[andyjohnson0]

> What are you not convinced about? They were pretty clear that people who use Flickr as a storage space rather than a photography community are not their target audience, and therefor will not be the focus of their efforts and goodwill.

I suspect that the change is more to do with the cost of storage than with re-creating some photographic community that may have existed before 2013. But I'm also happy to be proved wrong.

Yes, I am just using Flickr for storage. And while most of my albums are public, my photographic skills are fairly average compared to many on Flickr, so they are unlikely to be able to monetise my efforts. But I'm not interested in being part of a "photographic community" because, while I enjoy photography, I don't do it to be in a community. And I suspect that they see community participation as basically user-generated content creation, and I'm not into that either.

I'm happy to accept that I'm not a user they can support for free. I like Flickr, wish it well, and am happy to pay for pro.

[ysavir]

> I suspect that the change is more to do with the cost of storage

I think you're right about that, but they did address it up front:

> Second, you can tell a lot about a product by how it makes money. Giving away vast amounts of storage creates data that can be sold to advertisers, with the inevitable result being that advertisers’ interests are prioritized over yours.

*

> I'm happy to accept that I'm not a user they can support for free. I like Flickr, wish it well, and am happy to pay for pro

That's great! And I want to say that I highly respect the maturity and understanding you demonstrate here. I wish more people adopted this attitude.

[onethumb]

And we're happy to have you as Pro. Thanks! We have lots of customers who like to use Flickr for storage, and we're happy to have them. If you care about photography, for whatever reason, we care about you.