produce various results, but the three main examples are:
   • The price for the work wasn't justifiable given all the facts. So you either pay nothing if the works was truly crap (not what you asked for/nothing like their other works) or a very low sum. Even if you don't plan on using it, the sum would be for the artist time/what they done.
   • A middle ground for the price is reached if they feel the artist didn't give their best for the price and the requests from the buyer were also partially unreasonable.
   • The full amount is paid if the buyer is simply asking for unrealistic expectations based on the evidence and the artist has proven he gave near/or his best.

Anyways that's just a random suggestion of how you could do it, obviously it still has a lot of problems with the fact you might end up paying for work you won't use. So it's open to ideas, obviously it's kind of hard to find that middle ground, but a system with work could potentially be better than what we have now.

 

[Jack]

This is just fucking terrible. Your comparison of it being like a firecape makes no sense. With graphics, you have no idea what you're going to get. There are so many instances where I hire someone to make something for me, but I've never used that person before, and it looks like utter shit so I don't pay for it nor do I use it.

It should be against the rules to use it and not pay for it. But if you're not going to use it? If this became a rule, you're going to ban a lot of people.

Funny how it's only people who run graphic services that support this, and a few other randoms.

It's not necessarily the initial suggestion that is important, its discussion and counter suggestions like what Lazy23 is doing. I'm merely addressing the situation and acknowledging that there is a problem.

I don't really know how it works for graphic designers in the real world so I don't really want to get into this. But I was under the impression that one would charge by the hour or have an initial lump sum paid for the work, and in the latter case if the buyer wasn't happy with the result they would have to pay extra (either by the hour or another lump sum) to get whatever changes they need done. Like I said, that's just my impression of how I think it works; but I could be very wrong.



I get what you're saying. I would like the rule implemented nevertheless just so those who claim they no longer need the work do get punished. As I doubt many would research the rules intensively beforehand, to claim they weren't satisfied instead of saying that they don't need it.

In terms of drawing the line, for me personally. If you order a piece of work, you have the artists previous work there to give you an idea of more or less what their capabilities are. So for me I would suggest something like this, obviously this is open to ideas.

1. Artist/Buyer agree to what they want, agree a fee, buyer gives a list or something to the artist of what they wanted included.
2. Artist produces results, buyer can now discuss with the artist any changes wanted. This can go on as long as the buyer wants and/or the artist is willing to do changes. If the artist refuses to do changes it will come back to bite them in ass in the last stage, likewise if the buyer doesn't give the artist a chance to fix the work.
3. If either the buyer or artist feel that the desired result expected is unobtainable or if the artist/buyer feel too much time has been spent on the piece. The work is put towards a panel of mods/knowledgeable GFX artists with: the requests the buyer had, the different changes the GFX artist done/final piece & the fee agreed. Then from the previous work of the artist, plus the list above, the panel will come to a verdict anywhere between the buyer being unreasonable and the artist not doing a good job. They then will come to a an agreement over how much of the initial agreed sum should be paid. This could produce various results, but the three main examples are:
   • The price for the work wasn't justifiable given all the facts. So you either pay nothing if the works was truly crap (not what you asked for/nothing like their other works) or a very low sum. Even if you don't plan on using it, the sum would be for the artist time/what they done.
   • A middle ground for the price is reached if they feel the artist didn't give their best for the price and the requests from the buyer were also partially unreasonable.
   • The full amount is paid if the buyer is simply asking for unrealistic expectations based on the evidence and the artist has proven he gave near/or his best.

Anyways that's just a random suggestion of how you could do it, obviously it still has a lot of problems with the fact you might end up paying for work you won't use. So it's open to ideas, obviously it's kind of hard to find that middle ground, but a system with work could potentially be better than what we have now.

Yeah it will definitely be difficult to find a middle ground that is fair for both parties.

 

[Emperor Nero]

I get what you're saying. I would like the rule implemented nevertheless just so those who claim they no longer need the work do get punished. As I doubt many would research the rules intensively beforehand, to claim they weren't satisfied instead of saying that they don't need it.

In terms of drawing the line, for me personally. If you order a piece of work, you have the artists previous work there to give you an idea of more or less what their capabilities are. So for me I would suggest something like this, obviously this is open to ideas.

1. Artist/Buyer agree to what they want, agree a fee, buyer gives a list or something to the artist of what they wanted included.
2. Artist produces results, buyer can now discuss with the artist any changes wanted. This can go on as long as the buyer wants and/or the artist is willing to do changes. If the artist refuses to do changes it will come back to bite them in ass in the last stage, likewise if the buyer doesn't give the artist a chance to fix the work.
3. If either the buyer or artist feel that the desired result expected is unobtainable or if the artist/buyer feel too much time has been spent on the piece. The work is put towards a panel of mods/knowledgeable GFX artists with: the requests the buyer had, the different changes the GFX artist done/final piece & the fee agreed. Then from the previous work of the artist, plus the list above, the panel will come to a verdict anywhere between the buyer being unreasonable and the artist not doing a good job. They then will come to a an agreement over how much of the initial agreed sum should be paid. This could produce various results, but the three main examples are:
   • The price for the work wasn't justifiable given all the facts. So you either pay nothing if the works was truly crap (not what you asked for/nothing like their other works) or a very low sum. Even if you don't plan on using it, the sum would be for the artist time/what they done.
   • A middle ground for the price is reached if they feel the artist didn't give their best for the price and the requests from the buyer were also partially unreasonable.
   • The full amount is paid if the buyer is simply asking for unrealistic expectations based on the evidence and the artist has proven he gave near/or his best.

Anyways that's just a random suggestion of how you could do it, obviously it still has a lot of problems with the fact you might end up paying for work you won't use. So it's open to ideas, obviously it's kind of hard to find that middle ground, but a system with work could potentially be better than what we have now.

I like this. The suggestion is practical, simple, and fills the problem presented. I doubt that this would ever be considered though, and I am surprised this thread has gotten to three pages. There needs to be a solution, because graphic artists get scammed out of their time a lot.


Real world example using contractual terms:

The buyer orders a piece and a price is agreed upon and the artist begins the work. Take a contractor building a house, they agree to put up the walls in a room, the owner agrees on a price and the contractor begins work. If the contractor completes the work and the owner refuses to pay them then that is breach of contract if the parties had both reached mutual ascent and met all the other requirements to be made a contract. The contractor then can sue for breach of contract and the court decides if the work is of satisfactory quality. What lazy has just suggested is the same system.

A brief outline adding to lazy's:

The artist must show agreement of terms and price in screenshot form to prove there was mutual ascent. If the buyer refuses to pay it goes before a council of I would say 2 mods and 1 active/knowledgeable GFXer where they will see if the piece meets requirements. If it meets the requirements and fulfills the order then they have to pay, just like it would work in the real world.

All artists can add into their ToS that if the buyer backs out they have the right to take it before the council or whatever to make a decision. That is if all avenues for payment and work is exhausted.

 

[Dial]

The buyer orders a piece and a price is agreed upon and the artist begins the work. Take a contractor building a house, they agree to put up the walls in a room, the owner agrees on a price and the contractor begins work. If the contractor completes the work and the owner refuses to pay them then that is breach of contract if the parties had both reached mutual ascent and met all the other requirements to be made a contract. The contractor then can sue for breach of contract and the court decides if the work is of satisfactory quality. What lazy has just suggested is the same system.

All of your (a contractor) past work with walls has been dry wall, and that's why I hire you. For some reason, you make my wall out of concrete blocks.

People use Kinaesthic because his work is supposed to be good. I'm not going to pay him when he makes me something shitty.

All analogies (including mine) in this thread have been pretty fucking terrible and really don't relate since it's not the same situation.

 

[I Have Needz]

If they don't complete it for whatever reason then the buyer should get a full refund, the artist is giving an insufficient effort. If it's not satisfactory then the buyer should just request some changes.

TBH, I CBA to read through all the comments. But what you are saying above is the same as the current rule, just the buyer going first. As you stated in the first post, buyers will ALWAYS say some of the GFX is not good enough. So how can you tell when a consensus is met? This is just a way for the GFX artist to scam the buyer out of money when the buyer isn't satisfied with the work.

With the current ruling, a buyer will pay when they are satisfied.
With your new ruling, the buyer will pay before they are satisfied, but can get the money back if unsatisfied.

So isn't this really the same thing as it is, with added steps involving charge-backs and claims?

Sorry, but no support, I understand the annoyance of GFX artists, but if I want changes done I am not comfortable just leaving them with my money until I know what the finished product is, with your method they still have my money and if I claim to be "unhappy" and they claim to be "completed" then I have to fight for my money back. It is best the way it is, do I get $1,000.00 before I design a package for a new video game? No. Do I have to compete with other producers to design the package? Yes. Do I have to give them the complete version before payment? No. The way it is now is like the way it is in the real world. The best way IMO.

-Needz

 

[Dial]

In all seriousness...

Jack Goff, Emperor_Nero, Kinaesthic, and most other people arguing for this rule to go through are biased since they (have) run graphic services and/or are active in that section. They're thinking of the betterment for themselves and not as the site as a whole. As a frequent graphic purchaser, I would never buy graphics from anyone on Sythe again if this were to go through. I'm not going to fucking pay someone for something that isn't what I expected and that I'm not going to use, and have to pay another designer to make what I want. When you support this rule guys, think of the amount of customers you're going to push away because that means you can do shitty work and still get paid. If anything, this lowers standards in that section and will only harm it more than anything.

 

[Emperor Nero]

All of your (a contractor) past work with walls has been dry wall, and that's why I hire you. For some reason, you make my wall out of concrete blocks.

People use Kinaesthic because his work is supposed to be good. I'm not going to pay him when he makes me something shitty.

All analogies (including mine) in this thread have been pretty fucking terrible and really don't relate since it's not the same situation.

You're taking the analogy out of context. The point is that if a person performs a job that is measured in at least part by subjectivity then there is always a chance you could create a masterpiece to rival Da Vinci and they won't like it because it is an 8th tone off and for some reason you can't get it to the tone they want. The piece is a great piece, but the person is being difficult. You work with them for a few hours to get the pay, and then you're out cash that you could have from doing other orders. If we do Lazy's system then that subjectivity becomes somewhat measurable, and creates an equal playing field for everyone.

 

[Lvl 75 Def]

In all seriousness...

Jack Goff, Emperor_Nero, Kinaesthic, and most other people arguing for this rule to go through are biased since they (have) run graphic services and/or are active in that section. They're thinking of the betterment for themselves and not as the site as a whole. As a frequent graphic purchaser, I would never buy graphics from anyone on Sythe again if this were to go through. I'm not going to fucking pay someone for something that isn't what I expected and that I'm not going to use, and have to pay another designer to make what I want. When you support this rule guys, think of the amount of customers you're going to push away because that means you can do shitty work and still get paid. If anything, this lowers standards in that section and will only harm it more than anything.

Ya and if you buy gfx you decide you don't like it after a day because it has a stock in there that isn't copyrighted or anything. Then demand a full refund even tho you already used that graphic on you website.
way to go mate.

 

[R]

In all seriousness...

Jack Goff, Emperor_Nero, Kinaesthic, and most other people arguing for this rule to go through are biased since they (have) run graphic services and/or are active in that section. They're thinking of the betterment for themselves and not as the site as a whole. As a frequent graphic purchaser, I would never buy graphics from anyone on Sythe again if this were to go through. I'm not going to fucking pay someone for something that isn't what I expected and that I'm not going to use, and have to pay another designer to make what I want. When you support this rule guys, think of the amount of customers you're going to push away because that means you can do shitty work and still get paid. If anything, this lowers standards in that section and will only harm it more than anything.

The "panel" in lazy's suggestion would assess the final product against the examples given to determine whether it was just a lousy job for the money or not

 

[Dial]

Ya and if you buy gfx you decide you don't like it after a day because it has a stock in there that isn't copyrighted or anything. Then demand a full refund even tho you already used that graphic on you website.
way to go mate.

MoonGlare used copyrighted materials to make me a banner for a professional website. I didn't realize until Kinaesthic pointed it out to me. But no, I let him keep his money.

Go suck Moon's dick elsewhere and stay out of my business.

 

[Punjabi3]

If people are worried about losing their time for graphics they should either charge for their time or stop graphics altogether if the loss of time is too much for them to handle.

 

[Lvl 75 Def]

MoonGlare used copyrighted materials to make me a banner for a professional website. I didn't realize until Kinaesthic pointed it out to me. But no, I let him keep his money.

Go suck Moon's dick elsewhere and stay out of my business.

lmao back to reality faggot, moon refunded you. Then i paid back that money to moon and said i got it back from you. So infact it is my business. I didn't know having an opinion was sucking dick. Don't lie about the copyrighted shit, that didn't even matter to you. You kept changing your mind, first it's the copyright then it was the fact that he "didnt make it himself". Just stfu unless you're gonna tell people the truth.