fairly priced spec vs. underpriced team: which is better

Not an author yet? Have questions? Post here!

Moderators: Celeste Stewart, Ed, Constant

Isabelnewth
Posts: 304
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2011 6:15 am

Re: fairly priced spec vs. underpriced team: which is better

Post by Isabelnewth »

Agreed, Gail Kavanagh.

I would just like to add a request that, if and when the rules for claiming articles are updated, it results in a transparent process which is fully explained to writers.

And I would really like to be reassured that there are measures in place to improve email response time. It wouldn't matter that it was a bit slow, but nine tenths of the time there is no response ever!

Thanks.
Constant
Posts: 406
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 10:35 am

Re: fairly priced spec vs. underpriced team: which is better

Post by Constant »

Gail Kavanagh wrote:My dealings with the editors lately have been supremely frustrating. I had a number of private requests with short deadlines and somewhat esoteric subjects that I did accept and manage to complete in the time allowed. What was frustrating was that all of the articles I submitted for private requests (making sure that I informed the editors what they were for) were rejected and sent back to me, causing me to miss the deadlines. I had to contact the project manager at CC every time to get them sent through to the client - who accpted them and paid for them without complaint. Not only do we have to meet tight deadlines, research difficult subjects and in a specific style, but we also have to battle editors who have no idea what 'private request' or even deadlines mean, and have an 'English teacher' approach to style that goes against what the client has asked for. I have seen writers here in the forums say that they were rejected because they put 'private request' in the short summary box and it 'wasn't to be used as a message box." For Heaven';s sake how else you get across to these people that it needs to be seen by the client?


I can appreciate that some requests come in with a very short deadline. The editors are very aware of that and do prioritize reviewing articles for requests. In fact, the average amount of time an article waits for review for private requests is within a few hours. With requests with very short deadlines that few hours can make things tight.

If you do feel that the editor's review goes against what the client has asked for, please include a note about that in the resubmission form's note to the editors. That's not our intent and we do adhere to a client's instructions.

Regarding how to get across that the content needs to be seen by the client - just attach it to the request. The editors can easily see what articles are for requests. If you do want to include a note in the short summary of articles for Private Requests, that's fine. I actually just got this clarification from our lead editor:

If the article is for a private or writer pool request, rejection shouldn't be happening for this issue. I don't know anyone who would do that.

Only in certain cases should non-private request articles have info to the editors (in the case of resubmitting an already accepted article, for example). Sometimes we get new writers using this box to tell their life story or how they're new to Constant Content. More often, it's a new writer saying to the *customer*, "I hope you like my stuff." They also think that it's a way to get around having so many articles (five? ten) reviewed before being able to connect with the customer. In those situations, yes, we'd reject for it.


I am not complaining abouit the short deadlines - I remember years ago sitting up all night (I am in Australia) submitting one astrology article after another for a private request. The editor was you, Eric, and it was a great writing experience. You let the client decide every time if that was what he wanted and we got a long request with a very short deadline done by sunrise in Australia. That wouldn' happen now. By dawn I would be tearing my hair out and swearing never to write for CC again.


Just want to clarify here - I'm not an editor, nor have I ever been one. The team that reviewed your content then is largely the same as it is now, including the same lead editor.

Things have changed, I do appreciate that - and I have always appreciated the CC editorial process and understood why it is place. I do not understand why writers of long standing on CC now feel they are out in the cold, and have even been banned because someone 'doesn't like their style'. As for the cheap requests - well, 30 articles for $36 will get what it deserves and the editors will have a field day. The client won't expect quality for that price, but the editors will, and it just won't be worth the hassle.


From our perspective, our guidelines haven't changed. We definitely don't want anyone feeling left out in the cold, and someone not liking a writer's style is not a cause for suspension. If that style included wordiness, grammatical errors and lacked focus then it could lead to some rejections.

I can appreciate that getting rejections is frustrating and that writers will not always agree with editorial decisions. I do want to clarify that the editors are working hard to do their job in support of a common cause that we all share - producing high quality content for our clients and earning competitive rates for it. We're in this together, and if you have concerns we want you to let us know in the resubmission box or by contacting Support.

On a final note, I checked with the account manager behind the 30 recipes for $36 project and it seems that each one is only requiring a small amount of text to be written and it's mostly modifying existing content. He's heard from some writers doing these that it's taking them 20-30 minutes.
Constant
Posts: 406
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 10:35 am

Re: fairly priced spec vs. underpriced team: which is better

Post by Constant »

Isabelnewth wrote:Agreed, Gail Kavanagh.

I would just like to add a request that, if and when the rules for claiming articles are updated, it results in a transparent process which is fully explained to writers.

And I would really like to be reassured that there are measures in place to improve email response time. It wouldn't matter that it was a bit slow, but nine tenths of the time there is no response ever!

Thanks.



I expect the updated system is going to be much clearer. We'll have updated documentation from day one that will explain everything.

As I said, we try to get back to emails within 24 hours.
Abbamay
Posts: 248
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2012 11:57 pm

Re: fairly priced spec vs. underpriced team: which is better

Post by Abbamay »

Hi Eric,

It's great to have you on the forum answering questions. Thanks for that. Quite a few people over the last year mentioned on the forum that emails to Support were not replied to in most cases, and it could be possible that for some reason they haven't been getting through.

Anyway, I just wanted to say that 99% of my private and writer pool requests are edited and approved within 24 hours, often very quickly. It makes my work so much easier, and it's good for the client to get the articles quickly too. Thanks!

Take care,

Abba
Tster
Posts: 48
Joined: Sat May 04, 2013 6:16 am

Re: fairly priced spec vs. underpriced team: which is better

Post by Tster »

Uft.

I submitted another article recently and as pitted against all my previous articles the editor must have thought it was terrible. Really puts me off from writing for CC when I try to submit an article for a request and the editor (I presume new, as I haven't had any major problems previously with my 10+ articles) has a problem with every sentence.

Went back and forth a few times until I told the editor I just couldn't change it anymore without ruining the content and it was rejected once more, upon which I was asked not to resubmit.

I saw the request for culinary recipes, and sent an email back to CC writing 'Let me just check again.. 30 recipes for 65% of 36$ ?!'. No response of course. I love this platform but some things here are just laughable and sad.

I feel like things could be better here if requests didn't have to be checked by the editor. The most frustrating thing is having an article sent back because of a typo and me having to change it and resubmit instead of the editor spending 2 seconds. Especially frustrating as I live within Europe which doesn't seem to coincide with any of the editors' working times.

Sorry for this long, poorly-worded rant. Being told how to use an m-dash is almost as insulting as when my English teacher told me I couldn't include parentheses in my work.
evaku
Posts: 184
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 2:46 am

Re: fairly priced spec vs. underpriced team: which is better

Post by evaku »

Tster wrote:Really puts me off from writing for CC when I try to submit an article for a request and the editor (I presume new, as I haven't had any major problems previously with my 10+ articles) has a problem with every sentence.

Went back and forth a few times until I told the editor I just couldn't change it anymore without ruining the content and it was rejected once more, upon which I was asked not to resubmit.


Well, I've had almost 900 articles accepted and will still get a rejection once in a while where an editor has pointed out over 10 different errors or suggestions. It may suck to see but I actually appreciate that they would take the time to do that, instead of just stopping at the very first error and sending it back, as I know is sometimes done. If this happens then I either make all of the corrections they asked for or delete the article altogether (if I think that salvaging it in their eyes would require a complete rewrite). That's just how the site works, and if you learn how to go with it then you will have much better time!

I've gone back and forth with an editor once when I truly thought that the changes they wanted weren't needed. In the end I got what they were saying and really appreciated it. No, the editors aren't always going to be right and infallible (as I've said, I've deleted a few articles because I thought that we just weren't ever going to agree), but it's wise to really try to consider the advice they give.
Isabelnewth
Posts: 304
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2011 6:15 am

Re: fairly priced spec vs. underpriced team: which is better

Post by Isabelnewth »

Edits are sometimes helpful and sometimes over the top. To an extent, that's c'est la vie.

I am not complaining for the sake of it. I really do appreciate this site and I think the way it is designed to work is very good, and makes for a lot of writer satisfaction compared to other models. I personally haven't found any other site that I like as much.

But in my opinion there is a huge problem with communication.

The rules of the site should be communicated clearly to writers, for many of whom this is a major part of their livelihood. They shouldn't have to piece things together by trawling through the forum , which contains a lot of contradictory information.

Writers should also be able to communicate with the site easily and have faith that their message will be read and responded to, whether or not they get the response they want. That just doesn't happen.

Cheers.
LauraGinn
Posts: 143
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 2:25 pm

Re: fairly priced spec vs. underpriced team: which is better

Post by LauraGinn »

I just wanted to pitch in to say a couple of weeks ago I was submitting private requests and Eric and the editor made sure the content went through really quickly to the client. I did say a few weeks ago that I wouldn't be submitting any more gallery articles, but CC has restored my confidence slightly through responding to support tickets quickly, and replying to comments on forum posts. I submitted a new article a couple of days ago, and may start to increase the amount I submit again. Hopefully things will start to go back to how they used to be.
ReneeF
Posts: 204
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2014 2:52 pm

Re: fairly priced spec vs. underpriced team: which is better

Post by ReneeF »

LauraGinn wrote:I just wanted to pitch in to say a couple of weeks ago I was submitting private requests and Eric and the editor made sure the content went through really quickly to the client. I did say a few weeks ago that I wouldn't be submitting any more gallery articles, but CC has restored my confidence slightly through responding to support tickets quickly, and replying to comments on forum posts. I submitted a new article a couple of days ago, and may start to increase the amount I submit again. Hopefully things will start to go back to how they used to be.


Good to hear.

I'm still VERY wary though.
Word Gypsy
Posts: 469
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 9:16 pm
Location: USA

Re: fairly priced spec vs. underpriced team: which is better

Post by Word Gypsy »

I doubt that things will ever go back to the way they were.
Last edited by Word Gypsy on Wed Nov 05, 2014 6:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Constant
Posts: 406
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 10:35 am

Re: fairly priced spec vs. underpriced team: which is better

Post by Constant »

Just so we're all on the same page, what specifically are folks referring to when they speak about things going back to the way used to be?
LauraGinn
Posts: 143
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 2:25 pm

Re: fairly priced spec vs. underpriced team: which is better

Post by LauraGinn »

Constant wrote:Just so we're all on the same page, what specifically are folks referring to when they speak about things going back to the way used to be?


I'm not sure if it's the same for everyone else, but for me personally, it's being able to submit content without fear of being banned from the site. If I'm banned, I have over 200 articles that I can do little with. The editors used to be really quite friendly, or at least fair, on here, but recently some have been quite rude. Especially where style points are concerned. I understand having the correct punctuation and grammar, but style is personal opinion, and what one editor is happy with, another will reject with a rude comment. A few of us said on here one time that we'd be happy to buy the editors some coffee or hot chocolate if it helped them relax and cut the attitude. I'd still be willing to do that, but right now, I'm pretty much on edge every time I see an email from CC. I didn't use to be.
ReneeF
Posts: 204
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2014 2:52 pm

Re: fairly priced spec vs. underpriced team: which is better

Post by ReneeF »

LauraGinn wrote:
Constant wrote:Just so we're all on the same page, what specifically are folks referring to when they speak about things going back to the way used to be?


I'm not sure if it's the same for everyone else, but for me personally, it's being able to submit content without fear of being banned from the site. If I'm banned, I have over 200 articles that I can do little with. The editors used to be really quite friendly, or at least fair, on here, but recently some have been quite rude. Especially where style points are concerned. I understand having the correct punctuation and grammar, but style is personal opinion, and what one editor is happy with, another will reject with a rude comment. A few of us said on here one time that we'd be happy to buy the editors some coffee or hot chocolate if it helped them relax and cut the attitude. I'd still be willing to do that, but right now, I'm pretty much on edge every time I see an email from CC. I didn't use to be.


THIS^^^^ EXACTLY THIS!

The last few articles editors had issues with they didnt even give me a chance to fix it. They just said rather rudely "there is an error" and deleted the article. Another time they asked me to divide an article into two articles and resubmit it, so I did and then the two articles were deleted because the editor wanted them to contain the list the other article had. But they weren't even diplomatic about it.

Mostly it's just the panick that sets in anytime there is an email of any kind from CC. Just logging in sets off panick attacks for me and I cant bring myself to submit stuff because I feel that no matter how much effort I put into editing it, or even adding in spelling and grammar checkers (because the document program, Open Office, I use doesn't have any of its own so I was editing purely by my own sight and not relying on technology to catch minor things like hyphens or missed commas), my work will never be good enough to get past editors ever again. Now that they have suspended me and even though they let me come back, they will be even more angry, rude, and mean when editing work and start looking for an excuse to get rid of me again. So why put mountains of effort into working here?

(I have seen at least one nice editor who has taken the time to point out that I missed commas and hyphens, but thats the exception here.)


Mostly, in my opinion, its the unprofessionalism when it comes to communication.
gators18
Posts: 41
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 2:46 pm

Re: fairly priced spec vs. underpriced team: which is better

Post by gators18 »

Constant wrote:Just so we're all on the same page, what specifically are folks referring to when they speak about things going back to the way used to be?


Two things:

1. It seems like there is no more marketing of the general catalog. Even with the Google changes, niche articles should still be selling for full rights.

2. The bans for established writers. No one is saying there shouldn't be standards. Standards are great so we can justify higher prices. But when people that have done thousands of dollars of business are completely in the dark that something's wrong until they're tossed with no further communication, something is very wrong.


If my expected value for submitting an articles is price x .65 cut x .25 chance of selling - .1 x $$$$ inventory articles that might need new home with account ban, it makes no sense to submit more articles.
Tster
Posts: 48
Joined: Sat May 04, 2013 6:16 am

Re: fairly priced spec vs. underpriced team: which is better

Post by Tster »

I must say for the first time in my history here (ok that's only ~17 articles or thereabouts, but spaced over some years and as something just on the side) I've had a serious problem with an editor. A lot of what I read here seems to reflect the way I feel right now. CC is a great platform; if there was a better alternative in my view, I'd move to it! It's just, it really is nice here and I wish I wasn't constantly in fear my work would disintegrate into nothing but a .txt sitting on my drive.

I mean, for the first time, I had an article rejected so many times and eventually I was asked not to resubmit! I even left a comment to the editor that I believed my use of m-dashes was a style issue and that I couldn't change the article anymore without butchering it. (S)He clearly didn't give a toss and I just received a lovely email asking me not to resubmit :).


Anyway, I like the new system where editors actually tell you what's wrong and where. I remember the time I proof-read my article the best part of a dozen times to no avail and kept resubmitting until the editor finally gave in and told me what line the error was in.
Post Reply