Loyalty and Honesty in Writing

[cgardener]

Celeste, what if we don't KNOW it's a customer? What if we have never dealt with that customer? There isn't a list of customers anywhere. Do we have to ask everyone who approaches us outside of CC whether they are, or ever have been, a CC customer? Customers, just like authors, use names other than their own. How are we to know who we are dealing with? How do THEY know who they are dealing with?

It's not like everyone is going to do what the subject of this thread did, and mention CC and try to broker a better deal with an author. It's not as simple as wanting to be loyal, which no doubt, all of us want to do. The terms of service say we can't act against the business interests or reputation.

So what constitutes "acting against the business interests..."? How are you to prove that the person KNOWINGLY acted against the interests? I guess I'm playing devil's advocate here, but there are bound to be people who innocently accept outside jobs, not knowing they are acting in any way to harm CC. I'm new here, but I'm just really honest and wouldn't do it IF I KNEW I was doing it, and I'm sure that applies to most of us.

I don't mean to make waves, but when I read about people being banned, I couldn't help but think that sometimes bannings aren't actually fair, and how does someone defend themselves against such an accusation? I've run websites, and it's very hard to have to ban someone, especially someone you like who has been with the site awhile. You have to weigh so many factors in order to be fair.

Anyway, I didn't mean to start a war. I was just making a point.

[Celeste Stewart]

No war here, I'm just passionate about CC!

It's not like how you envision it. If you find customers elsewhere, go for it. You don't have to do background checks to see if they are CC customers. In fact many customers post here as well as other locations. That's all fine. It's when you have a working relationship with a CC customer and then circumvent the system where there's a problem. Another trouble spot is when you see a request and contact the customer and work via other means - again, circumventing the system. One of the first public requests that a good writer friend of mine tried for asked her to call him directly. She did (not knowing better). He immediately wanted her to sub work directly to him and he'd take care of paying her directly. She didn't. She did the article, subbed it via CC, and never heard back from the customer.

CC's reasonable, they wouldn't ban someone for finding work on their own and working with a customer who uses many sources including CC to attract writers.

I know of several writers who took a chance to work directly with an established CC customer directly when offered a contract outside of the system (I was offered the same deal). I chose to continue subbing via CC because I felt that it was the right thing to do. The customer has since gone on hiatus. I am still in good standing with CC and the customer who respected my choice and continued using my services. Others are uncertain of their future writing prospects. One of my dear friends is ready to take a real "show up and get paid" job because she already burnt her CC bridge and now the work she thought was a sure thing has dried up.

If you don't know the customer, found the customer on your own, it's fine. It's when you knowingly agree to bypass CC when it gets dicey.

[Ed]

Just to be clear for anyone reading:

You may not exchange contact information with a customer.

You may not contact a customer directly.

You may not circumvent CC's system by accepting work outside of CC from your CC customer.

Violating the agreement you have with Constant Content will be terms for account suspension.

Everyone at CC works very hard to protect your interests and the work you sell here, and we are continually improving how we do things. You follow the agreement you have with CC, and we provide an outstanding venue for your writing. It's very simple. This is not a large company with a lot of disinterested employees. Every one of us invests ourselves personally, and this sets us apart from many other writing sales outlets available for freelancers.

Thanks,
Ed

[cgardener]

Celeste, you said
"It's when you have a working relationship with a CC customer and then circumvent the system where there's a problem. Another trouble spot is when you see a request and contact the customer and work via other means - again, circumventing the system. One of the first public requests that a good writer friend of mine tried for asked her to call him directly. She did (not knowing better). He immediately wanted her to sub work directly to him and he'd take care of paying her directly. She didn't. She did the article, subbed it via CC, and never heard back from the customer."

Now see, that's what I would have done. I guess I got upset because it seems so easy to break the rules online, and there are some webmaster that are just ridiculous in what they punish you for. I just found CC, and I love it, and I would hate to be banned for something I did innocently.

Ed, thanks for clarifying, but honestly, none of that is written down anywhere. You need to put that directly into the agreement. I would. I love CC, and I'm so happy that I found it. It's nice to have business owners who actually care about the people who work for them. I gladly give you part of my earnings just to be able to partake of the comraderie and professionalism here.

[Ed]

Believe me, I have tried to get this incorporated into the TOS on several different occasions. It is included in the FAQ, which refers to the TOS, which was updated a couple of months ago. Let me revisit this issue. Immediately.

The bottom line is a lot of customers believe they can get cheaper work by circumventing CC, too. Well, it's possible, but they don't necessarily get better work, or original work. Going around CC in any way doesn't help anyone. It doesn't help the customers, it doesn't help the writers, and it doesn't help CC.

[cgardener]

If you can't get it into the TOU because of legalities, you can make site rules people must agree to. Since the TOU is a legal document, it might be a violation of free enterprise to put that into it, but site rules are another thing entirely. They allow you to do things like banning, closing accounts, whatever. They only apply to certain people, such as people who submit articles or customers, as opposed to people who might cruise the site looking for ideas, etc. You really should put it into the customer agreement, if it isn't already there. There could be something that writers or customers had to click whenever they did a submission or request that said that they agreed to abide by the site rules. Totally legal, totally effective.

Can you tell I used to work for an attorney? LOL ;=)

[Ed]

We do have a registration agreement; it might be good there, as you suggest.

[dawngordon]

ew, not good at all...I have to be honest I also write for associated content, but, I would never place the articles from their into here or vice versa...that is being loyal and honest...

but I also must say, that if I try to place something into here several times, a piece of writing, and after 2-3 tries, if that article is not published I would place it into AC..

I do take critism, and would most certainly try to change the piece a few times, but after a few times if nothing is placed up, then I would put it into AC,

I am not being rude when I say this...

I have also been offered a writing job for a new magazine, 50 dollars an article. It has not started yet...so again, if my articles are not placed into one after several tries, then guess what? I will place it into someplace else..

Dawn

[dawngordon]

What one editor does not see, does not mean the other will not.

Stephen King and many other authors, started off with a flogging first, I mean several tries, several rejections, and look where they are at now?

[dawngordon]

I have also considered french articles, I am originally from Quebec, I am Canadian by the way. Left side of the world hehehe

[cashwriter]

What one editor does not see, does not mean the other will not.

Stephen King and many other authors, started off with a flogging first, I mean several tries, several rejections, and look where they are at now?

In line with that, the first (and frankly only) print publisher I've ever sent anything to was the New Yorker. I figured I'd be rejected (and I was) but what a thrill to send it off, and a minor thrill to get an email from the NEW YORKER! Some famous author once wrote (quoted loosely), "You aren't a real writer until you've got a filing cabinet full of rejection letters."

[Kristain]

Article writing is a part of marketing so I don’t think any writer write article in pure honest way. The honest writers will try to show everything either wrong or write in complete professional manner. I really appreciate whom they know truly what, where and when everything should present.

Thanks & Regards
Ellery Mooler

[MSO]

When I first joined CC I gave out contact info because I was trying to get some clarity from a client. I have since learned how to use the internal email system so that is not an issue. Once I understood how to ask for clarification, there has not been a need to "go around" the system.

I'll quibble about the percentages, but for the most part I'm very happy to let CC have their cut because without them I would not be selling my work today. It is important, as some have pointed out, to keep the site as the main way client's find our work. This helps us all find new clients. Additionally, had not the CC editors rejected some early attempts because of style, grammar issues, etc., I would not be selling ANYTHING today.

The other great thing about working through CC is the hassle free process. Having done some freelance professional work, I'm very happy to avoid becoming an accounts receivable clerk as part of my writing process.

Michael

[carterjoseph64]

I discovered your web site ideal for my requirements. It is made up of splendid and helpful posts. I've read most of them and acquired a lot from them. To me, you're undertaking the very good work. Keep on this. function at property Inside the finish, I would prefer to thanks for producing such a nice web page.

URL removed

[jellygator]

Ok, I am brand new to freelance writing, so feel free to take my response to this necro thread with a grain of salt, but...

I started researching online freelancing opportunities just a few weeks ago, and I'm inexperienced with usage rights, as all my materials to date were writing-for-hire articles. I located a site that provided a topic, gave eight hours for the article to be completed, and paid $2 for 400 words. In two days, I knocked out ten articles and got a "promotion" to $2.25 per article. In all, I put in about ten hours worth of research and writing in order to earn a measly twenty bucks. That was the payment threshold so I could receive the pay I'd earned, and I did no more writing for that site.)

Then I discovered blogging, which may be promising over time. That is, if that site will ever let me sign up for the affiliate programs. A technical glitch has been getting in the way. In any case, it will take quite a while to earn anything at all, and that's only if I'm very, very good at marketing my blog.

That site introduced me to this one. I got four revision requirements on my first submission and have not sold anything yet, but browsing the forums and evaluating the site has led me to believe the editors here are very astute, and the site is one of the few channels that will enable authors to get paid reasonably. If the writers here accept work outside of this channel, it hurts CC's effectiveness. That means fewer customers in the long run for everyone, including the rogues who undermine the system.

Personally, I'd rather split off a healthy agency fee to a website like CC than to see sites like this one vanish when they're not fully supported by their writers and buyers, because I sure as heck don't want to write for $4 an hour.