Statistics and Rejections
By Keira, Textbroker Editor
We get a lot of questions about how things work here. Many of those questions can be answered by reading our FAQ.
Fun Fact: Studies show that as few as one out of five underwater bears read the FAQ, mostly because reading is notoriously difficult for bears, and the pages get so soggy that "Textbroker" becomes "Toast Broken," which causes bears to cant their heads and twitch their noses.
But despite the hours scientists spent compiling research, searching for threads of thought and whittling objects to a point, five out of five underwater bears agree that there are some areas of our site that could use a little more explanation.
Statistics Page:
If you go to Assignments > Statistics, you will see a listing of all the articles you have submitted. The listing also provides submission dates, earnings, the status of your articles and any ratings that you have received.
The status of your article falls into three categories:
1. Waiting: This means that the client has yet to accept the article.
2. To be rated: The article has been accepted, but our editors have not yet reviewed it.
3. Completed: The article has received a rating.
By clicking on an article title, you can see any commentary left by a client or an editor. Articles with client commentary will have CL in the far right column while articles with editor commentary will have TB. Some will have both.
Please use this resource to keep track of your assignments.
Rejections:
When a client receives an article for the first time, there are only two options: accept or return for revision. This is hard-coded into our system to allow authors a chance to tweak an assignment to the client's liking or to fix a mistake. A client can issue as many revision requests as necessary. However, after just one request has been issued, the client is given a third option: reject.
At this point, the rejection goes into our system for review, and our editors must either side with the client or the author. A rejection is a lose-lose situation for our team. We're bound to upset someone, and we may even lose money in the process.
When we review a rejection, we look for two main things:
1. Did the author's work meet or exceed the requested quality level?
2. Did the author follow the original instructions?
For the first part, we review the article as we would any other in our system. To keep your article from the chopping block, please read through it prior to submission. Run spell-check. Read the article aloud. Read it backwards. Do whatever you need to do to ensure your message is clear so that your article on "Messaging a Prospective Client" doesn't turn into "Massaging a Prospective Client," leaving you with a former client.
While we review rejections with a magnifying lens, we remain aware of the quality level requested by the client. We do not hold a 2-star author to the same standard as a 4-star author; we only ask that each author performs to his or her best ability. We understand that clients may not always be clear in their instructions, and some may also have unrealistic expectations for the quality level they selected. Because we are willing to overrule a client's evaluation, we ask that our authors strive to deliver the best work they can.
The second part of the review may take some time to determine, and we often discuss the article as a team to reach a decision. Unfortunately, most rejections result from the author not following instructions. If you receive a revision request, use this time to try and contact the client with any questions you may have. Knowing exactly what the client is looking for will reduce the likelihood of a rejection.
Before you re-submit an assignment, review the client's instructions. If there were keywords required, make sure you used them. Using the "find" function in your browser or word processor can help you keep track. If there were questions to answer, be sure you addressed them. If the client asked for a certain style or tone, make sure you delivered it. You're dealing with your earnings, so don't turn it into a gamble.
When we have reviewed all factors, our decision will be rendered in one of two ways:
1. Client is right – refusal granted
2. Order is okay – refusal rejected
Rejections appear on your profile and are displayed as a percentage. This number is determined by the number of rejections versus the number of accepted articles. If you had 100 completed articles and one rejection, you would have a 1% rejection rate.
Rejections also appear on the client's profile, letting you know just how frequently that client has rejected an article. This is computed the same way, so if a client had five orders and one rejection, the client would have a 20% rejection rate.
While a rejection may sting, take what you can from the process and use it to become a better writer.
As a final note, we've covered a bit about the client-side of Textbroker and what goes on behind the curtain. Based on the results from the poll, the third highest score went to grammar. So tell us authors: What do you want to learn about? Bonus points to the author who can explain the deeply philosophical meaning of "Toast Broken" to the bears. We may have a special surprise for the most creative answer.
posted on 09/24/2010 - 07.14 | textbroker blog | comments: 32
 | Comments | |
 | ||
Thanks so much for this info, it sure helps to provide an insight to some of the clients' options.
The bears need to know that Toast Broken is a complicated concourse of profoundly affecting vigilance of delightfully mangled English language barriers. When the Toast Broken is approached with an open mind and an attitude of total cooperation, it is only then that the true essence of it's significance is realized.
And I mean that with all my heart.added by: author A-001695 on 09/24/2010 - 10.09
"Toast broken" is the international signal that a host's hospitality has been rejected. The guest, upon finding there he does not like his lodgings, will accept a slice of toast from his host at breakfast and will then drop it on the floor, where it usually shatters into many pieces (which, by the way, are EXTREMELY difficult to clean up). The Toast has now been Broken, and the host's hospitality has been rejected. The guest then leaves rather quickly, often without paying his bill.
Sometimes the bears even chase him away...added by: author Cat Lady on 09/24/2010 - 10.39
I'm a 4-star writer and I've never had an article rejected. I have written over 1,000. I recently had an article returned for revision. I did exactly what the client asked for in the revision and he/she later accepted it with a "poor" rating stating that I did NOT do what was asked for, and added the comment that the "the article stinks".
I'm telling you about this just to let some of you know that just because the client is paying you, it doesn't mean they are right. Add to that the fact that the instructions he gave me went against everything I know as a Textbroker writer and a professional technical writer. Add to that the totally unprofessional and tacky comment. Needless to say, I blacklisted him even though he has recently posted quite a few articles.
You can't please everyone. Keep in mind that if they could write as well as we can, they do it themselves!added by: author Barbara T. on 09/24/2010 - 11.30
"Toast Broken" is the name of the North Pole's own Cold Inn's Blue Plate Breakfast Special, followed in popularity and inn-famy by "Most Broken," found soley the Dine Inn next to the pastry shoppe owned by the mayor's cousin's third ex-wife's aunt, twice removed, in Hoboken.added by: author A-035348 on 09/25/2010 - 01.45
Thanks for the explanation, it helps to understand how the system works. On a Rejection, will you specify why it was rejected?
Also, once the first 5 articles have been submitted, realistically how long before we are notified of a decision?
Thanks for your time.added by: author tbroker on 09/25/2010 - 03.38
I need all of the help I can get to move from the fourth star to the fifth, and I need more help with commas. (See how I have internalized your advice? I put a comma after "and" because those were two independent clauses separated by a coordinating conjunction! I can learn! I swear!)
Anyway...
To comma or not to comma in the middle of this sentence, and why:
"Memphis has a rich and eclectic history of musical geniuses who have called the city home over the years, giving contemporary residents a sense of pride and ownership over much modern music today."
My gut feeling is that the comma belongs there, but I can't find the rule.
Another possibility is that I can't find the rule because the comma doesn't actually belong there? Or is the sentence just FUBAR all together? WTFBBQ is going on?
I write a lot of sentences like that, where the first part is a complete sentence, followed by a comma, followed by a word like "making" or "creating" etc, and then the rest is an incomplete sentence.
Tips on issues like these would be very useful to me (and I was one of the people who voted "MOAR GRAMMAR!" on the poll.)
added by: author Jupiter on 09/25/2010 - 04.53
"Bonus points to the author who can explain the deeply philosophical meaning of "Toast Broken" to the bears. We may have a special surprise for the most creative answer."
Oh, and on that. It's Murphy's law in action:
http://iopscience.iop.org/0143-0807/16/4/005
"We show that toast does indeed have an inherent tendency to land butter-side down for a wide range of conditions. Furthermore, we show that this outcome is ultimately ascribable to the values of the fundamental constants. As such, this manifestation of Murphy's Law appears to be an ineluctable feature of our universe. "
Life just sucks, underwater bear. See? It's a scientific fact, see? "Toast Broken" just means you're lower than us on the food chain, and there ain't squat you can do about it! MwuHahahahaha.added by: author Jupiter on 09/25/2010 - 05.01
Great article! Have never had anything rejected, but I have always wondered why that might might happen, and what I should do if it ever does. And I thought I was the only one who read my articles (quietly) out loud to myself before submitting!
As for the other thing, after a long day of underwater bear activities, these animals like to resurface on an ice floe and toast each other to their great success. However, due to their incredible strength, they break many of the glasses during the process. This causes the underwater bears great anguish, as they have to lick up the spilled champagne from the ice, being careful not to cut their tongues on the broken glass. Although broken toasts are clearly an annoyance for underwater bears, they feel the far greater sin is letting a good bottle of bubbly go to waste.added by: author A-045275 on 09/25/2010 - 06.11
Bears have not just gone underground; they've gone underwater. They are part of a growing social revolution who will not be told how life must be by some online community. The "TextBroker" to "Toast Broken" thing just tips the ice burg of the language revolution refusing to speak directly of the web-woven world.
Under-water bears have submerged in response to our overly social, networked lifestyles. They feel exposed by the security gaffes in Facebook and have lost all privacy now that people Twitter about them all day. Rather than survive a hostile environment, they have adopted a new image. Out of their element, they wish to thwart pic taking and escape the over-exposure of digital media. They have even changed the "Don't feed the bears" signs to read, "Don't 'like' the bears." They do not want to be tagged, twitted, or flickred.
Anyone else ready to take the plunge?
added by: author A-051007 on 09/25/2010 - 06.51
For an underwater bear, Toast Broken is devastating. The pieces drift away and one loses the connection with the Mother Ship. As one of the 20% of underwater bears that read the FAQ, I highly recommend that bears take the time to read the FAQs during the moments when they come up for air. I know from experience that these moments are few and far between, however, to keep Text Broker and avoid Toast Broken it is well worth the few minutes it takes.
Thank you Support Staff for always being there.
added by: author A-034727 on 09/25/2010 - 07.47
The bears deepest existential philosophy has been violently mangled to the core by the callous quip "Toast Broken." Plus it scares the seals.added by: author Tresa on 09/25/2010 - 09.23
Just had to do this, since I have received feedback on commas.
Sentence, "So tell us authors:" technically means that you at Textbrokers are the authors. Putting a comma after "So tell us, authors: What..." now means that you are appealing to the authors to tell you something.
added by: author A-037873 on 09/25/2010 - 09.36
When diving into the icy waters of metaphor, even the most “perceptionally challenged” of bears realizes the nutritional value in a piece of toast, be it whole in form or “broken”.
Granted, with each successive fragmentation to the whole of that “toast”, grasping the cumulative nutritional components becomes a task more suited to an octopus rather than a bear.
With the given parameters being a bear reading underwater and some narrow banded “scientists”, I think the Trix rabbit could solve the mystery here at hand. “Silly scientist, bears can’t read.” They are missing the lobe of their brain that would avail them that pleasure.
So, with your options as the “scientist” in charge being to forego your merit d’academia and become a baker of toast, which by the way has its pitfalls, I hear the yeast involved can cause a painful infection in gender specific editors, my bad, I meant “gender specific scientists”, and maintain a constant “whole toast” environment for all to glean those life sustaining nutrients, or as one of your most prolific observers of environmental reaction (Ivan Pavlov) long ago realized… simplify the parameters involved in your petri dish.
OK, so we are not working with dogs, but on the primal level the results will be the same. Find a way to limit the separation from whole. We are back to the toast, “bear” with me here. Given the options of yes, with a reward, and no, without reward, performance of the “bears” shows a notable rise in positive productivity, hence, a decline in the negative.
But I digress. While I have written very few articles here at Text Broker, I have grasped one thing. The amount of effort put forth here by the editors in the evaluation process is beyond reproach. While it may seem to the “bears” as picayune, I commend you for keeping my “dish” in a neutral balance.
As I take my leave, I would like to interject one thought. The availability for creative, artistic and fun articles is limited here. We are for the most part producing pulp at a production level. If it passes the muster, we get paid, if not… and no amount of explaining steers a writer towards improving, then that.
added by: author kwaggs on 09/25/2010 - 10.07
This underwater bear, yours truly, feels a delightful tingle transverse his spine upon noticing this above-water board's genuine creativity and sense of underwater bear community.
On a secondary note, I also would love the UB TBroker's last humble utterance explained. For I too am a fledgling underwater bear that instinctively waits in earnest for the grown bears' acceptance.
Kudos everyone for having such creative, out-of-the-box thoughts and comments!added by: author WordRaptor on 09/25/2010 - 10.33
I agree with Jupiter, I would definitely like an article about commas. Comma rules are kind of slippery territory. The only comments I ever get from textbroker on my articles are about commas. Not all comma rules are very straightforward. I'm an English teacher and I don't always disagree with textbroker's comma policies, so a posting of what the comma rules actually are would be extremely helpful.added by: author A-042859 on 09/25/2010 - 11.17
Okay. While reading--or attempting to read as a UB sans required frontal lobe, just spewed champagne--I mean "bubbly"--darn it! I meant "coffee"--all over my screen from the overwhelming urge to laugh at these UB protestations--I mean "comments." Unfortunately, it, too, scared the seals. They've canceled their Deluxe, No Expense Spared, No Sight Unseen (well, maybe a few, thankfully, if the mayor's cousin, etc. remembers to close the... ummmm... never mind.
A-051007, "Yeah, You tell 'em about it! You GO, gu-... ummm ... gir-.... uhhhh.... You GO, writer!"
-
WordRaptor, "As quickly as possible." (insert sigh here.)
Jupiter, the comma belongs where it is. Complete sentence followed (or led) by a dependent clause equals a comma at the point of conjunction.
http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/ : follow the L-margin link under "General Writing" then "Punctuation" ... or any other area you'd on which you'd like information.
Also, http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/
Yes, there are more, but these two TB uses as reference info for the authors all the time.
added by: author A-035348 on 09/25/2010 - 03.21
author A-035348,
"Jupiter, the comma belongs where it is. Complete sentence followed (or led) by a dependent clause equals a comma at the point of conjunction."
In the sentence:
""Memphis has a rich and eclectic history of musical geniuses who have called the city home over the years, giving contemporary residents a sense of pride and ownership over much modern music today."
This part is an independent clause:
"Memphis has a rich and eclectic history of musical geniuses who have called the city home over the years,"
This part is neither an independent clause nor a dependent clause:
"...giving contemporary residents a sense of pride and ownership over much modern music today."
(It lacks a subject, so it can't be any flavor of "clause", I don't think.)
It might qualify as a "nonessential phrase", though. I think it might be a nonessential participial phrase? And it needs to be set off with the comma because it's not essential?
added by: author Jupiter on 09/25/2010 - 07.25
*GINORMOUS SIGH*
To all of my friends and underwater bears (some of whom are my friends): Toast Broken has nothing to do with toasted bread. Here follows the true tall tale of Toast Broken.
In days of yor, when animals could speak, a great many of the esteemed Clan o' the Underwater Cave Bear would participate in a long-standing annual ritual known as "Sanctus Toastus" or, the Sacred Toast.
During the ritual, a bear would proceed to submerge him or herself underwater and in bubbly prose, propose a toast. Some shortened it to "proprosing", but that's another story for another day.
Please understand, this ritual was not taken lightly and unlike its counter part "Sanctus Roastus" or the Sacred Roast (performed ad nauseam by hyenas and meerkats), the Sacred Toast was considered a demonstration of true underwater bear sovereignty.
The ritual itself was quite simple. It included beer (it used to only include one "bear" but in some bygone millenium some bear scribe misspelled it and so it became beer, which was a good thing because more bears could participate and beer is better for toasting), bears and a pretty decent amount of ribald bear entertainment (which we shall not go into because this is a mixed audience and we don't want to offend Sonia C). It also included tinfoil hats.
As the full moon proceeded across the night sky, a toast was proposed and made and thus, the Sanctus Toastus ritual was performed. What the toast was about or who would propose it was always voted upon prior to the actual ritual and for our story it is unimportant.
It so happened, that on a fateful evening near the twilight of the reign of the Clan o' the Underwater Cave Bear, the beer flowed like the Ganges (when it wasn't yucky and full of poo) and the toast was simply forgotten and never made. Thus, toast broken.
When all of the bears involved realized that the toast had been broken, there was a great wailing and gnashing of teeth. However, no amount of teeth gnashing could change the fact that the Sacntus Toastus had become Sanctus Toastus Brokus.
In the years that followed, the beer flowed and the toast was broken more and more often until finally due to too much beer, it became forgotten altogether. And now, due in large part to Wikipedia and the Internet (which we all know is the ultimate resource for Toast Broken research) the great Clan o' the Underwater cave Bear Toast has been reborn in a story thus recorded on a blog created by Textus Brokerus (not to be confused with Toastus Brokus ;)
Anyway, now you know the true tall tale of the Toast Broken.
-Nealadded by: author Neal on 09/25/2010 - 10.57
"It lacks a subject, so it can't be any flavor of "clause", I don't think"
Jupiter, click the reference links given; look at both the grammar and the punctuation sites.
added by: author A-035348 on 09/27/2010 - 01.29
Neal...oh Neal....LOL You must be the Master of Ceremonies whenever the author convention is organized!added by: author A-002484 on 09/27/2010 - 08.48
No great philosophical meaning, obviously the underwater bears have been modernized and they were texting. The texting error of the spelling of Text Broker went out to all bears as "Toast Broken" and has remained so ever since, because they are such poor spellers and never bothered to correct it and "add word" to their underwater cell phone data bank.added by: author A-002484 on 09/27/2010 - 09.36
I have been a UB for a while, and it's ok. I get thrown the marshmallows of help by the editors, and am learing to become a ground bear.
Having been a full-time writer for 2 years now, I can assure all the UB's out there of one thing: There are both good and bad clients in this world, just as there are good and bad writers.
One bad review by a client seeking to back out of payment won't destroy a career.
I wonder if there is a way to challenge a client's "poor" rating of a writer's work when TB decides it's a 4 and the client gives a bad comment.
added by: author TGallagher on 09/27/2010 - 09.37
"I'm a 4-star writer and I've never had an article rejected. I have written over 1,000. I recently had an article returned for revision. I did exactly what the client asked for in the revision and he/she later accepted it with a "poor" rating stating that I did NOT do what was asked for, and added the comment that the "the article stinks"."
Don't sweat it. Some of the people are rude but as long as they pay you just laugh it off. I figure if he really hated it so much he wouldn't have accepted it and took the time to mark it as poor. In the end of the day you got your money, which is all that matters.added by: author A-038960 on 09/27/2010 - 11.09
@ A-035348
"Jupiter, click the reference links given; look at both the grammar and the punctuation sites."
I've read that page (and much of the rest of the site) many times before; that's how I know the second part of the sentence can't be a clause of any kind.
It definitely lacks a subject, and the verb isn't really a verb, it seems. "Giving" is serving as a participal, apparently. I'm >95% sure that the comma belongs because it's setting off a nonessential participal phrase.
added by: author Jupiter on 09/27/2010 - 11.54
I do not poo poo in the woods, so I am not a bear! LOL
Commas are something that I goof with when I do. I had college English 101 and 102 and my teacher used to tell me that the original way we learn it is what we will go back to and maybe have trouble with b/c of having put it in our mind that way! Old habits are hard to break are her other words! smilesadded by: author A-027766 on 09/28/2010 - 02.51
*Confident in her truthiness, Jupiter tosses into the brew a pinch of newt testicle with a dash of octopus liver; they're necessary to summon an actual textbroker editor to weigh in on the Great Grammar Smack-Down of 2010 wrt clauses vs phrases. What it all means in terms of commas in the example sentence given above is yet to be determined.*
lol.added by: author Jupiter on 09/29/2010 - 06.21
A broken toast sounds like the work of an inebriated best man at a wedding at which time, the bride becomes a real bear.added by: author A-000540 on 10/01/2010 - 04.26
What I'm confused about is how Textbroker's initial check for plagiarism works. I just got an article sent back due to "segments that coincide with an external source." I would be offended at the suggestion if not for my belief that this MUST be an automated process.
It left me scratching my head. The terms that were coming up as too similar were all proper names of specific locations.....
They were long names, not phrases. They did contain an unusual number of words for a single place. For example, "so-and-so- state national park." The article was a request for top attractions in a certain city.
How exactly can you revise that? It's a very short, low-star rated article. I can't change actual place-names in order to be more creative. And I can't leave out the top attractions in a city when that's what the client wants me to list. I could replace them with smaller-named attractions, but that wouldn't be an accurate article.
If this system is automated like I suspect, then it is seriously flawed. There should be a way to appeal it or point out that using long place-names is not lifting complete phrases from another article.... I do not plagiarize. Of course a name will come up in other articles. This is as silly as sending a revision for the phrase "The Eiffel Tower is in France," because you find it in other articles.
I've never had much of a problem with clients. I've never had an article rejected. I have had a couple revision requests over the last year. In one case it was just a matter of the client wanting more specific details on one area of the topic. In another case I was given additional instructions. I wondered why the client didn't include them in the first place. But working with them and trying your best is the way to get direct-orders. Most clients are friendly and don't mind questions. I got my first few direct-orders after simply asking a question of a client. I believe it lead to the client realizing that I have a sincere desire to write a good article for them.added by: author S. Patrick on 10/16/2010 - 10.27
Speaking as a client, I just wanted to respond to Barbara T. In fact, our in-house writers writes much better than most of the TB authors we have outsourced work to, and they very frequently have to perform extensive edits that could better be described as re-writes. We outsource to Textbroker because we often have hundreds of articles to write, and there's no way that our in-house team can create that much content in the short span of time we allocate to the project. It's easier and more efficient for the editorial team here to rewrite or tweak existing, mediocre articles than to create them from scratch. So, with all due respect, we don't use Textbrokers because our team can't write well. On the contrary, we use Textbrokers because multiple authors who work very cheaply can pump out reams of content quickly -- which we can then clean up.added by: client 2001666 on 10/26/2010 - 02.09
I hope your in-house writers "writes" much better than you do!
Thanks, everyone. This was a very enjoyable thread until client 2001666 brought it to a screeching halt. Perhaps there is something to the "666" lore after all.added by: author Diane M~ on 07/29/2011 - 12.33
I am perfectly aware that I am digging up an old thread, but OUCH! That last comment by client2001666 stung! I've been in a back-and-forth messaging session with one of my clients about this very thing. If the clients will take notice, there is a one to five rating scale. If you want a spectacular article, go with a 5-star rated author. Then you can fire the people who are "cleaning them up" and still have a great piece of work. I don't see the economical gain in pushing out articles to 2 and 3 star authors only to pay a group of individuals to edit them later. Isn't that more time consuming than just doing it correctly in the first place? To each their own, I suppose. Happy Writing!
Erinadded by: author Erin1980 on 09/05/2011 - 10.19
Categories