Rejected on 'Quality Issues' when low quality AI nonsense runs rampant on the platform

Do as you want. I rarely see a user complaining about the quality of a photo here, but I see often complaints about bad generative AI assets. We all know that too many bad AI assets slip through and that nowadays many accounts get blocked because people violated the terms and conditions. There seems to be relation between them. 

If your pictures get accepted elsewhere, that is of no concern for Adobe stock. Either you contribute or you do not contribute. Your single contributor account does not make the weight. And I am happy with the quality requirements for photos. I rarely have a refusal here. If I have, it is for a reason.

Do you have an actual question or is this just 'sour grapes' about too many rejections?

If you want to know why your photo was rejected, post the full-sized image here. 

We'll provide you with feedback based on our experiences. 

It might be something simple you can fix and resubmit. 

Or it might go much deeper.  We can't know anything until we see it.

Meanwhile, read all chapters in your Stock Contributor User Guide.

• https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/submission-guidelines.html

It's not difficult to find flawed AI assets or flawed photographs, illustrations, vectors, or videos if you really search for them; however, the existence of flawed assets in the database doesn't mean that Adobe must continue to accept those. There has been a learning curve on Gen AI, and the Moderators do seem, in general, to be much more discriminating and picky now; nevertheless some glaring errors still seem to escape their attention. Quality definitely does matter. If you're questioning why a particular image has been rejected, you can upload it here for feedback from fellow Contributors.

My photographs continue to be accepted at a high rate, because I've learned to carefully edit and review them prior to submission. 

There is still a viable market for good stock photographs. My sales are up ~40% already this year. Many designers aren't interested in using AI assets in their designs.

"Almost feels like I should just flood the site with AI nonsense too instead of proving images of the real world. Clearly quality doesn't matter."

Contributors who flood the site with AI nonsense eventually end up on this forum asking why their accounts were deactivated. They get called out eventually. Crappy AI gets through now and then. As do crappy photographs. (Though admittedly more of the latter). One either rolls with the punches or submits elsewhere, especially if assets are approved more readily elsewhere.