bmiSTUDIO wrote:
How about three strikes and you are out. If someone is found to violate the same rule three times, kick them off MM. Delete their account with zero notice. Imagine their surprise when they go to log in and find a place holder with a report card graphic that has the note: "Doesn't follow rules" or "Doesn't play well with others".

And what if someone gets booted over he-said/she-said bullshit?

Patchouli Nyx wrote:

yeah, last I read they got angry at some people for CAMing too much to clean up that area.

thats not a good thing

T A Y L O R  wrote:
I usually use negotiable to mean that I'll work TF with select photographers, but if I'm not interested in doing a trade shoot with them I'll send them my rates. I usually state as much, too.

Does negotiate mean negotiating rates to pay a photographer? Where's that stated?

yes negotiable means negotiate rates to pay the photographer if you want to be paid you need to put an availability notice not a casting.

Dean Soapbox Killer Photo wrote:
This.

Though one may wish to follow up the report via CAM as just reporting the casting won't really tell us what the issue is. There's isn't an option for "castings says TF but I contacted them and they are actually seeking pay" when reporting a casting so an explanation may be in order.

CAM = Contact A Mod. The link to contact us is found under the help tab.

But when it comes to casting calls, generally it is sufficient to simply report them without using CAM.

And I have done this... as recently as a week ago...

With no observed corrective results whatsoever that I could observe.

So with all due respect to the moderators, whatever is being done to fix this problem (and I have recently noticed what seems to be a new warning pop-up message which appears at casting call preview and/or confirmation time, and I consider it ineffective), it may be prudent not to labor under the impression that it has been very effective.

JadeDRed wrote:
To be honest, whilst i understand the differences between casting/availability/travel i feel the system is a little bit overly complicated. Since there are search options for location and date and work being offered/solicited, i don't see why they can't just all be in the same section. I understand in a forum setting it would be annoying to have people clogging up the forum soliciting work when people are trying to find work but with the search options it would seem simple enough. Obviously people would still try to manipulate the system but might result in less mistakes through lack of understanding.

So, to clarify, is the suggestion being made that ignorance is an acceptable excuse?

If you have posted a casting call recently you will see at least one screen warning against using non-paid casting calls for soliticing work.

If a person needs money, he or she should issue an availability notice, and read and respond to all of the appropriate casting calls.

If a person needs a service, he or she should issue a casting call and read and respond to all of the appropriate availability notices.

This is so that people who need money don't waste their time responding to other people who have no desire or intention of hiring them, and so that people who need a service don't waste their time responding to other people who have no intention of providing a service.

Some people might be in both camps: both providing a service and needing money.  However, to send out an ad for one and respond to responses as if you are the other is unprofessional because you are "baiting" and then "switching."

This practice is called "bait and switch."

From:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictiona … and+switch

bait and switch
noun

1: a sales tactic in which a customer is attracted by the advertisement of a low-priced item but is then encouraged to buy a higher-priced one

IOW, a potential customer (in the case of this thread, a photographer seeking a TFP model) is enticed to spend his or her time and effort to respond to a model's TFP casting call advertisement, and then encouraged by the model to pay for her services in spite of the advertisement being categorized by the model as TFP (no pay needed).

A person might respond to one such ad or a thousand such ads.  If many models consistently bait and switch, whether by design or accident, it interferes with legitimate (honest/responsible) TFP photographers using MM to contact legitimate (honest/responsible) TFP models and legitimate (honest/responsible) TFP models to contact legitimate (honest/responsible) TFP photographers, because the wheat (honest/responsible people) must be culled from the chaff (dishonest/irresponsible people).

From the perspective of the people attempting to use MM TFP casting calls in the manner in which it is intended to be used, there is no effective difference between dishonest and irresponsible people.

The results are the same: bait and switch, and active interference to legitimate (honest/responsible) MM models and MM photographers.

For this reason, IMHO, ignorance should not be an acceptable excuse to misuse the MM TFP casting call feature.

Cherrystone wrote:
Casting calls have been out of control for a long time....a very long time.
Good luck CAM'ing them.

+1,000

bmiSTUDIO wrote:
How about three strikes and you are out. If someone is found to violate the same rule three times, kick them off MM. Delete their account with zero notice. Imagine their surprise when they go to log in and find a place holder with a report card graphic that has the note: "Doesn't follow rules" or "Doesn't play well with others".

lol...that law doesn't even work in real life

Nicolette wrote:
Rick OBanion Photo wrote:

Or she is full of shit....either way offering up rates in a casting call reply is not permitted and tactless.

Perhaps. We don't know that for sure though.

We know for sure that the model using a TFP casting call to solicit paid modeling gigs is violating MM rules, actively interfering with legitimate use of MM.

Everything else that is known, or not known, or somewhere in between, is irrelevant to those violations of the MM rules.

Nicolette wrote:
I've posted castings for TF shoots before. When a photographer I did not feel was the one for that shoot contacted me, I said pretty much exactly this:

"Thanks for the response, but I am going to continue looking for someone who I feel is a better fit for this shoot. However, if you'd still like to work with me, my rates are XYZ."

That seems to me a violation of the MM rules, which state that TFP casting calls are to be used for soliciting unpaid services only.

Nicolette wrote:
Posting a casting for TF doesn't mean you TF with everyone that responds. You aren't obligated to do that.

This issue is not in contention, here or anywhere else, and so IMHO it is irrelevant to the issue under discussion in this thread.

JadeDRed wrote:
Nicolette wrote:
So basically... she's doing trade work... just not with you.

So they see I'm looking for paid work, which they aren't offering, and think I might be willing to do TFP as well. That's reasonable.

Just like it's reasonable for a model who you say you wan't to work with, who doesn't want to offer you TFP to send you rates.

IMHO, no, because

(1) the person responding to TFP casting calls is doing so in the anticipation that they will successfully locate a legitimate (honest and professional) TFP model.  If you and many other models respond with a bait and switch response, why even bother with the TFP casting call feature at all since it will just be abused by large numbers* of bait and switch models as a quick and cleanliness-challenged way to find non-TFP model work?;

(2) you are comparing apples and oranges (a situation in which the MM rules are being broken by the model, and a situation in which the MM rules are not being broken by the photographer); and

(3) in the long run, rules or not, people should be decent and respectful to other people.  People should practice the golden rule and be able to empathize with other peoples' legitimate experiences and issues.  bait and switch, in any form, is unprofessional and dishonest.

* the problem can be viewed as a "denial of service".  From:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial-of-service_attack

In computing, a denial-of-service attack (DoS attack) or distributed denial-of-service attack (DDoS attack) is an attempt to make a machine or network resource unavailable to its intended users.

Many photographers want to find models to photograph on a TFP or paid basis and want to use the MM TFP/negotiable casting call features to do so, but many models abuse the TFP/negotiable casting call features making it almost impractical for such photographers to find, contact, and shoot with the models who satisfy the photographers' qualifications.  Thus the models abusing the MM site in this manner are in effect forming a DoS attack on the MM site, by effectively denying some photographers from using the MM site in the manner in which it is intended to be used.

Nicolette wrote:
Rick OBanion Photo wrote:

No but you are not permitted to try and change it into a paid gig for yourself either. Best wait a few weeks then send your rates in a new message apart from the casting call. Otherwise how does anyone know you don't say the same to everyone?

That's not trying to change a gig, by any means.

Whether or not it is changing the gig is difficult to determine by a disinterested observer.  To the point at hand, however, it is against the MM rules.  I am merely trying in this thread to address the violations of the MM rules.

Nicolette wrote:
That's saying "Hey, you're not right for this. But if you wanna work with me anyways [knowing full well it won't be for that trade shoot], these are the terms."  I don't get upset when photographers do that to me. It's the nature of the beast and the way this business works.

So you are stating-- screw the MM rules. I will do what I please, because it fits reality as I view it.

This seems like Elliot Ness walking into a beer warehouse and shooting the barrels of beer before the Prohibition Act is passed.  "Hey, you are not right to store this beer here.  It's the nature of the beast and everyone knows liquor is bad."

Nicolette wrote:
I'm not going to cold call them for work at a later date [when I can only start 15 messages a day as is] when they have already expressed interest in working with me. If they say no thanks to the terms, then that's their right. I'll wish them a good day/week/month/whatever, move on with my day, and tell them perhaps we can work together another time.

It is in bad faith to conduct any business under a false flag.

Nicolette wrote:
But a brand new message, weeks later with "HEY YOU RESPONDED TO MY CASTING A WHILE BACK, HERE ARE MY RATES YO".... that is tactless.

You are probably better off not using the contacts received from a TFP casting call to solicit any paid work at all, as that and only that IMHO conforms to the MM rule.  Why not post a paid availability notice and simply use those responses to contact people for paid work?  That would be tactful (because you have targeted your intended recipients by limiting them only to those who have responded to your availability notice, so you are automatically assured via proper use of MM that your solicitations are not received by anyone who is not interested in paying you, or (in the case of a "negotiable" cc) is only interested in being paid by you).  And professional and honest, too.

Cherrystone wrote:
Casting calls have been out of control for a long time....a very long time.
Good luck CAM'ing them.

JadeDRed wrote:
Rick OBanion Photo wrote:

No but you are not permitted to try and change it into a paid gig for yourself either. Best wait a few weeks then send your rates in a new message apart from the casting call. Otherwise how does anyone know you don't say the same to everyone?

Photographers seem perfectly capable of using the phrase "I don't have any paid work to offer at the moment, but I'm willing to offer a TFP shoot if you are interested" to me. Try that.

I agree with the other poster who suggested you CAM them, since it is against MM rules.

It is simply common sense to learn the rules and adhere to the rules of the community for the sake of the common good of the community.

JadeDRed wrote:
What I say to other people is not your problem.

The problem IMHO is an apparently significant number of self-centered models who either are too unprofessional to learn the existing MM rules, and/or who chose to ignore the existing MM rules, and/or fail to lobby to change the existing MM rules before taking matters into their own hands, the existing MM rules having been previously established for the sake of the common good of the community, and prima facie agreed to by all in the MM community as a prerequisite to use of the MM site.

JadeDRed wrote:
Shot By Adam wrote:

How in the world is it overly complicated?

Well, for a start, if i'm available to shoot in a location 2 hours away in a car its 'availability notice', if i'm available to shoot 3 hours away it's 'travel notice'. It's the same thing since I have to state the location anyway but i need to work out car distances (I don't drive) to work out which one I'm offering. I find that to be unnecessarily complicated.

OK that is a different issue about a different part of the MM posting policy, so it can and IMHO should be a separate discussion in a separate thread.  Professionals can and routinely do deal with such complexity by dividing and conquering.

Shilo Von Porcelaine wrote:
Rick OBanion Photo wrote:

Uh..no. That still leaves it open to abuse. Never leave an door open wide enough for a snake to slither through.

It's a complicated line, and to be honest it varies from case to case, but I still think that someone has a right to offer their rates/not work with someone if their work is not what they're interested in for that particular project.

Not -- at least, to my understanding -- if it violates MM rules.

Shilo Von Porcelaine wrote:
IfI don't think shooting that particular project paid when they are advertising TF is right, but if someone puts up a TF casting call, they still have bills to pay, and should still be able to accept paid work for other things.

This IMHO contains incorrect assumptions.  For example a photographer can have a policy of shooting only TFP.  In that case, the photographer should be able to respond to models' casting calls without being baited and switched by large numbers of models posting fake casting calls.  Another assumption is that photographers don't have day jobs or other sources of income.

Shilo Von Porcelaine wrote:
I do, however agree that a casting call is not the place to look for paid work, ...

Actually it is for respondents to the casting call.  It is, though, not a place for the casting call posters to look for paid work.  The distinction is significant for respondents, since responses sent per day are not unlimited.

Shilo Von Porcelaine wrote:
... whereas an advertisement is. With a casting call, you can choose who you want to work with however.

If you post a casting call, you can choose who you want to work with, but since it is a casting call, you must either pay them, work TFP with them, or decline them, but not bait and switch them by responding to them with a solicitation of services for payment.

GingerMuse wrote:
lol. this is not just with models.
are you responding to their castings directly or messaging them without them realizing that you are responding to their TF casting?

For myself, never.  So that is not the problem I am observing (and that I am addressing in this thread).

GingerMuse wrote:
Most likely they do not really like your work and don't want to work with you unless you pay them.   I'm assuming they just don't want to actually tell you that so they just send you their rates.

I have never been told that, so I have no direct evidence of that.  However,
not liking someone's work still does not IMHO justify anyone breaking MM rules and adding insult to injury by suggesting that the responder give them money because they do not like the responder's work.  It would be much better for all parties in such cases for the model to send a polite message declining the offer to work together, and not suggest working together with someone whose work one does not hold in good regard.  That is simply bad faith (and I am expressing myself euphemistically here).

GingerMuse wrote:
as far as the negotiable aspect, they clearly don't read what that means or don't care. just flag them.

As I have stated above, I will reiterate that this still does not seem to have much if any observable effect with the system currently in place.

UCPhotog wrote:
If we as a community work together well and do what's right, including educating those who are not following the rules, it will make it better for all of us.

Which is in part why I started this thread and am still participating by responding to other responses here.

Images By Joseph wrote:
If your looking to be paid by models from this site
BOY ARE YOU IN THE WRONGPLACE

Welcome to the world of Internet modeling

Actually there are some models who pay for work, and I have been paid by some models to photograph them.

In any case, IMHO, the worldview of one person is insufficient justification for breaking MM rules.

Nicolette wrote:
Rick OBanion Photo wrote:

You are comparing apples to oranges. We cannot post a casting call where you are expected to pay nor are we allowed to suggest you do in the reply.

I've responded to a photographers TF casting before and received a very simple, "Your look isn't quite right for this casting. If you'd still like to shoot, ym rates are XYZ."

And there was nothing wrong with that.

I agree with the other poster who suggested CAM'ming the photographer who did that.  To the best of my knowledge and recollection, I have never responded in that manner to a model who responded to any of my TFP casting calls.  Common sense tells me that it is unethical.  IMHO, common sense should tell anyone that it is unethical.

Nicolette wrote:
Just like there's nothing wrong with a model saying that.

To the contrary, it is against MM rules, no matter wether the casting call poster who says that is a photographer or a model.

IMHO, wrong is wrong, and IMHO two wrongs do not make a right.

[IMHO this discussion is sounding less and less like straightforward ignorance, and more and more like willful disregard for ethics as reflected in the existing MM rules.  Therefore, I anticipate that a more effective solution than the system that is currently in place will involve harsher punishment as well as more clarity in labels and menus and warnings.]

UCPhotog wrote:
Ava Photography wrote:

I do not dispute that.

However, it is also true that the model is able to respond to the photographer and let the photographer know that she is passing on the photographer's offer because the photographer's portfolio does not seem to her a good fit for her vision for the shoot.

Agreed.

UCPhotog wrote:
I agree with your thoughts and interpretation of the rules for these postings. I also know that the moderators are a busy group. As one noted, just click on the flag button. They can always contact you via reverse CAM. Save emails. And continue to flag.

I have used the flag button, but so far, with no observable effect.  I sympathize with the moderators' workloads, which is a reason I am suggesting systemic and procedural changes as (what at least I believe is) an alternative to increasing their workloads.

bmiSTUDIO wrote:
How about three strikes and you are out. If someone is found to violate the same rule three times, kick them off MM. Delete their account with zero notice. Imagine their surprise when they go to log in and find a place holder with a report card graphic that has the note: "Doesn't follow rules" or "Doesn't play well with others".

I do not know how many times violators are allowed to skate.  However, to my perception, and the perception of at least some other participants in this thread, the current procedures in place are insufficient deterrent, which IMHO argues for harsher penalties than whatever is currently in place.

Also, again based on some responses in this thread, one conceivably can envision some models claiming that the current menus and labels are still unclear if their account is suddenly terminated.  Therefore IMHO part of the issue may be clarifying the labels, menus, and warnings to the extent that the concerns expressed by the models regarding confusion are minimized.

terrysphotocountry wrote:
I have had several experiences while responding to female models who post casting calls for TFP photographers.  When I respond, the female model answers that she is not doing TFP but seeking paid work.
                                                It's called bait and switch!

This suggests to me that the issue is still not addressed by the system currently in place.

Nicolette wrote:

And what if someone gets booted over he-said/she-said bullshit?

I know of a photographer that says one thing and send lots of emails for confirmation but in the emails he adds little things that if your not paying attention your not realizing what you are agreeing to. Now this didn't happen to me but I witnessed the email transactions of nearly 3 weeks for a TFP from a photographer to a MUA. It started out with a 4 hour shoot to a 8 hour shoot. Then from 2 models to 5 models, then from one look per model to 2 looks per model. When he asked her how long to do hair and makeup per model she had to stop him because she doesn't style hair. He came back with well your casting said you did! And her reply... I never put in a casting, you contacted me. So she made some requests of her own very directly and he said he wouldn't do it. Simple stuff like more pictures because of more models ( not raw files) Specific Photoshopping  and choice of what photos she wanted if she was going to spend 8 hours ( which can turn into 12hours as you know) using specific makeup HE requested and calling a hairstylist friend TFP to benefit HIS shoot. Again he said no so she felt that they couldn't agree they couldn't work together on his shoot. Since it was 3 days before the shoot he had time to get another MUA. He put out a casting on Twitter and Facebook for a MUA saying his flaked. She didn't flake out but she was still not happy. Joining Mayhem took a long time for me because of some weird stories. I will try to get everything in writing so that no one is confused.

Hi_Spade Photography wrote:

Really?? I thought they could post castings for paid work as long as it was listed under the "paid" section in the castings.

Posting a casting call means that you are "hiring" the other party, although "hiring" them for TF is allowed.

If you are expecting to BE paid, your posting has to go in travel/available.

Ava Photography wrote:
That seems to me a violation of the MM rules, which state that TFP casting calls are to be used for soliciting unpaid services only.

Yeah, but if someone I'm not interested in trading with messages me in response to my casting about trading... I'm gonna tell them no. And I'll tell them if they wish to work with me while knowing they will not be doing THAT shoot or getting trade work... my rates are gonna get sent. Period.

That's just the nature of the beast.

That's not a violation of rules since I'm not trying to get them to pay me by posting that specific casting. Thats a, "hey. you don't fit. sorry. still wanna shoot? okay, my rates are XYZ." I really don't know how I can dumb that down further because you're obviously not catching what I'm throwing out here. It's not a "false flag" or any of that shit. It's saying, "No. No trade for you. You don't fit this shoot. But, if you wanna shoot anyways, here are my rates."

It's not just models that respond like that. That's totally fine.

ETA:
It's not unethical. It's really not. It might be to you, but it's certainly not unethical to me.

If you email me and I'm not interested in your book for my casting, you're gonna hear that. However, if you still wanna shoot, and you say so in that same message after hearing you're not getting the TF shoot... you're getting rates.

I don't get my jimmies rustled when people do that to me. I don't really care if their jimmies get rustled when I say that to them. It's not unethical. It's not me saying "SCREW DA RULEZ I ARE MODEL I DO WHAT I WANT." It's not me ignoring rules. It's not me trying to pull a bait-and-switch. It's business. I'm not gonna just ignore potential business contacts and NOT offer them other ways to work with me. I'm not gonna forget they exist simply because they don't fit a trade casting. I'm not gonna cold call them at a later date...

It's really just that simple.

But, the more I'm reading your responses, the more it seems like you're just mad that a model sent you rates after denying you a trade casting, IMHO.

Cee Jay Starling  wrote:

I know of a photographer that says one thing and send lots of emails for confirmation but in the emails he adds little things that if your not paying attention your not realizing what you are agreeing to. Now this didn't happen to me but I witnessed the email transactions of nearly 3 weeks for a TFP from a photographer to a MUA. It started out with a 4 hour shoot to a 8 hour shoot. Then from 2 models to 5 models, then from one look per model to 2 looks per model. When he asked her how long to do hair and makeup per model she had to stop him because she doesn't style hair. He came back with well your casting said you did! And her reply... I never put in a casting, you contacted me. So she made some requests of her own very directly and he said he wouldn't do it. Simple stuff like more pictures because of more models ( not raw files) Specific Photoshopping  and choice of what photos she wanted if she was going to spend 8 hours ( which can turn into 12hours as you know) using specific makeup HE requested and calling a hairstylist friend TFP to benefit HIS shoot. Again he said no so she felt that they couldn't agree they couldn't work together on his shoot. Since it was 3 days before the shoot he had time to get another MUA. He put out a casting on Twitter and Facebook for a MUA saying his flaked. She didn't flake out but she was still not happy. Joining Mayhem took a long time for me because of some weird stories. I will try to get everything in writing so that no one is confused.

This kinda shit happens all. the. time.

Nicolette wrote:

Yeah, but if someone I'm not interested in trading with messages me in response to my casting about trading... I'm gonna tell them no. And I'll tell them if they wish to work with me while knowing they will not be doing THAT shoot or getting trade work... my rates are gonna get sent. Period.

That's just the nature of the beast.

That's not a violation of rules since I'm not trying to get them to pay me by posting that specific casting. Thats a, "hey. you don't fit. sorry. still wanna shoot? okay, my rates are XYZ." I really don't know how I can dumb that down further because you're obviously not catching what I'm throwing out here. It's not a "false flag" or any of that shit. It's saying, "No. No trade for you. You don't fit this shoot. But, if you wanna shoot anyways, here are my rates."

It's not just models that respond like that. That's totally fine.

ETA:
It's not unethical. It's really not. It might be to you, but it's certainly not unethical to me.

If you email me and I'm not interested in your book for my casting, you're gonna hear that. However, if you still wanna shoot, and you say so in that same message after hearing you're not getting the TF shoot... you're getting rates.

I don't get my jimmies rustled when people do that to me. I don't really care if their jimmies get rustled when I say that to them. It's not unethical. It's not me saying "SCREW DA RULEZ I ARE MODEL I DO WHAT I WANT." It's not me ignoring rules. It's not me trying to pull a bait-and-switch. It's business. I'm not gonna just ignore potential business contacts and NOT offer them other ways to work with me. I'm not gonna forget they exist simply because they don't fit a trade casting. I'm not gonna cold call them at a later date...

It's really just that simple.

But, the more I'm reading your responses, the more it seems like you're just mad that a model sent you rates after denying you a trade casting, IMHO.

So you freely admit to not using the system for what it was intended. You freely admit that you don't care that you are weakening the entire casting call system by your abuse of it. You freely admit you don't give a shit what the rest of us want or how the site admins set as rules, you will do what you want.
It is EXACTLY you saying 'screw da rulez'. It's really that simple. When you signed up for an account your user agreement said you would follow all the rules.
Your word is apparently not worth the crayon you write it in.

sdgillis wrote:
cam them.

+1 Just cam them and move on, because that is against the rules.

Rick OBanion Photo wrote:
So you freely admit to not using the system for what it was intended. You freely admit that you don't care that you are weakening the entire casting call system by your abuse of it. You freely admit you don't give a shit what the rest of us want or how the site admins set as rules, you will do what you want.
It is EXACTLY you saying 'screw da rulez'. It's really that simple. When you signed up for an account your user agreement said you would follow all the rules.
Your word is apparently not worth the crayon you write it in.

No. That's not what I said at all. Good try though, bro.

I put up castings for my special projects that I want for trade. If someone messages me wanting to do it and doesn't fit the bill, they don't get to shoot me for trade. They can pay my rates. Period.

An abuse/weakening of the system would be more like me saying, "Yeah, I posted that casting for trade work, but really I just wanna get paid," when that is simply not the case. I don't pull that shit. If you don't fit, you don't shoot. It's no different than any other scenario. Like really, it's not a difficult concept here. I can't figure out if you just can't understand what I'm saying [even though I am being very clear] or if you just don't want to because YEAH RUDE MODELS.

I really can not put that in any simpler terms and, quite frankly, even trying to think of a way to is not worth the effort. You want to think I'm just a manipulative model and I'm breaking the site rules. No amount of explanation is going to change your mind. That's cool, dude. Enjoy that shit.

Nicolette wrote:

Ava Photography wrote:
That seems to me a violation of the MM rules, which state that TFP casting calls are to be used for soliciting unpaid services only.

Yeah, but if someone I'm not interested in trading with messages me in response to my casting about trading... I'm gonna tell them no. And I'll tell them if they wish to work with me while knowing they will not be doing THAT shoot or getting trade work... my rates are gonna get sent. Period.

That's just the nature of the beast.

That's not a violation of rules since I'm not trying to get them to pay me by posting that specific casting. Thats a, "hey. you don't fit. sorry. still wanna shoot? okay, my rates are XYZ." I really don't know how I can dumb that down further because you're obviously not catching what I'm throwing out here. It's not a "false flag" or any of that shit. It's saying, "No. No trade for you. You don't fit this shoot. But, if you wanna shoot anyways, here are my rates."

It's not just models that respond like that. That's totally fine.

Not according to the letter of the rules nor the spirit.

You're certainly welcome to decline the offer; there's nothing that prevents that. But using casting calls to get leads or use them as a reverse-cold-call isn't within the spirit of the rules.

It's kind of like responding to a craiglist ad for some free merchandise, and when you get there, they tell you how much it costs. Tacky.

Nicolette wrote:
But, the more I'm reading your responses, the more it seems like you're just mad that a model sent you rates after denying you a trade casting, IMHO.

Perhaps. Given he justifiably feels it's a rule violation, I can see how he might be annoyed.

Kevin Connery wrote:
Not according to the letter of the rules nor the spirit.

You're certainly welcome to decline the offer; there's nothing that prevents that. But using casting calls to get leads or use them as a reverse-cold-call isn't within the spirit of the rules.

It's kind of like responding to a craiglist ad for some free merchandise, and when you get there, they tell you how much it costs. Tacky.
Perhaps. Given he justifiably feels it's a rule violation, I can see how he might be annoyed.

That's just it though. I don't use the castings to get leads. But if someone wants to shoot with me after knowing they aren't getting that trade shoot, new negotiations start.

I don't see anything tacky about sending rates during a new set of negotiations.

Kevin Connery wrote:
It's kind of like responding to a craiglist ad for some free merchandise, and when you get there, they tell you how much it costs. Tacky.

Nonsense. It's like going to a shop to get some special deal on a television but they don't have any left so they offer you a more expensive one, i.e. exactly what would happen in most business situations.

She's not saying 'I'll sell you the TV but for more money' she's saying 'I actually already sold that one, but if you still want a telly I have something different out back but it will cost you more'.

Maybe models need to start writing 'As long as stocks last' at the bottom of their castings.

Kevin Connery wrote:
reverse-cold-call

If someone contacts you about hiring you for modelling, and you reply about modelling for them, that's not cold calling, regardless of any change in compensation or whatever.

JadeDRed wrote:

Nonsense. It's like going to a shop to get some special deal on a television but they don't have any left so they offer you a more expensive one, i.e. exactly what would happen in most business situations.

She's not saying 'I'll sell you the TV but for more money' she's saying 'I actually already sold that one, but if you still want a telly I have something different out back but it will cost you more'.

Maybe models need to start writing 'As long as stocks last' at the bottom of their castings.

Did she run out of free photons?

Patchouli Nyx wrote:
yeah, last I read they got angry at some people for CAMing too much to clean up that area.

Jonny Melvin wrote:
thats not a good thing

Please understand that only one person was asked to stop reporting casting calls to the moderators, and that was over two years ago.  This person reported dozens of them every day--some days over 100.  Many times over 50% of the total casting calls posted for the day were reported as violating the rules.  Every single casting that used the "negotiable" option was reported.  Additionally, this person never read any CAM reply we made to the reports explaining the rules better, describing why specific reported castings were permitted.  By the end, this person had opened nearly 2000 CAMs, and reported well over 10,000 castings.  I believe that the person's intention was not to help police the site, but to make the moderators less effective by making so many frivolous reports.

We take all reports seriously and work to handle them as quickly as possible.  We do appreciate those who take the time to report those castings in violation of our rules, and the vast majority of members who do so have the best interests of the community at heart.

Nicolette wrote:
That's just it though. I don't use the castings to get leads. But if someone wants to shoot with me after knowing they aren't getting that trade shoot, new negotiations start.

I don't see anything tacky about sending rates during a new set of negotiations.

That is not what you stated earlier.  Earlier you stated

Nicolette wrote:
Yeah, but if someone I'm not interested in trading with messages me in response to my casting about trading... I'm gonna tell them no. And I'll tell them if they wish to work with me while knowing they will not be doing THAT shoot or getting trade work... my rates are gonna get sent. Period.

... inferring that you piggyback your rates into your response to the response to your casting calls, which is against the modelmayhem rules.

IMHO piggybacking a response to a casting call with what amounts to an availability notice and/or mentioning rates seems against the rules.

If you initiate the new round of negotiations within a trivial amount of time (eg 7 days), you also IMHO seem to have violated the rules, since it is effectively piggybacking an unsolicited availability notice to someone who is merely responding to your casting call.

T A Y L O R  wrote:
I usually use negotiable to mean that I'll work TF with select photographers, but if I'm not interested in doing a trade shoot with them I'll send them my rates. I usually state as much, too.

Does negotiate mean negotiating rates to pay a photographer? Where's that stated?

Your the one casting. In other words your looking for someone to fill a position.
Its like a job listing. Would you pay to go to work for someone else? I doubt it.
Castings are so out of control because people don't understand what a casting really is. I think MM should assign someone to be a gate keeper for just castings. I've been on mm for 8yrs. I would volunteer to do it just to get it working properly and make it useful once again.

Ava Photography wrote:
That is not what you stated earlier.  Earlier you stated


... inferring that you piggyback your rates into your response to the response to your casting calls, which is against the modelmayhem rules.

IMHO piggybacking a response to a casting call with what amounts to an availability notice and/or mentioning rates seems against the rules.

If you initiate the new round of negotiations within a trivial amount of time (eg 7 days), you also IMHO seem to have violated the rules, since it is effectively piggybacking an unsolicited availability notice to someone who is merely responding to your casting call.

/sigh.

You're not listening and I'm getting so tired of repeating myself. My two responses say the exact same thing, only in different words.

I said earlier, and I'll say it again, I will post up a trade casting. If someone doesn't fit the bill, I will tell them that. If they wanna shoot with me anyways, knowing they aren't getting that trade shoot, new negotiations are opened. Whether it's withing a week, 3 weeks, 6 months, 2 days, or an hour. Period. Negotiations on the trade shoot are closed, and new negotiations start.

I don't post a trade casting with the specific intent of getting leads on paid work. I post it to find someone to do a badass trade shoot with.

If you don't fit,  and you tell me you wanna shoot anyway, you get my rates. The. End.

JadeDRed wrote:

Nonsense. It's like going to a shop to get some special deal on a television but they don't have any left so they offer you a more expensive one, i.e. exactly what would happen in most business situations.

She's not saying 'I'll sell you the TV but for more money' she's saying 'I actually already sold that one, but if you still want a telly I have something different out back but it will cost you more'.

Maybe models need to start writing 'As long as stocks last' at the bottom of their castings.

To me, it's more like going into a TV shop that's offering special financing on a TV. They do a credit check and realize you aren't good for it. So... they offer you something else.

The trade shoot is declined. New negotiations for a possible shoot start.