Vivatic - writing test now open for 2 days only.

jaynemaria

ive only seen writing jobs too,

littlewren

Could you tell me please whereabouts the link for the Writing Test will be once it comes back on the website? Many thanks.

jaynemaria

Well to say im gutted and :mad: is an understatemet One of my articles has been given 0 out of 5 as they said it has been plaguerised and copied straight from the internet. The article took me nearly 2 hours to research and make notes before writing it up :mad: and certainly didnt copy anything.

Guess i can expect the same for the others:mad:

f1re_cr4cker

Did u do any copy and pasting when u were researching is that why? Or did u not provde any website refs?

jaynemaria

No, no copy and pasting at all, The same research and writing as I have done for the others that I have had approved.
Ive read through it and through it and all i can think of was where I described how a solar panel was made up as it was the same terms were used on all the sites and there was no way I could technically describe it without using the same technical terms.

Oh well live and learn:o


Just to add had another approved, two more waiting, be interesting on one of them because it was done on what is my nephews trade, so had first had research available.

rellarips

Hi all,

I've joined specifically to contribute to this thread about Vivatic.

Firstly to jaynemaria, you have provided them with a service and if they believe you to have plagiarised then they should provide details of the site where this plagiarism has come from. Ask them. They claim to know you have plagiarised so they must have the source. I doubt they can supply you with it.

Secondly to all of you who have so far written articles for them. Be warned. I wrote four for them. The first two were approved within 24 hours. I submitted two more. I have had neither of them approved and it is now well into the second week of waiting.

Now, if they decide to approve my work then I will obviously post and let you all know. However, I have a strong feeeling that there is a possibilty of not having this happen.

Along with accusations of plagiarism experienced by another, is it not a good way to get out of paying someone, and getting work for free?

As an aside, I am by profession a Secondary Science teacher; my adult life has been spent writing essays and theses at postgraduate level, writing A Level and GCSE resources, and ditto for Key Stage 3. All of my writing experience is scientific in nature. I have been awarded a 4 out of 5 for my writing by Vivatic, despite choosing scientific subjects. So do not take their rating seriously, please, it's a bit of a joke.

I would like to think that Vivatic will turn out to be an honest company and not a bad egg. We shall see....

geordie_joe

jaynemaria wrote: »

Well to say im gutted and :mad: is an understatemet One of my articles has been given 0 out of 5 as they said it has been plaguerised and copied straight from the internet. The article took me nearly 2 hours to research and make notes before writing it up :mad: and certainly didnt copy anything.

Guess i can expect the same for the others:mad:

There are many sites, and scripts, where you can enter an article and check if it is copied on other web sites. The whole process is automatic, and usually give you a score as a percentage. So it may come back and say your article is copied 25% on other sites.

I expect vivatic use something similar, but in their case, instead of saying your article has been copied on other sites, it says you have copied it from other sites.

They will have a percentage limit, if you score above it then your article is not accepted.

If I were you I would feed my article into one of those sites and see what percentage it is the same as content on other sites.

You should find several sites here

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=plagiarism+checker&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a


EDIT: I forgot to add, if you keep feeding your article into one of these sites for long enough, you may find that vivatic used it anyway and just didn't pay you.

rellarips

geordie_joe wrote: »

EDIT: I forgot to add, if you keep feeding your article into one of these sites for long enough, you may find that vivatic used it anyway and just didn't pay you.

That would be my main concern.

Start out as a new company; build up a reasonable reputation and take on a good sized database of writers.

Once you have say, 2,000, all writing three a week for you, start to reject articles. Keep their fee (£5 to £7.50) and your fee (probably around the same amount, possibly much higher), because you still pass the article on to whoever commissioned it.

If you reject or simply do not approve 10% of the 6,000 articles, that's 600 per week. If each should have been paid £7.50, that will make you £4,500 extra.

Now think about that over the space of one month....

It's imperitive that they prove themselves as reputable if they truly are, because here are the very early signs they may not be:

1. Not always paying for surveys (I have three outstanding from over one month ago, I am not hopeful to see that money).
2. Rejecting work outright (not asking for improvements).
3. Simply not approving work.

Am I pessimistic? Possibly a little too much. Am I realistically suspicious? I think I personally have a right to be, until proven otherwise.

I'm keeping my eye firmly on this thread!

geordie_joe

rellarips wrote: »

Am I pessimistic? Possibly a little too much. Am I realistically suspicious? I think I personally have a right to be, until proven otherwise.

I'm keeping my eye firmly on this thread!

I think you are right to be pessimistic, there are far too many sites out there that are out to rip people off.

On the other hand, there are also people who who write small bits that have been written on other sites. Then claim they did not copy stuff, and they are completely right, they did not copy anything. But software is not smart, it can't work out if something is copied, just if something similar is on another site.

As an example, if I posted in here that

"The dog peed on the mat"

then submitted it to a site like vivatic and they fed it into there software to see if I had copied it from another site, it would come up with loads of sites that contained the words

"the dog sat on the mat" and say what I had written was 5/6 copied, because 5 out of 6 words I had written were also on those sites.

The problem really shows up when people write articles that must contain factual information. Suppose you are asked to write an article about penicillin, in the first sentence you want to say who discovered it. But how many ways can you form that sentence?

No matter how you phrase it, that phrase has probably been written on many web sites. The software can't tell if you went to those sites and copied the phrase, or if you just made it up in your head. All it can do is say that phrase has already been used on another web site, and the people using it assume you copied it.

I too will be keeping an eye on this thread. Mainly because I think vivatic is a very good site, but I suspect they are relying on software, that can't think, to do their thinking for them.

What I would really love to see, is someone who has had an article rejected for copying, post it in here so everyone can feed it into a web site and see how much the software reported was copied.

I'm sure it would help people not make the same mistakes again. And I'm sure a lot of those "mistakes" are writing facts. Because there are only so many ways you can write facts, so you are bound to have the same words in your sentence as everybody else.

Bmth100

I've had around three articles approved; the first took just 3 hours and the other couple took a little longer, but around a day or two. My other three I've been waiting for approval about 7 days so far. Maybe it's the bank holiday causing a backlog.. maybe..