A few suggestions for ConstantContent

[MP1]

I've browsed the forums and read the FAQs. I've browsed author profiles and content submissions. What I've found time and time again is that many of the staff and some writers here have an 'attitude' about themselves and CC. I've seen multiple replies in the forums from someone named 'Ed' who apparently is an editor here and it seems the attitude is 'take it or leave it' when replying about vague rejections. Drop the attitude. The 'high standard' submission standards means nothing if there is little editing actually done. Outright rejections that give zero guidance on what to do to get the article submitted aren't 'high standard', their useless for a site that relies on it's writers to make any money. The writers here aren't any better than writers on other websites, but from what I've read, a lot of people here have a chip on their shoulder.

I'm sure it isn't the editor's fault.You want a cut of the writer's profits? Then actually do something do edit the work if you find it isn't up to par. Don't tell writer's the 'word choice' was wrong, correct it as an EDITOR would do. Don't tell writers the 'submission guidelines weren't followed', tell them which guideline was overlooked.

Either CC thinks their customers are dumb or they don't realize that some customers just want content and want a wide selection to choose from. Let the buyers make the final choice.To those that say ' buyers shouldn't have to wade through a lot of articles to find good ones', consider the following things. First, CC appears to offer a refund policy, a customer I believe can demand a refund if the work isn't what they expected. Second sites such as Helium allow writers to do what they do best: write. They then allow publishers and customers interested in buying content to browse their site and purchase articles for usage rights. Writers don't need CC. CC needs writers. Remember that. All of these writing sites depend on writers to make their profits.

[Elizabeth Ann West]

I'm really sorry you think C-C is all about a superiority complex. As a writer here, and on Helium and Associated Content, as well as other e-lance sites, I can say hands down the C-C system of doing things IS better. I earn far more for my effort as a writer on Constant-Content than any other write for pay website. This is because my style of writing fits here. I enjoy writing non-fiction writing, exploring subjects interesting to me. For example, there was a Premium assignment on Helium a few weeks ago about "5 truths about credit cards." I wasn't interested in writing a piece to compete with 40 other writers for $17. I wrote the piece on spec just for C-C because I knew other buyers would be interested in that type of content and sold it here pocketing $31.25 after the cut. I prefer to write a few quality pieces of writing rather than simply play the "produce as much as you can" for advertising revenue.

The Editor services provided by C-C is not for the writers, it's for the buyers. It is a service provided for content buyers so they can buy with confidence and not waste time on poor writing. The services C-C provides to writers is like an art gallery. We are paying for the web interface, advertising, the collective strength to go after plagiarizers and fraudulent transactions. As a sole writer running my own content website, I would spend far too many resources and time if I had to do all of that, plus my personal inventory would not be enough to draw large amounts of buyers.

For what it's worth, in over a year of selling on C-C, I've only had one customer ask for a return and it was a very unreasonable one, trying to weasel a full-rights license when she purposely only paid for the cheaper use one. C-C protected me from having to deal with that, and I kept the sale. Also, from the delay in article approvals lately, it doesn't appear C-C is hurting for content contributors.

[Celeste Stewart]

I used to think it would be nice if Ed would correct those little typos, odd turns of phrases, and mistakes like an editor at a newspaper might do for the paper's reporters and columnists - until I started working with other writers who submit work to me for approval on another site. I only work with a few other writers (all excellent btw) and I can tell you that "light editing" is time consuming indeed - and that's with established writers! If Ed did the same here with the hundreds of submissions each day, the delay for approvals would be excessive! And, it wouldn't be fair to those who submit articles that are ready for publication.

From a customer service standpoint, I think it's better to have a refund policy and rarely have to use it than rely on it as a way of weeding out unsatisfactory products. Buyers have a huge selection of articles from which to choose - some is "just content" and priced appropriately. However, that content has passed the basic editorial test, so buyers don't have to worry about spelling, grammar, formatting, and other details. They know that they can come here and get reliable content. They can also come here and have content custom created for their exact needs with no obligation whatsoever. When customers request articles, they receive plenty of articles that have met the basic guidelines of the site. If customers don't want articles that are well written, then you can bet they won't want to look at articles containing typos, spelling errors, and grammar mistakes.

We're all writers here and the CC community is one of the more supportive ones you'll find with writers regularly helping each other out. We've all been on the receiving end of Ed's rejections, too. Though painful at times, CC is one of the best sites for writers and customers alike.

[Celeste Stewart]

In thinking more about MP1's thoughts on the "refund policy," I wanted to share the following experience. Having sold untold amounts of articles on CC, I recently had to issue my first refund. Believe me, this was far more upsetting than any rejection notice ever received. The money was a non-issue, but the fact that a customer didn't like my work was agonizing/irritating/insulting/you-name-it. I can handle Ed telling me to go back to the drawing board any day, and I appreciate it because it saves me from having to deal with something like this.

I pouted for a day or two before finally considering the customer's point of view. End result: I rewrote the article and offered it to the customer free of charge. The article was much better, the customer was happy with a new and improved article, and I was satisfied that I was able to put my ego aside for an hour or two and improve my writing. I learned a valuable lesson and those gut-wrenching negative feelings were soon replaced with feelings of empowerment! Plus, word has it that this customer is interested in working with me on future projects - something that may not have transpired had I just blown off the customer's concerns.

I don't know about you guys, but I don't want customers to reject my work. That's Ed's job and we all owe Ed a big thank you for the thankless job he does.

Thanks Ed! You are a true mentor and I appreciate everything that you do - Celeste

[HayleyWriter]

While I can understand the frustration at some of the rejection notices, I am grateful for the review process. It is not possible for Ed to give personalised rejection notices, but sometimes I have received a rejection notice pointing out an error in a sentence. When I review the article, I find other similar errors. Ed does try to encourage and support writers who are improving. I almost gave up in frustration because of the rejections when I started, but then I realised Ed was trying to encourage me to write better. Often a rejection notice points to a webpage with useful information. I got sent one on commas and when I read the information and worked through the exercises I could see where I was making consistent errors. Don't ignore the helpful links you do receive on the rejection notices! If I had submitted the article to another website, it would have been accepted, but it would still be grammatically incorrect with poorly used punctuation. Instead, I can submit articles to CC without being ashamed of having my byline appear on the quality article.

I would prefer a rejection from Ed than a refund from a dissatisfied customer. Celeste, I'm glad you worked with the customer to build that relationship. If we offer customers quality articles, the refund policy will not be used. CC is offering a niche market to content buyers - quality as well as quantity. This is what differentiates CC from its competition.

Sometimes, Ed's responses in the forums do sound as if he is frustrated. If you do not work to improve, you will get repeated rejections. No-one is perfect, but it is annoying to see authors complaining of rejections while making obvious mistakes in their writing in the forums. I know authors who have been discouraged or hurt by some comments on these forums. However, I personally have seen a fairness and a wish for authors to improve and to succeed here on CC from Ed too. I appreciate all that CC offers to authors and to customers. Hayley

[nichewriter]

I used to question the CC system of approving articles, but after a few rejections and more acceptances, I found an appreciation for how things are done here. I love writing for CC because it's simply the MOST PROFESSIONAL site for writers to submit their work. I always find great satisfaction each time I get an e-mail notice saying my article has been accepted. It means I managed to get quality writing, the kind of writing CC wants/demands from its authors, past Ed's editor eyes.

I like how CC has high standards, and the owners of the site obviously care enough about the business to make sure they're selling quality content to customers. A few times when I've gotten rejections from Ed, I wished he was more specific, but to be fair, he does give specific reasons at times. The first few times I got a rejection, I was very upset, but I realized soon enough that being upset wasn't going to get my work on CC and sold. So I got down to business, revised, resubmitted and got an acceptance.

...continued

[nichewriter]

Each time I submit an article on CC (and in most everything I do), I strive to make it or do it right the first time around. It's better to do things right the first time than do things hoping for the best and then having to do it all over again. It's a waste of time and energy. I always look at the submission process as an opportunity for me to make Ed's job a bit easier. After all, if I submit work that followed all of CC's guidelines, the better my chances are of my articles getting accepted and being available on the site for sale.

Someone new to CC may find that getting his articles accepted on the site difficult. I know those who come here from other sites think submitting here is as easy as submitting to those other writing/content sites. Then they get their first, second rejections and they're shocked (and even outraged), and come to the forum saying their work on such and such sites were always accepted, etc. etc. They wonder why it's so hard to get an article published on CC. It isn't that it's hard, but that they simply never took the time to read, understand and follow the specific CC guidelines. All other sites similar to CC don't appear to have as stringent a submission process as CC does, and frankly, I much prefer the process here at CC than all the other sites.

Just my 2 1/2 cents :o)

[Celeste Stewart]

And the beauty of CC over those other sites is that it is far more rewarding financially! This isn't an accident. It's because of the strict standards and returning customers.

[BarryDavidson]

MP1,

While it may look like "attitude" to your eyes, I offer a different opinion. I've gone the route of submitting individual pieces to publishers. It's time consuming, you sometimes have to wait months for an acceptance or rejection, and it tends to get confusing when you have thirty articles out there. Worse is when you have thirty articles out and you wait six months for twenty-eight rejections. This is a snap compared to that.

Also, Helium isn't a good example. The only people who make real money there are the ones who pump out a few thousand articles a month. In the fine print of Helium's TOS it also states that anything submitted to them can never be sold for exclusive rights without their permission. Not many publishers are going to go through an intermediary asking more than the author him/herself would ask. The spelling, grammar, punctuation and sentence structure of many articles on Helium are atrocious. It's one thing to write, and quite another to write well.

[nickpaddy]

Also writing for Helium and other sites I have to say that CC doesn't have a chip on its shoulder, it actually IS better.

The standard of writing is very high, and the customer knows they will get value for their money. That's why they come here and are willing to pay us up to (and sometimes more than) $200 an article rather than go to Helium and buy one for $20. At Helium I'd have to work for weeks turning out average quality articles in order to earn on CC what I can from the sale of a single good article.

CC isn't for everyone. It is a niche site offering a certain kind of writing. It isn't snobbish, it just is what it is. And it does it very well.

[charmbaker]

I applaud all the comments here that support Ed and CC in general. Not everyone that has a positive comment is a veteran either. I'm still fairly new and I support this site's policies and procedures 100%. When I first started writing here, I received several rejections of the same article. I was only slightly annoyed. I didn't take it personal and it reinforced what I knew about CC's professionalism.

I said as much in a post after reading another disgruntled writer make similar comments about bad "attitudes". I posted my feelings of appreciation for the rejection letters that forced me to improve my writing. I have sold two articles since then. The joy I felt getting paid dollars instead of cents (like I would somewhere else), surpassed any initial irritation over rejections.

The rejections helped me learn to correct comma-related errors that I'd been making for a long time. They also helped me to be more diverse in the way I phrase things. Whenever I use a sentence that I'm unsure about the structure of, I simply restructure it.

I have yet to find another site with a payment structure like CC. I'm absolutely CONFIDENT I can make a lot more money here. I simply need to remove all the personal obstacles in my life so I can write more diligently. I've written for AC and Helium in the past and I don't think there's any comparison.

I just want to shout to all the writers that still don't know about CC and tell them to STOP wasting their time with other sites if they truly want to get paid for their writing. For those who don't have the necessary patience, drive or thick skin to deal with CC, you might want to check out some of those sites that let you submit any old thing. If you expect adequate compensation, you must be willing to perfect your craft. If you get a rejection: 1) Check your ego at the door 2) Figure out what exactly is wrong 3) Make it right 4) Resubmit your work 5) Stop crying and write another article! - - - PEACE