Are you serious Crowdsource?

[ZenDude]

You want me to spam my social media sites so your clients can make money???? That survey is sort of invasive of my privacy, I think. If I wanted you to know my social media information, I'd follow you online, which I don't, so go figure.

If I'm going to spam my friends, I'll use my own affiliate links so I can make the money myself.

SMH

[AC80]

Almost as shady as that silly survey they had a few months ago that was extremely slanted toward a pay-to-play system.

[ZenDude]

Originally Posted by AC80

Almost as shady as that silly survey they had a few months ago that was extremely slanted toward a pay-to-play system.

They are a smarmy company.

I was on another forum today and one of the writers was literally in tears because she makes all her money on CS and now has nothing.

#1 Who the heck wants to make CS their only source of income?
#2 How many times do they have to do this to you before you wise up?
#3 Eggs? Baskets? Sound familiar?

[Blair Girl]

So these clowns really did want me to hustle for them over my Facebook page? I thought that was a joke.

As for the lady who uses CS exclusively -- if it's too good to be true, it is. I am rediscovering the joys (such as they are) of Textbroker. By cracky, I might even go back to I-writer.

But I do wonder what CS is going to throw up next. E-mailed Jeanne and she said the client had something else in the works. What I don't know. They were just scaling back the Q & A.

[AG1976]

Originally Posted by ZenDude

They are a smarmy company.

I was on another forum today and one of the writers was literally in tears because she makes all her money on CS and now has nothing.

#1 Who the heck wants to make CS their only source of income?
#2 How many times do they have to do this to you before you wise up?
#3 Eggs? Baskets? Sound familiar?

Honestly, in the seven years that I've written web content, I've seen so many people burned by relying on one site to pay all of their bills. It's a bad, bad idea. You have to diversify because things can turn on a dime.

[Blair Girl]

What in the devil are they supposed to be doing now? What do they mean by Q & A "writer's levels?" Can't these people get their act together? Does anyone who works at CS read this forum and can possibly explain what in the Sam Hill is going on?

[michaelj]

There's always been levels for the Q&A or at least for the last year or two. They're just making changes to them, which from what I've read so far sounds to me like a good thing.

From what they posted today they are going to essentially do away with fails. Instead of getting a fail for 3 or more dings, it will now count as a pass. That should eliminate a lot of the complaining about editors not knowing what they are doing. Personally I don't care what changes they make to it as long as i get paid and it doesn't affect my level.

They did say that there would be more reasons to send a piece back to be reworked, but that gives the writer a chance to fix it and avoid a fail or rejection so again, that sounds like a good thing to me. If it's just for minor punctuation or capitalization errors, those would just take a minute to fix, and if it's bad enough that it needs to be rewritten, then it probably shouldn't have been submitted in the first place. But you get a second crack at it so ...

It's way too early to tell but I'm cautiously optimistic at this point.

[LindaKay]

Originally Posted by AG1976

Honestly, in the seven years that I've written web content, I've seen so many people burned by relying on one site to pay all of their bills. It's a bad, bad idea. You have to diversify because things can turn on a dime.

No kidding. I made that mistake when I first started. It is sooo not a good idea. I definitely have favorites among the sites that I write for, but I could not imagine relying on just one company for my income.

[Blair Girl]

Well, we'll see Michael. It just seems to be so chaotic over there. As for the reworkings -- I just got something back to be reworked and I refused because I answered the question. It was something like "what's the prognosis of brain metastases?" After doing the research I had to write that it depended on several factors and you couldn't give a number, etc. etc. Editor said I didn't answer the question and I just should have given the prognosis for metastases in general. Now, if I had done that they would have kicked it back complaining that the question concerned BRAIN metastases -- you get the point.

Linda, I learned that the hard way when I got kicked off of DMS. Thought I had it made in the shade at that joint.

[michaelj]

Originally Posted by Blair Girl

Well, we'll see Michael. It just seems to be so chaotic over there. As for the reworkings -- I just got something back to be reworked and I refused because I answered the question. It was something like "what's the prognosis of brain metastases?" After doing the research I had to write that it depended on several factors and you couldn't give a number, etc. etc. Editor said I didn't answer the question and I just should have given the prognosis for metastases in general. Now, if I had done that they would have kicked it back complaining that the question concerned BRAIN metastases -- you get the point.

Linda, I learned that the hard way when I got kicked off of DMS. Thought I had it made in the shade at that joint.

True, half the battle over there is knowing which questions to tackle and which to leave alone, because some of them you just can't win. Did you resubmit anyway? I've seen several people post on the forum that they got something back to rework and they disagreed so they just resubmitted as is and it went to another editor and passed.