Turns out the requester of this "Heather Schulte" was a writer that as trying to sell her office supply articles. I did some home work and found this post:
http://forum.wahm.com/forum/forum_posts ... 4&get=last
Turns out this is the same person that made the request for Office Supply articles. She must have thought by submitting a request that this would sell her articles on Constant Content. She never responded to our emails and wasted a bunch of writers time. I don’t understand people some times.....
Office Supply Request
Moderators: Celeste Stewart, Ed, Constant
-
mattsterrr
- Posts: 106
- Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 2:44 am
-
mattsterrr
- Posts: 106
- Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 2:44 am
Is there nothing we can do about these people, because it really does waste our (the writer's time) and your (Chris') time when people do this.
Perhaps ask for a small deposit, which will be used toward the purchase of content, or returned if no suitable content is posted. Even a couple of dollars would probably scare the lunatics away, and if somebody is really willing to pay for the content surely they wouldn't mind paying a small deposit would they???
Just a thought, feel free to shoot me down in flames.
Perhaps ask for a small deposit, which will be used toward the purchase of content, or returned if no suitable content is posted. Even a couple of dollars would probably scare the lunatics away, and if somebody is really willing to pay for the content surely they wouldn't mind paying a small deposit would they???
Just a thought, feel free to shoot me down in flames.
It was probably an honest (yet dim-witted, perhaps) mistake. Maybe she thought she was offering them for sale?
Still, I think Matt's idea is a good one. It would weed out the not-so-serious requests for sure. Filtering them and getting in touch with the buyer before sending them out would be a good idea as well.
Still, I think Matt's idea is a good one. It would weed out the not-so-serious requests for sure. Filtering them and getting in touch with the buyer before sending them out would be a good idea as well.
-
carpesomediem
- Posts: 78
- Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2005 4:20 pm
- Location: Lancaster, Pa.
- Contact:
-
mattsterrr
- Posts: 106
- Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 2:44 am
-
Katie-Anne
- Posts: 96
- Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 6:05 pm
- Location: Sweden
- Contact:
Sigh!
I guess she's just clueless, but it's kinda worrying - a clueless writer! There have been a number of occasions I've checked out projects offered at elance and from the outline it's obvious it's someone looking for work, not offering it!
I don't think the system is that unclear (here or elance) that someone who is capable enough to write in a language couldn't understand whether they were to submit articles or request them from other writers.
Sigh.
Katie-Anne
who wrote a great photocopier article - the headache and stress of working in a University department that ordered them for the rest of the University had actually paid off ......well it nearly did!
I don't think the system is that unclear (here or elance) that someone who is capable enough to write in a language couldn't understand whether they were to submit articles or request them from other writers.
Sigh.
Katie-Anne
who wrote a great photocopier article - the headache and stress of working in a University department that ordered them for the rest of the University had actually paid off ......well it nearly did!
-
southernrose
- Posts: 84
- Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 4:34 am
- Location: Virginia
I guess she just had absolutely no clue how CC works, though it's hard to imagine since working with CC is about as complicated as operating my email account. 
I agree that a very small deposit would probably draw in more legitimate requests and less fakes. A legitimate business or website would most likely not have a problem with paying a dollar or two, especially if it would go toward content or be refundable.
I agree that a very small deposit would probably draw in more legitimate requests and less fakes. A legitimate business or website would most likely not have a problem with paying a dollar or two, especially if it would go toward content or be refundable.
-
mattsterrr
- Posts: 106
- Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 2:44 am
Seriously (you may have noticed I don't do serious very often) though, if I were looking for web content and found a site like CC that stated they required a small deposit to sort the wheat from the chaff I would be willing to pay it.
As a writer it would give me a whole heap more confidence in writing for the requested content section. It seems, at the moment, that there are more writer-bashers* than there are serious requesters** (you can do anything you want with some words). Once a requester** has legitimately done the business you could probably even drop the deposit. Just a thought.
Glossary
* writer-basher - one who wastes writers valuable time by requesting content they have absolutely no intention of purchasing. Writers should be spending their time creating literary artwork not trying to determine whether a buyer is genuine. Held in the same revere as mass murderers and parents who let their children scream blue murder at restaurants.
** requester/s - A person who partakes in the act of requesting. A relatively new word introduced into the dictionary by mattsterrr (a struggling but happy writer).
As a writer it would give me a whole heap more confidence in writing for the requested content section. It seems, at the moment, that there are more writer-bashers* than there are serious requesters** (you can do anything you want with some words). Once a requester** has legitimately done the business you could probably even drop the deposit. Just a thought.
Glossary
* writer-basher - one who wastes writers valuable time by requesting content they have absolutely no intention of purchasing. Writers should be spending their time creating literary artwork not trying to determine whether a buyer is genuine. Held in the same revere as mass murderers and parents who let their children scream blue murder at restaurants.
** requester/s - A person who partakes in the act of requesting. A relatively new word introduced into the dictionary by mattsterrr (a struggling but happy writer).
-
constant-content
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1330
- Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 9:20 am
The funny thing is I even contacted her to ask what price she was willing to pay for the articles and how many she was looking for. She played along...
The deposit is something I have thought about for a while now, but right now making it work is more complicated then it sounds. Not to mention someone could still make a deposit and never return, this doesn’t help the writers but it would help me. For now I’m going to implement an approval process for request and contact each party to get a fell for them.
The deposit is something I have thought about for a while now, but right now making it work is more complicated then it sounds. Not to mention someone could still make a deposit and never return, this doesn’t help the writers but it would help me. For now I’m going to implement an approval process for request and contact each party to get a fell for them.
Speaking as one who has been burned twice now...
The deposit idea should be a good filter. It would certainly eliminate some of the folks bent on revenge against CC because their articles don't sell, or who have been banned for various reasons, or who are clueless. I can't see that any of these would actually post a deposit with no intention of buying. And yes, it would help you Chris.
An approval process that would filter out more of these bad requests would help all writers here. I imagine that this now must be a heck of a challenge. When someone posts a request, how do you know if it's legitimate? Do you check out a buyer's site if they have one, or just take them at their word? Sometimes they won't have a site that's live or are planning one, so how do you tell the good from the bad?
Not knowing if requesters are legit could hurt CC's rep with writers. And since the site's purpose is to sell content to buyers looking for quality writing, a decrease in quality content for sale could hurt sales. The quality checks you have in place have helped and probably have decreased complaints about spelling and grammatical errors, etc. I think this is very good. A second set of eyeballs checking copy is always a good idea.
I'm the first to admit that I am not a website adminstrative or technical expert. So I may not have a lot of information as to how checking requests are done once marketing attracts buyers. But I do know that all systems need some fine tuning for problem fixes revealed by operations. I wish I could offer some ideas beyond the few questions posed here. CC is a growing business and I would like to see it become even better than it is. Anyone else have any ideas that could help?
The deposit idea should be a good filter. It would certainly eliminate some of the folks bent on revenge against CC because their articles don't sell, or who have been banned for various reasons, or who are clueless. I can't see that any of these would actually post a deposit with no intention of buying. And yes, it would help you Chris.
An approval process that would filter out more of these bad requests would help all writers here. I imagine that this now must be a heck of a challenge. When someone posts a request, how do you know if it's legitimate? Do you check out a buyer's site if they have one, or just take them at their word? Sometimes they won't have a site that's live or are planning one, so how do you tell the good from the bad?
Not knowing if requesters are legit could hurt CC's rep with writers. And since the site's purpose is to sell content to buyers looking for quality writing, a decrease in quality content for sale could hurt sales. The quality checks you have in place have helped and probably have decreased complaints about spelling and grammatical errors, etc. I think this is very good. A second set of eyeballs checking copy is always a good idea.
I'm the first to admit that I am not a website adminstrative or technical expert. So I may not have a lot of information as to how checking requests are done once marketing attracts buyers. But I do know that all systems need some fine tuning for problem fixes revealed by operations. I wish I could offer some ideas beyond the few questions posed here. CC is a growing business and I would like to see it become even better than it is. Anyone else have any ideas that could help?
-
mattsterrr
- Posts: 106
- Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 2:44 am
Another set of eyes.
Another set of eyes 
Why don't you offer a couple of the refererless referrals (the people who stumble on the site, by accident, sort of) in exchange for some help checking out validity of requests etc...
That way you could get a writer (not that I'm hinting) to do a little work for you without having to pay out cold, hard currency. I'm sure someone would be willing to donate a little time to weedle out the cr... You'd have to find someone trustworthy so they don't just keep hold of the request and be the only one who knows about the requests, but you would get a copy and you'd know how quickly they were going up on site.
Perhaps someone in another time zone would be helpful (Notice a pattern emerging?) so you could have 24 hour cover, as it were.
Obviously, a Brit named Matt would probably be best for all sorts of reasons...
Why don't you offer a couple of the refererless referrals (the people who stumble on the site, by accident, sort of) in exchange for some help checking out validity of requests etc...
That way you could get a writer (not that I'm hinting) to do a little work for you without having to pay out cold, hard currency. I'm sure someone would be willing to donate a little time to weedle out the cr... You'd have to find someone trustworthy so they don't just keep hold of the request and be the only one who knows about the requests, but you would get a copy and you'd know how quickly they were going up on site.
Perhaps someone in another time zone would be helpful (Notice a pattern emerging?) so you could have 24 hour cover, as it were.
Obviously, a Brit named Matt would probably be best for all sorts of reasons...
-
Ellen Russell
- Posts: 37
- Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 10:15 am
I posted on this very subject in Oct in the improvements topic section because I am so peeved working for specific requests when buyers never return and have no apparent intention of buying.Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 5:02 pm Post subject: My 2 cents
I understand what I'm about to suggest has some innate drawbacks; it's just something off the top of my head.
How about requiring a small deposit from new requesters? Nothing huge, basically a good faith gesture to indicate we might really have some purchases result from requests we have worked hard to fill. Lately, we're being inundated with requests, some quite specific and not very resale-able (making up words as I go along). We have several right now, but no purchases being made. Maybe if it cost a few bucks to ask us to work our little behinds off people would post only with good intentions of actually buying these articles.
Any deposit could be refundable if a purchase is made (i.e., go towards the purchase cost of the article, etc.) and I intend this only to be used for new clients. Returning clients who have previously bought articles can usually be trusted as using the site with the intention of really completing a purchase, not just weeding out what they can get.
Just an idea, but maybe then we could focus our efforts on what might actually pay.
Of course, re: this quote, "Returning clients who have previously bought articles can usually be trusted as using the site with the intention of really completing a purchase"
I now have four bulletproof articles sitting here from a returning requester that was hot on them when they made the request!! Don't see those going anywhere any time soon!