Being vague here...LOL

[AG1976]

I'm not going to name the company that I'm curious about on the open board, but it's one that many of you write for. This company just changed its guidelines significantly at the beginning of March, which resulted in higher pay but much stricter requirements. I was wondering how things are going for those who have continued to write there? Are articles being sent back for revision often? I'd like to try one in April but wanted to make sure it was worth the effort. PMs are welcome! Thanks!

[pricetheory]

I'd also like to know. I was accepted there shortly before the change but haven't written anything yet.

[Miss Aurora]

Check your mail.

[LuvWAHLife]

Also, there are a few rather lengthy threads on the topic over at wplh (if you haven't seen those yet, I mean).

I've been on the waiting list there for months, and now I'm wondering if I'll ever have a chance to write for them. Based on what I've seen in the other forum, I think my style of writing would be better suited to the new requirements than the old.

I'm guessing that once they iron out the kinks, the site may be even more viable and potentially lucrative than it was before the changes.

[Jarod Limson]

Most that have posted have said that they are getting a lot of revisions...a la DMS.

It was what I feared. They give you extra pay, but they make the standards almost impossible. In addition, reviews are not going quickly enough and they don't have a set cut off for article submission reviews. I honestly would not mind spending 2 hours on an article to make it perfect if I knew it would be reviewed quickly. However, that is not the case. It is taking weeks for most reviews.

[Miss Aurora]

I don't find it much like DMSat all. It's got a lot of potential.

[Jarod Limson]

Originally Posted by Miss Aurora

I don't find it much like DMSat all. It's got a lot of potential.

Like DMS in the sense that some reviewers want us to read their minds. If we are to come up with our own ideas for a topic and create a suitable outline for an article, it should more or less be trusted. We should not have to deal with editors requiring subjective changes based on their non-editorial opinions.

If they get a handle on what they want and lay that out clearly to both editors, there is a shot that things can get better. They also need to have respectable review times.

[aumom]

I've been on their waiting list for months. Does anyone know how long the wait is now?

And I've read on a blog that I follow that they seem to slowly be ironing out the new system's kinks, and it's getting better. Obviously I don't have first-hand knowledge, but that's what I've read.

[Squarix]

They have a facebook page...if you look it up, you'll see how things are going. A lot of the writers aren't happy. Most of the complaints are about review times (some have waited a month to have a review - wrote one on the first, as told, but still haven't gotten their first review.) I have written 4 so far, but haven't gotten a review yet.

Meh...they might have new standards like DMS, but they seem a lot fairer, and willing to give writers second chances.

Other writers are complaining about (hope I'm not giving too much away here) their new "ideation" issues thing. They say it seems like every editor is on a different page, and requests revisions due to their own "personal" vision of how the article should be. Those are the two biggest complaints I've seen so far.

[AG1976]

Thanks, everyone! I don't have Facebook so I don't think I can access their page, but I'll check out the threads on WPLH. I appreciate all of your input!