I would like reviewers to improve their process

YES！That is absolutely true.

It is only Adobe that reviewers dont check carefully the work and reject to reduce their work. 

By @Ulica belgiska

How does that “reduce their work”?

Rejections always come with a reason. And while it is possible that sometimes, a rejection is erroneous, that is the same with acceptance. I rarely see here images that got rejected “for no reasons”, i.e. where I cannot determine why an asset should be rejected.

This problem is very common and I often see on the internet articles.

By @Ulica belgiska

You should feed us with links of those internet articles (at least one or two) so that we can check and see the claims with our eyes. Without that, this is a filler sentence, like “Many people say that the earth is flat”. Having many people saying that does not make it true.

Some works of mine that were rejected are (of course) accepted by other sites and actually sold.

By @Ulica belgiska

Great. If Adobe does not accept selling assets, they lose money. But as the masters of the house, they decide what they sell. It's like a supermarket that does not want to carry your articles. You move on and sell to the next one.

If you find that your assets are getting unjustified rejected, you can choose to stop submitting to Adobe stock.

Adobe stock is widely known to have quality assets and indeed, many buyers complain that since Adobe accepted generative AI that especially with those assets, Adobe does not meet their standard quality requirements. You can check those complaints on the stock forum site. They are plentiful, and they started when Adobe began accepting generative AI.

Moderators always give a reason for a rejection. Some images on Adobe get rejected that other sites accept, possibly because Adobe's standards are higher or at least very specific. Moderators that reject images "to reduce their work" would not be working for Adobe for very long, since they would be getting paid while not providing Adobe with a means to afford paying them by maintaining a database of quality assets. And the amount of time it takes to reject an images no doubt takes the same amount of time to accept one. Or perhaps not. A moderator needs only to find one flaw, after which there is no need to continue looking for more.

I'm not saying the moderators are always right. Mistakes have been made, but more so, in my opinion, with images that have been accepted rather than rejected.

In any event, one of the primary purposes of this forum is to help contributors better understand why this or that image was rejected. Feel free to post one that you feel should have been accepted and we'll have a look.