Rejected all already approved works, even those for which there were sales

[IngaVAS]

I had an unusual incident) On the 19th, I sent a request to the support service regarding the possible consideration of my work, since the deadline was already more than 2 months. I received a standard answer that the deadline is now up to 8 weeks, I responded to this message that I am contacting precisely because the review period is already more than 8 weeks and asked for help in deciding. Then something interesting happened - 99.9% of my works under consideration were rejected - this is possible, although it is very difficult to understand, random works were approved, without any logic, high-quality ones were rejected.

But the biggest surprise was that absolutely all the works that had already been approved and had sales were rejected. I have gone through the stages of anger, disappointment, depression, bargaining - acceptance has not yet come. I wrote to the support service with a request to explain why the joyrides were approved and already rejected by sales, I still have not received a response. Maybe I can get a little more information here? Has anyone encountered such a problem, because, to put it mildly, I am in great shock now.

To me it looks like some kind of revenge from an angry specialist, because this all happened on the same day with my requests and disagreement with the standard answer.

[Abambo]

There is no such thing than revenge. This is business, and business means selling assets. There was probably one or multiple returns of your assets and Adobe decided to check your assets again, and determined that they should not have been accepted in the first place. 

You are free to post one of the accepted assets here, in the quality as submitted (!), with the refusal reason, and we will check it and tell you, where the issues with this asset are. 

[inka1043243744399op]

Here are some of the works that have already been accepted and were sold. Reason for rejection: audit: non-compliance with conditions.

The only question is that, in the end, those approved now, in my opinion, are much inferior to these works in all factors. Therefore, the incomprehensible subjectivity of Adobe in general is very frustrating and the hyper sense of injustice is very upsetting to me and I’m very sorry for the time and effort spent on all this

[Jill_C]

Here's an explanation of "noncompliant images"; it doesn't refer to quality issues, per se. 
Reasons content is rejected at Adobe Stock

Noncompliance

Non-compliant generative AI content:

Your content gets rejected, or in severe cases, your account may be suspended if you:

• Mislabled your generative AI submissions by not selecting the checkbox "Created using generative AI tools"
• Submitted assets generated with reference to other artist(s) in the prompt. 
• Include references to names of people (including artists), places, or property in your prompt, and/or include them in your title, or keywords. 

Files may also be considered noncompliant due to watermarks, inappropriate or irrelevant keywords or titles, or questionable or defamatory content. Also, if you get a reminder to provide or resolve a problem with a release and you resubmit the file without addressing the issue, we’ll reject it as noncompliant. 

Check your keywords. The 5th one, in particular, looks like it was created by reference to an artist, or perhaps has an artists name in the keywords.

[inka1043243744399op]

No, all the criteria that you described were taken into account by me. I carefully read all the requirements and strictly adhered to them. That's why I'm very upset and very upset

[Abambo]

I said one not several, not all. What keywords did you use? What was the title?

[oleschwander]

I can understand why you are frustrated. I can't immediately see any flaws in the pictures except maybe the one with the lake.

[Abambo]

I can understand why you are frustrated. I can't immediately see any flaws in the pictures except maybe the one with the lake.

By @oleschwander

The refusal is non-compliant. You do not (necessarily) see flaws in the images, except may be a frame, a signature, or something of the like. The mystery lies in what we can't see.

[RALPH_L]

What you say is not logical. An approved image does not get reviewed again. How do you arrive at this instance?

It would be useful if you would post one or two originals that got refused but you think were high quality.

[Abambo]

What you say is not logical. An approved image does not get reviewed again. How do you arrive at this instance?

It would be useful if you would post one or two originals that got refused but you think were high quality.

By @RALPH_L

Already approved assets can be reviewed again, if buyers complain. There are cases, where already accepted assets got a refusal afterwards, but normally those are isolated cases. With generative AI and the very bad quality of some of the accepted assets, I suppose that this will happen again.

[Jill_C]

The fact that your assets were reviewed and rejected after you sent a query to Contributor Support is just a coincidence.  Adobe also undertakes a second review of previously accepted assets in your account if there have been reports, particularly from a Buyer, about poor quality, unusable assets. Re-reviewing, and sometimes suspending, accounts has been a regular occurrence since so many substandard AI assets were previously accepted.