At iwriter, I have been getting only bad requester proposals for articles. While few are very vague in their instructions, few are too very specific about keyword density to be 3%, which makes the article not very good to read.
I have always found that, my hunch about a requester being bad, turned out right after, they reject it for silly reasons, stating grammar errors and rejection at article directory website was the most popular reason for my articles being rejected. Few, quoted saying, it needed correction at multiple spaces and hence it was rejected. While few are honest enough to tell that it needed correction and hence it was awarded four/five stars instead of five, and accept the content.
The question is, How can the requester who rejects the article on the basis of poor grammar or needing correction, use the article they rejected, again for their purpose. If Brad Callen had ensured that an article once rejected would not be shown to the requester, or cannot be copied from the same link, it would make things better for innocent writers being taken for a ride by the bad requesters.
Ways to Avoiding Bad Requesters:
Do You think they Use rejected articles?
I feel very strongly that these rejected articles are used by requesters, as the primary data that can be corrected, because they get it for free, without paying much to the writer. What do you feel about it?
I have always found that, my hunch about a requester being bad, turned out right after, they reject it for silly reasons, stating grammar errors and rejection at article directory website was the most popular reason for my articles being rejected. Few, quoted saying, it needed correction at multiple spaces and hence it was rejected. While few are honest enough to tell that it needed correction and hence it was awarded four/five stars instead of five, and accept the content.
The question is, How can the requester who rejects the article on the basis of poor grammar or needing correction, use the article they rejected, again for their purpose. If Brad Callen had ensured that an article once rejected would not be shown to the requester, or cannot be copied from the same link, it would make things better for innocent writers being taken for a ride by the bad requesters.
Ways to Avoiding Bad Requesters:
- Stay away from requesters with poor approval rate. I would not even care to look what is the assignment, if the approval rate is less than fifty percent. A few who are very confident of their writing skills or experience, may want to take chance, but I always found them to be people who reject articles without giving proper reasons.
- Unclear Instructions is one other thing to watch out for, when choosing a requester. If the requester does not give all details about what the article should deal with, it is better to move on to search other good rated requesters.
- Never go for short articles, and waste your time, because, they are rejected for silliest of the reasons. I had one of the requester do the same. He had submitted about 100 articles each about 150 words for scrape metal statues, and kept on rejecting every time, and by the time he rejected mine, his approval rate had fallen down to 20%. It was just about 45% when I started writing only three of his articles, as I din't want to waste all my time, only to find they were rejected later on. You can check the product description here and give your feedback. And my hunch about his rejection came out true, when he said it was poor in grammar and rejected all of my articles.
Do You think they Use rejected articles?
I feel very strongly that these rejected articles are used by requesters, as the primary data that can be corrected, because they get it for free, without paying much to the writer. What do you feel about it?
Thanks for the list. To those that simply browse posts and get away, please now tolerate those web log directories. Got smart links mistreatment the list and SERP shoot up! Thanks bro. San Francisco SEO
ReplyDelete