How to Rat People Out for $3.50
Look, Demand Content Editors,
We know we have a love and hate relationship with you. You take our carefully crafted articles about retardedly mundane subjects and turn them into unreadable drivel.
We’ve got no problem with that. As long as we get our $15+ dollars.
What we DO have a problem with you doing is RATTING out writers for submitting duplicate content.
The thing is….EVERYONE duplicates content. It’s really the only way you can make good money writing for Demand Studios.
We’re sorry you only make $3.50 per article. Quite honestly, I don’t know why anyone would be a copy editor when there are so many easy $15 articles out there.
But, seriously – WHY THE F**K DO YOU CARE IF SOMEONE SUBMITS DUPLICATE CONTENT?
You shouldn’t AT ALL.
I understand the concept and why Demand Studios doesn’t want duplicated content. But, really, they only care about IDENTICAL content, which Google penalizes for. That’s why the Pflag checker is there.
So, if a writer writes an article and it passes the pflag checker and comes to you….why would you even bother with turning someone in for duplicate content.
Unless…..are you secretly getting paid for this?
Does Demand slip an extra $5 into your PayPal account for every writer that you snitch on?
How does that make you feel? Pretty good? Almost as good as taking away $15 from someone’s pocket just because you don’t agree on their interpretation of an article title?
You do know what they do to stoolies in prison, right?
Hahaha… Interesting topic. I just joined this place because I’ve been writing for DS since Dec. and this exact thing has just happened to me. Yet, the thing is, if I copied anyone’s content, it was MY OWN! Why do they care??? I swear, some of these CEs get off on making the writers’ lives miserable. I’m also in their ridiculous writer development program, so my title claim is limited to a whopping 3! Wow, way to go, DS! You would think that if they want a writer to improve in any area, they would allow them to claim MORE articles so that they can more easily claim titles they actually know a thing or five about…
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
Wow, what a bunch of reading impaired, sanctimonious, insufferable douche nozzles. I’m so glad I no longer work for that place.
All you self-important CEs and power-tripping, semi-literate CE supporters need to die in a fucking fire.
Hot debate. What do you think?
10 
11
Ever been caught in a fire? I have. It’s seriously fucked-up to wish for anybody to “die in a fucking fire,” no matter how much of a douche nozzle they are. Don’t joke around with shit like that, or throw around those words loosely. And if you mean it, you’re a sick, sick fuck.
Hot debate. What do you think?
9 
6
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
1 
5
I’m praying that you and your mother rot to death from cancer. I will shit on your grave you worthless piece of fuck.
Like or Dislike:
0 
2
Go right ahead. I’ll be dead, I won’t care. But your irrational hatred will eat you up inside until you rot, just like the proverbial cancer you wished upon me.
The more you seethe, the further I infiltrate your tiny little mind.
Like or Dislike:
0 
2
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
0 
3
EVERYONE WHO READS THIS SITE WILL SUFFER
Like or Dislike:
0 
2
Cool Story, bro.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
You’d be fun to invite over for dinner.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
0 
3
Die
In
A
Fire
Like or Dislike:
0 
2
Because it takes bravery to threaten someone on the net. Maybe you should post your info and people can come to you. Save you gas money.
Like or Dislike:
1 
2
by the way, the person who created this site will not live to the end of the year. Sorry, but nothing can be done about this.
Like or Dislike:
0 
2
:::head pat:::
Don’t go away mad, dear. Just go away.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
First-time poster here. Love the site. I’m a DS CE.
In two years, I’ve reported two writers for writing basically the same article twice. I try to prevent this issue in the first place by not picking up similar titles back to back to edit. Chances are, they have the same writer.
The reason I reported these two writers is because if my CE chief notices I let them go by, I am in big trouble.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
11 
2
i’m not quite sure i follow your comments.
plagairism duplicating content. that’s been rehashed about a thousand times in the comments above.
by “duplicating content”, Demand means that it doesn’t want writers to write on the same topic numerous times, even though they might be the most qualified.
they have plagairism checkers that look for plagairism. if found, the article doesn’t even go into the queue.
again, to the original post, WHY THE F*** DO CES CARE?
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
WHY DO YOU WANT TO REPORT PEOPLE FOR REPURPOSING?!!! That’s the whole F***** angle of the post. It doesn’t get picked up by the system AND it creates more work for you. Unless the CEs are being paid some kind of reward for reporting re-purposing (either monetary or DMS promotions), there’s no reason why you should care. If it’s an okay article, SEND IT THROUGH.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
7 
1
The truth is Demand can be OK to work for, and can also suck big time. I have only been with them for a short time, and have not really had any major issues I can’t deal with. I suppose in some respects it has made me a better writer (if nothing else it certainly gets you to write more and provides you with lots of practice). On topic: I have been selecting as many similar titles as I can find, and repurposing a portion of each article. Thats the only way its remotely worth the $15 for each assignment. Funny thing is, I didn’t even know this is against the rules and written in stone. I kinda just thought I’m getting away with a bit of trickery, and yes as someone else mentioned, you do need to be very inventive and creative as you tap dance around the plagiarism flag. Pat on the back to everyone that can do it
However even doing this, I find writing for Demand is extremely tedious. I honestly can’t fathom how some writers are able to crank out 8 or more articles/day.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
4 
0
lol Patrick its because as a good little brain-washed DM sheep/zombie you must report it! Once you’ve been sucking of the virtual corporate teet that long, you get to enjoy it and can’t do anything else.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I signed up with DS at the end of 2009. I have not written an article for over a year. My lights got shut off last month and I still wouldn’t write for them. I’d rather starve and wait for something better. That company treats its writers like complete shit and the copy editors (I’m using the word “editor” quite loosely) are lacking in the critical thinking department. I just found this website and it has verified everything that I have ever thought about this company.
A friend of mine directed me towards this post and I couldn’t believe it. I guess we can just chalk it up to one more unethical DS business practice. I will laugh when that company goes up in flames and those idiot CEs have to try to get an actual editing gig elsewhere. All I can say to those CEs is good luck getting a real editing job with the way that you guys think and supposedly “edit”. No reputable publication would hire you to chew bubblegum. Your laziness, arrogance, and terrible work ethic would not fly in the real world and your asses would be standing in the unemployment line in a heartbeat. So, live it up while you can but don’t be surprised when DS goes up in flames and you can’t get another editing gig. Yeah, I’m talking to you Mr. “How do microwave buttons work?” CE and all the rest who ask stupid, obvious questions like that. You can all eat my fat, wet twat.
Hot debate. What do you think?
11 
8
Definition of “lacking in the critical thinking department”: Having work that could earn you $30 in an hour, and turning it down when you don’t even have electricity. Working for DMS is one kind of dumb, but not working for DMS when you are that desperate for money is another level of dumb.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
17 
6
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
6 
9
Why do you check the titles every day, if you have no intention of working for Demand?
Hot debate. What do you think?
6 
3
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
2 
9
You just boasted you refused to write for Demand even when you had no electricity and wouldn’t work for Demand if you were starving. Now you say you crawled the title queue every day for the last month looking for work from them. Which is it?
I didn’t have too much of a problem finding titles last month, but I think that’s because DMS lets us brighter crayons access more assignments.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
12 
4
I was not “boasting” about not writing for Demand even though I was without electricity for a short period of time (only 2 days actually). I was making a statement that Demand is a shitty company taking advantage of a shitty economy and that I refuse to support them if I can help it. Many people only write for them out of necessity. I haven’t written anything for them in over a year. It does not mean I have not tried to find halfway decent titles only to become aggravated and look elsewhere. Of course, you aren’t able to think logically and put two and two together that an intelligent human being. That’s why Demand loves you. They adore people who can’t think critically.
I could care less what a stupid content mill like Demand Studios thinks about my “merit” as a writer. The magazine I wrote an $800 article for last week seemed to think my writing was excellent. I’m sure you’ve never had nice projects like that because you’re too busy kissing DS ass. I find your criticism and attempts at derailing those you disagree with rather amusing. Your silly ad hominem attacks are precisely the reason why you probably can’t get work outside of that place.
If you truly love them so much, then why are you on a website called “demandstudiossucks.com”. Isn’t the purpose of this website to point out what a ridiculous place Demand Studios is? Or, perhaps I am wrong. I just assumed that on a site like this I wouldn’t find a bunch of DS brownnosers. Carry on then. I hope your perpertual serfdom makes you proud of yourself, you silly little boy.
Hot debate. What do you think?
7 
8
Doesn’t take much to get you all pissy, does it? Calm down and just admit you contradicted yourself.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
8 
3
PS I don’t love DMS. I just think you’re talking out of your ass, which is a totally different point.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
7 
2
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
3 
7
“My lights got shut off last month and I still wouldn’t write for them. I’d rather starve and wait for something better.”
I see why you’re all flustered now. You don’t understand the difference between “didn’t write” and “wouldn’t write.” Are you really this obtuse, or should I be charitable and assume you’re just pulling our legs? If the former, please be my guest and keep digging that hole you’re in.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
8 
3
Hey Deborah, I’ll gladly eat that fat wet twat anytime. Just sayin’…
Hot debate. What do you think?
5 
7
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
3 
6
I really don’t get why it’s so hard for people to understand that DMS is not in the business of journalism.
Their very model makes it impossible to write anything that is original or unique- and they don’t even want those words used in their articles.
It’s not reporting, not news and not even op-ed. It’s essentially ad copy, except that it’s ad copy written specifically as a vehicle for ad placement.
We don’t interview anyone, do investigative research or offer opinion, all of which would be unique and original.
DMS has bastardized the meaning of those words. Being forced to have references that say exactly what you say in an ‘article’ is nothing more than regurgitation, word-flipping and word scrambling. CEs know it, writers know it, DMS knows it, and Google knows it.
I am sorry that people aren’t able to come to terms with what the actual work they do at DMS is. It’s work, but it’s not journalism. The editors are not journalistic editors. Back when I worked as assistant editor of an actual paper newspaper (remember those?), I would have thrown DMS tripe back in the writers face and said… we are not paying you to paraphrase what some sources and references have already said. But, that is the specific requirement DMS has for its articles.
We do not get paid by the word to write or edit, and there’s a reason DMS has recommendations for how short the articles NEED to be. So the ads will fit around it. We didn’t write our copy to fit around ads when I was doing actual journalistic writing- they fit the ads around MY work. When I edited, I didn’t cut the copy down to fit around ads.
Get over yourselves and stop pretending DMS is something it is not. Get your gig on and do the work you actually like elsewhere. The work it is obvious people are bitter about not doing at DMS, whether writer or editor. Use DMS for what its intent is… filler. Not journalism. Follow the rules DMS sets. Their rules require regurgitation.
Be honest about what you really do, and what DMS really requires you to do- regurgitate information from more respected sources. And editing that regurgitation. There’s a huge difference between plagiarism and the regurgitation DMS DEMANDS.
You’ll be happier in the long run.
You can thank me later.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
17 
3
To be fair, if it were “ad copy” the CEs would actually allow a modicum of personality to seep through from time to time.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
7 
0
Has anyone thought of this . . . how many eHow or LiveStrong visitors click on enough similar articles that they’re EVER going to see the same info?
Most people click on ONE article about a topic, and if you leave the basic info out of that article, just to avoid repurposing, they’ll miss it.
Do you really think someone goes to eHow and clicks on, “How to Lower Your Cholesterol,” then clicks on, “How to Lower My Cholesterol,” then clicks on “Ways to Lower My Cholesterol?”
If all three articles DON’T contain the same, basic information, you’ve screwed the reader.
I fucking hate Demand CEs for being so one-dimensional and lacking any critical thought.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
12 
3
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
8 
15
dude – the best Demand writers do nothing BUT repurpose. That’s the only way to make money at the website.
Now – I think we’re getting confused between “repurposing” and “plagairism”.
If I, as a writer, can repurpose the same “How to Toss Salad” article a thousand different times WITHOUT triggering the pflag checker, I would say that makes me a pretty good writer.
If you’re concerned about eHow quality, then I feel for you. There’s A THOUSAND worse articles floating around on that site worse than anything that has been submitted to a CE.
That’s the whole point of this post – let’s all just make some money. If an article gets to you (meaning that according to Gooogle and Demand, it’s not plagairised) and looks half way decent, again, WHY THE F*** DO YOU CARE IF IT’S REPURPOSED OR NOT?
Sure, if it’s a bad article, and you don’t feel comfortable passing it on, don’t. But don’t just go start ratting people out for repurposing. That’s just retarded.
And that’s EXACTLY what Demand wants you to do.
Hey – CEs who really give a f**k – how much of that sweet Demand IPO money did you get cut in for? What’s that? None? Sorry to hear about that.
Have a special grilled cheese.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
15 
7
Look, if I remember your previous Demand article at all, it was either very good or not at all good.
The very good Demand writers tend not to repurpose. A few of them, I have edited hundreds of times.
So if you’re not a good writer and you just handed me the same slop I saw three days earlier, why WOULDN’T I bust you? I want you gone. It’s worth the extra 10 minutes e-mailing Richard, just to be rid of you forever. Your articles were that bad.
Can you dig it?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
28 
17
Your name fits.
“Very good Demand writer” LOL. Maybe, for other clients they are quite good. For Demand? Have you seen the moronic edits CEs ask for?
Which is a bigger oxymoron?
A) Very good Demand editorial staffer
B) Very good Demand CE
Can you dig that? Dig it deep.
Who says “Can you dig it?” Did I just flashback to the early 90s Manchester sound or the 70s? Are you THAT out of touch? Are you the CE who has moral issues with grade school crushes?
Hot debate. What do you think?
11 
8
It takes you 10 minutes to write an email? You must be making a killing editing articles at $3.50 a pop.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
10 
3
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
3 
9
Thanks, guys!
Today they just made it easier to report repurposers. All we have to do is click a dropdown menu rather than compose an email to Richard and cut and paste links and story ID.
Your ass is mine! Hahahaha.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
19 
8
Yay! Now, you don’t have to work to get your daily feeling of false superiority. I’m so happy for you. That must make you feel real good.
Hot debate. What do you think?
7 
6
Aha! Nabbed one already.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
12 
6
So I take it that this is your way of granting unequivocal permission to duplicate any portion of your website that I see fit for my own blog and purposes?
Generous, that.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
10 
6
Another CE who lacks reading comprehension. I’m shocked. Shocked! I say.
Hot debate. What do you think?
8 
7
I’ll play. You’ve noted that my reading comprehension is subpar. Please help me to correct that by defining the following paragraph that is stated in this initial post:
“What we DO have a problem with you doing is RATTING out writers for submitting duplicate content.
The thing is….EVERYONE duplicates content. It’s really the only way you can make good money writing for Demand Studios.
We’re sorry you only make $3.50 per article. Quite honestly, I don’t know why anyone would be a copy editor when there are so many easy $15 articles out there.
But, seriously – WHY THE F**K DO YOU CARE IF SOMEONE SUBMITS DUPLICATE CONTENT?
You shouldn’t AT ALL.”
Duplicating content.
From MW: duplicating
present participle of du·pli·cate (Verb)
1. Make or be an exact copy of.
2. Make or supply copies of (a document): “a duplicating machine”.
Content: What you write at DS. What is written on this page.
What exactly did I miss?
Like or Dislike:
3 
2
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
3 
7
None of the writers on this forum advocates plagiarism. The ability for Demand Studios CEs to interpret “duplication” or “repurposing” as something more foul makes most writers angry. In my experience, CEs occasionally–very occasionally, thankfully–don’t bother to review references and resources! Is there actually process associated with the editing of articles we write for Demand Studios?
Like or Dislike:
3 
4
Back to the original question – if the article passes the pflagger which means IT IS ORIGINAL CONTENT ACCORDING TO EHOW AND GOOGLE – why the f**k do you care if it’s been repurposed or not?
just do your job and pass it along.
Hot debate. What do you think?
10 
10
I care because it could be my original work that you are touting as your own work. It’s lazy, and again, ILLEGAL.
What part of illegal is getting by your radar?
BTW, CEs are told TO check for plagiarism. Don’t be cross if you’ve gotten caught doing something ILLEGAL and against DS’s rules. You won’t find much work writing elsewhere if what you do is repurpose.
Hot debate. What do you think?
13 
10
Reading comprehension. Patrick is not talking about plagiarism.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
10 
4
This is cute. You advocate duplicating content, and yet you aver that this doesn’t mean plagiarism?
I’ll bite. How does duplicating content not equal plagiarism, and according to whom?
Like or Dislike:
2 
3
Even outright plagiarism (taking an article you wrote and putting my own name on it without changing a word of your text) is not “illegal,” as you keep claiming. It is *actionable* by the holder of the copyright. That’s not the same thing.
“Illegal” means an act carries criminal charges. Plagiarism does not. Copyright infringement via plagiarism only carries a risk of criminal charges if the plagiarist also widely distributes the piece without permission. (And frankly, the U.S. Attorney’s Offices have a *lot* better things to do than track down one individual for slapping his or her own name on 400 consecutive words s/he found on the Internet.)
In this case, DMS owns the copyright to the stuff you’ve written for them. (You sold it to them when you agreed to write for $whatever.) DMS, therefore, is the only party that has a civil case if I swipe your article, put my name on it, and sell it back to DMS. There’s really no point in getting upset over the “theft” of intellectual property you don’t even own.
Meanwhile, if I swipe the DMS article you wrote wholesale, put my name on it, and sell it back to DMS, there’s no viable criminal case because DMS is the one who (a) owns both copyrights and (b) is the one doing the distributing. Which is not copyright infringement, because *DMS owns all the copyrights involved in its own distribution.*
I’m not saying plagiarism – real plagiarism – doesn’t light me up like a Christmas tree, because it does. I’m saying that you’re waaaay too defensive of rights that, in this context, you do not have.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
11 
2
What part of “re-purposing your OWN goddamned content” can you not fucking comprehend, you drooling moron?
The whole point of this conversation is to discuss CEs who flag people for writing similar articles on the same topic.
How the fuck can you plagiarize yourself, you fucking halfwit?
Like or Dislike:
3 
4
It’s funny to see posts from a few DS “writers” who are apparently proud of the fact that they’re bending over and allowing a company to ass-fuck them for the rates they pay. (Donna, Marsha and OP, I’m looking at you.)
Even if you think you’re clever for “repurposing” your “pieces,” you’re still writing for a miserable content mill at rates that equal less than minimum wage.
Hot debate. What do you think?
6 
6
Hey, someone has to serve up your McArticle. If not me, then someone else. It might as well put gas in my tank. Don’t hate the player, hate the game.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
8 
0
So good of you to drop by and assert your superiority over everyone Stevie. Yes, now that your nose isn’t blocked by titty flesh anymore, you are free to turn it up at us. Say, just how long were you suck–uh, writing for DMS before they fired you?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
5 
0
I don’t understand why anyone would bother writing for DS if they couldn’t even make minimum wage there.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Who takes 2 hours to write 400 words? You’re right, Marsha, why bother?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Anyone who makes less than minimum wage at DMS is in the wrong job. The pay is poor, but only by comparison with freelance writing in general. A decent writer should be able to earn $20 to $30 an hour at DMS on average. I spend 30 to 45 minutes on the average article. I might be on the slow side for DMS. I often hear claims of getting out three or four articles in an hour, but I’m not sure I believe it’s that common. Or perhaps it is, but they’re probably the ones getting canned by DMS now.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
7 
0
Exactly right!
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
CEs are snitching on writers who break the rules? What the fuck? Next they’ll be grassing people up for bad grammar and spelling. I wouldn’t be surprised if some of them rejected articles for being shit.
The next person who breathes a word to TPTB about my scam outsourcing assignments to India gets tarred and feathered.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
14 
5
Enjoy your $3.50, loser. Go buy a Big Mac Meal. Enjoy your power trip while you’re at it, as fleeting as it may be.
Like or Dislike:
1 
3
I’m not a CE.
And maybe I misunderstood the OP when I left that comment.
Sorry I got your panties in a bunch. :p
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
Obviously we really need to clarify a couple of things.
1. Plagiarism, in a nutshell, is taking someone else’s words or ideas and claiming them as your own. This includes copying work you have already sold to DMS
2. Repurposing is, essentially, article spinning.
Most writers for DMS do not spin articles. Even if we wanted to we wouldn’t have the chance. We have to write strictly to the title. We do use our own knowledge and expertise when writing a piece. Sometimes, that knowledge comes from previous articles. That shouldn’t be a bad thing. When you specialize in a field, you’re even more likely to get “caught” repurposing when, in fact, you were just writing an article the way it was intended to be written.
If I had the capacity to pity stupid people (alas, I do not) I would shoulder an immense amount of sorrow for anyone working for DMS who has yet to learn how to play the game.
Being duped does not in any way, form or fashion make someone a “professional.” You’d have to have a brain tumor to even come to that conclusion.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
6 
0
CEs are on the hook for QC, so if a higher up goes through the published content and finds a piece of junk of junkier than average quality, the CE who passed it can get in trouble.
CEs don’t want to waste their time outing plagiarizers and artless repurposers. But if they smell something fishy, they have to look into it to cover their own asses. And no, there is no bonus for sleuthing.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
18 
1
Exactly this.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
Since when was it ever OK to plagiarize? And plagiarizing also included taking other people’s work and barely rewriting it to pass a “Copyscape” like program, or in the case of Demand Studios, plagiarism flagging.
I don’t work for Demand Studios any more, but I thought those writers were paid to work better than the $1 per article writers of India, who do that sort of thing.
For once, I’m with the copy editors. If you are too lazy to read for 15 minutes and write, in your own words, based from facts and draw your own conclusions, it’s time to go do something else. Something, you know, not illegal.
Hot debate. What do you think?
9 
10
Seriously, Demand does not pay for writers to “draw your own conclusions.” As a matter of fact, they reject articles where the writer’s conclusions don’t repeat the conclusions found in whichever reference the CE decides to check. If there is more than one conclusion to be found, the writer had better list (repeat) them both or she is looking for a rewrite.
I’m all for grammatically correct, unique, verifiable content, but Demand DOES NOT PAY FOR THAT. I repeat: DEMAND DOES NOT PAY FOR THAT. I don’t go to the Salvation Army looking for Dolce & Gabbana. If I find used D&G there, in decent condition, then “go me!” If not, I can’t be too disappointed. I just need to go pay the high cost for the good quality (or brand name.)
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
18 
4
They pay you $15 or more per article to a) research facts, b) write concisely based on those facts and c) edit to the guidelines before passing along to editors. Other people seem to get how to do this, if you aren’t, maybe reconsider your writing position or take a class on how to write.
Demand DOES pay for grammar and verifiable content. If you don’t agree to the payment method, don’t work for them. It’s that easy. Go find work elsewhere where you are paid what you want.
If you can’t, it’s probably due to your own writing quality issues. Again, I do not write for DS or have any part of them any more, but I do write, and I am offended by anyone who considers it OK to repurpose any article.
Hot debate. What do you think?
7 
4
Exactly my point: “Demand DOES pay for grammar and verifiable content.” They do not pay for unique content or writers’ conclusions.
As for your personal attack, I have no writing quality issues. Are you projecting a little?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
6 
2
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
1 
4
You mean, why do we care that you’re passing off plagiaried swill as your own product?
Maybe because we’re, you know, professionals.
Unlike you.
Maybe because we’re ethical.
Unlike you.
Maybe because, despite working for DS, we take pride in our work.
Unlike you.
Could be something like that.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
17 
11
If it passes the pflag, WHY DO YOU CARE? Is checking for similar content part of copy editing? Is similar the same as plagiarized in your book?
Hot debate. What do you think?
9 
7
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
7 
13
If you don’t know the difference between articles that repeat similar facts and plagiarized articles, you aren’t doing your job intelligently enough to deserve to take pride in it.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
7 
2
Let me be clear: I was talking about plagiarizing — typically rewriting an already published eHow article — and passing it off as your own. Repurposing, to my mind, is different, as long as the second, third, whatever article is unique unto itself. Doesn’t pay for me to do that. But if your lame intro is 95% the same as your other lame intro, and all you’ve done elsewhere is transpose a few words around, I might point that out to my lead. More than likely, though, I’ll just approve and give you a 1/1 or 2/2.
Like or Dislike:
4 
2
Aren’t you the kind one. If your lame edits that have nothing to do with guidelines or AP style are the same as your other lame edits, should I report that to your lead as well?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
9 
5
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
4 
7
Wouldn’t you get into trouble for approving an article that was bad enough to get a 1/1 or a 2/2? If not, I better apply to be a CE. I’ll just select, approve, select, approve all day. I’ll be rich in no time!!
Like or Dislike:
2 
2
If it’s legible by the time I’m done fixing it and answers the question in the title, there’s no reason not to approve it. I know you people don’t believe it, but we have no incentive to send back rewrites (more work for us) or to reject articles (even more work for us — we have to explain to you why we’re rejecting you). The more we can approve the first time through, the more money we make. TPTB can never make up their minds if they want more approvals, more rewrites, more rejections; whether they want us to fix more ourselves or make the writers fix more. So we do what’s best for us. Dog eat dog, you know.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
11 
0