Complaint Review: Need an Article - I736 W Sherdian Ave Idaho

Based on your credentials you don't have the authority to tell anyone if they are a "real" writer or not.

Textbroker and Demand Studios? Really? Those, along with NAA, are the sites you deem to be the draw for "real" writers?

This shows your lack of experience in freelance writing, thus blowing your argument out of the water.

"Real" writers don't work for peanuts. NAA, Textbroker, and Demand Studio all pay peanuts.

When you get a real writing job then you will be qualified to present a knowledgeable response here.

I wrote for NAA when I was just starting out but if you are a serious writer don't waste your time.

The extremely low pay is a slap in the face.

They want all the talent and all the expertise but they don't want to pay for it.

I get 5 and 6 times more, on the average, for the same amount of work with other companies.

I like Scott, but he seems to be a bit of a hot head and when that kicks in, his professionalism goes right out the window.

I like Nancy; never had a problem with her.

I didn't have much interaction with Angie while I was there, but she doesn't know nearly as much as she thinks she does. I have seen her butcher pieces.

Robbie is a nightmare. That is the truly unprofessional one in the bunch. She acts like she doesn't like men - or anyone for that matter. My dealings with her left the impression that she is a scatterbrain and pretty full of herself. But that is just the impression that she gave me. I tried to avoid her as much as possible. She is not a nice person - at least to me anyway. For that matter, to several people I know who also worked there.

I have a friend who worked there and left because Robbie was such a cruel bully to her.

There are other better paying, more professional services out there. Don't waste your time. Go with a company that appreciates your talent, skill, and expertise - by paying you for it.

This has been up for a long time and I didn't respond initially due to a load of work. I've worked for several sites and hard copy magazines as a freelancer. I also freelance at NAA. The site does offer lower pay than some of the other work I do, but then, I choose to go there. One of the biggest differences at NAA is that I can PM the editing staff when there is a problem. I'm retired, so I don't earn a living there, but it does supply me with extra money for my vices with little stress. I have regular customers and most of the time, they ask the articles go directly to them without editing. As for the remark that the writers are uneducated---I have a BS and MS with a year toward my doctorite--several professional classes (I was a financial planner and a stockbroker for 23 years and a teacher for nine)---and write well enough to have a series of articles in a national publication.

We are freelancers. If the client doesn't accept our work, we don't get paid. I have written a querry to a magazine outlining a "special" and was turned down because they use onstaff, not contracters. Four months later, my idea was published by the magazine and it followed my outline. I have submitted a few rejections in my day and didn't expect payment because the articles weren't used. In two instances, I refuse to write articles for a company--one being a national magazine, because of slow payment--180 days after publication. NAA pays me every Friday. There's no frustration, no billing and it's a pleasant place to work.

I don't know the quality of Chanel's work, but if another writer had to complete it, there should be no pay. In my "previous" life, no matter how long I "schmoozed" a client, if I didn't complete the sale, I wasn't paid. That's the life of an independent contractor. Get over it or get out of the business. If you've found another place that pays more and is less stressful. Good for you. I'm sorry your experience was so bad, but don't knock those who don't share your same belief. I don't need someone to "save me" from a bad employer. I was an attractive woman in a man's job long before there were sexual harassment suits or women were allowed in the good ole' boy club. I'm pretty tough and also pretty smart. You were hurt and simply wanted to hurt back. You hide your true identity behind a penname and yet accuse someone with their business's real name. Your income is not affected and NOBODY knows who you are if you apply for another job. That's seriously unfair. BTW, Scott didn't "put me up to this," I am my own person and do what I d*** well please. That's why it's so late in coming.

You can try to hide the facts, but the truth is what it is. I hope that Scott will grow and move on with some sort of grace......

This is what Scott wrote and it ends the story. Yes she was paid and it was overdue. Please tell your team to stop posting things that smear a writer, which worked hard for you. You should do the same.

************Below is what the owner of this business wrote.

What kind of person agrees to a confidentiality and privacy agreement prior to
working with you... and then turns around and breaks it because they think you
owe them $60.



I mean that is what she's wanting. $60 dollars!



Actually, our calculations came out to be about $20 she had coming. I know the
economy has some people riled up. But you don't sell your soul to the devil for
the price of the average cell phone bill.

The articles in question were not accepted and the jobs had to be reopened so other writers could take them. Scott ended up paying her anyway just to end this debacle. Now he has paid for those jobs twice.

Before anyone accuses me of being on Scott's or Chanel's side let it be known that I am commenting as a fan of ROR and as a writer.

I frequently look at ROR's Latest Reports to understand how consumers are feeling.  I have posted a complaint or two here myself and have rebutted complaints that I find interesting.  To me ROR is the pulse of consumer attitude toward businesses.

My husband is a freelance writer and I aspire to contract as one myself.  I have very little experience in the writing industry however I am often encouraged by others to pursue a career in this field.

Working with my husband I have witnessed the ups and downs of this business.  He has been ripped off more than once.  He has been underpaid plenty of times.  Often, getting paid is like pulling teeth.  For these reasons this debate intrigues me.

First of all,  was Chanel's work accepted? If so, pay her.  

Scott,  I was so impressed reading the comments made by your current writers. It appears that your site is offering a service like no other, quick turnaround at a fair price.  As I read on, not so impressed.  Yes, you are helping people earn an honest living in tough economic times however, your unprofessionalism is appalling.  A professional response to Chanel's report would have gone a long way.  And by the way,  rip off reports cannot be removed that's why they are so damaging.  You should have heeded Chanel's warning.

So, as an aspiring writer who is seeking employment as an Independent Contractor I'd like some advice.   Which sites are offering more than $5 per article?  Are they paying consistently like NeedAnArticle.com does?  Is there plenty of work?

If you were me, would you suggest I begin my freelance writing career with NeedAnAnrticle.com? 

Anybody?

×

1 / 0

❮ ❯

I wanted to add that I am a strong supporter of this company and anyone who gets regular paychecks from them knows that they are reputable. The owner of the company is available by phone or email to help explain (in detail) the specifics of various job assignments and to answer questions. Clearly, he cares about his writers and the proofreaders and other administrative staff have always communicated to me honestly and openly.

I remain a grateful employee of a company which has allowed us to have some flexibility in our very tight budget while also giving me the opportunity to stay home.

I just wanted to say that I did get paid from Scott last night.

I hope that the other writers won't ever have to go through this situation, especially with the abuse and threats. And I'm sorry for the ex NAA writers who did go through this. I'm glad that they did have the courage to speak out against this.

No matter what freelance writing company you work for, it can happen. Hopefully this will help create an awareness for all freelance writers and jobs. 

We can all move past this and learn from this experience.

Since you are not going to read Scott's posts, I thought I might quote one for you:


"When I saw this report, I gave her the choice to remove it. I even called her on the phone and told her flat out that I did not want trouble; and even offered to go ahead and pay her for what she think I owed her. (Even though we can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that NONE of the work she had submitted was used - each job was reopened). I even apologized if I had offended her. After ending the call and providing my number to call me and discuss it, I get an email response back from her where she basically lays out the rules and conditions for getting it removed."


As you can see, he tried to pay her, but Chanel wants to keep this going. I'm officially tired of this, and now I have a project to finish for the company I work for, and will continue to work for. If you'll excuse me.

P.S.

Chanela: You started a sentence with and.

I am surprised that freelance writers think they should still get paid for articles that are rejected. None of the clients got any of the article that Chanel claims she is owed for. SHE STILL OWNS THEM! She can do with them as she likes.

Would the people saying she should still be paid would also expect a person should still pay for products that are not acceptable and returned to the seller? No, not likely. But it is sure expected here.

Maybe Chanel should offer those same rejected articles for sale in the same condition they were submitted and see what happens.

My name is Bianca Raven and I am a fulltime Australian freelance writer. I make my entire living by selling my writing to various publications and private clients around the world.

I've had a NAA writer account since November 2008. It never was and never will be my primary source of freelance writing income, however, it can sometimes be a handy source to help top up my income on weeks when there are bills due and checks haven't arrived on time.

While I don't endorse the idea of professional writers working to generate 'quality' articles at $5 per 550 words, it can be a great way for newer, less experienced writers to learn a little about article format, following client specifications, meeting deadlines and sticking to the rules.

Any half-way decent writer can turn in a 550 word article and earn $5 on NAA. Do this a few times a day and it can help to top up your income by the end of the week. You'll be paid on time every Friday evening via PayPal.

Scott, Nance and Angie are usually very accepting, helpful and understanding of writer's needs and wishes. Communicate with them if you have an issue. They'll work with you to sort it out.

However, if you can't turn in a half-way decent article and the client doesn't accept it or asks you to rewrite it to match their specifications, then YOU need to rewrite it before you demand payment for a job that wasn't completed fully in the first instance.

This is just an unprofessional and childish attack from someone who isn't adult enough to take responsibility for her own standard of work.

I'm glad that someone else has come out and spoke about NAA's devious practices. Thank you Hancock!

Now let's take a look at this...

Go to http://www.magicofmakingup.com/ and http://www.nicheblueprint.com/go.html.

Then, go to www.needanarticle.com.

Eerily similar or what?

It makes no sense!

I mean out of the word-work, we are now being slammed, beaten down and kicked in the face here. It's a feeding frenzy now. It is CRAZY!

It reminds me of piranhas, or sharks searching for meat. Once they find it, they'll rip everything down to the bone - and probably eat the bone too.

I am sure many of would love to go into our domain registrar and just flip the switch and wouldn't think twice about it. You'd probably laugh, or even gossip about it with your friends.

But the funny thing is... NONE of you had one word to say 2 days ago, or the day before that, or even one week ago.  So why all of a sudden?  Certainly, ROR was a site that you were well aware of before.

I mean the guy who said he ended up 'homeless' because of us... IS JUST NOW coming onto ROR to declare this? Is he for real? Why did I not get an email, or phone call from this person? My name, email and phone number are on the site and easy to find. Only NOW is he making a big deal out of this. Do you see how shallow and ridiculous this is?

That is just the point here. You hung out like a predator and saw an opportunity and STRUCK! . You could care less about morals or this writer, or that writer - YOU need this drama in your life - it is what you live for; It is human nature, and it is unfortunate.

To prove my point that you don't care. So far, we have had several who have come on here an have vehemently disagreed with you. And have stated that Need An Article is how they pay their bills. They did this yes, in response to me informing them that we were being bashed here on ROR. But oddly, none of that has an bearing with you. NO! We are bad and need to go away right now.  We need to be exposed!! 'A RIP off report was needed to save all writers!!' 'We are scamming writers left and right, bla bla bla.'

Okay, let's say I shut the doors right now without notice. Would that make you happy? I am sure it would. AND you wouldn't give a hoot at how many people this could affect negatively. All you people care about is the FIX you get here. It is sick!

So what is the lesser evil here?

Like I said, WHERE were you a week ago informing the world about us here in ROR? Get a life!

Scott, anyone can easily start their own website. I think you need to take your ego down a few notches. You're not the only person in the world who's created a site for freelance writers. I could tomorrow and I could make a BETTER business.

What are your credentials? Do you have Journalism or English degree? Do you even hold a BUSINESS degree? Have you ever written in your life? Your typos and misspellings make your business more of a joke. And you're name calling is reminscent of elementary school bullies.

And you're just setting yourself to look crazier by name calling those who are standing up for me. I don't even know most of the people that have left a comment on here. I'm sorry that you need a backbone by rallying your writers to fight against me.

This report is going to stay up on here. No one has claimed that you put it up. It really doesn't matter who put it up.

And writers: This is really none of your business. If Scott respects "privacy" so much, why can't he respect my own? Instead, he decided to drag other people into our business. I didn't ask anyone to write rebuttals for me, Scott Foster did because he's so insecure about himself. Obviously, I ticked off his insecurities.

The writers have no clue what I'm going through until they go through it themselves...Don't worry, your day is coming.

I'm doing this to make people aware of shady business practices. This could happen at any freelance writing job site. This just happened to be the place.

I accepted criticism. I am AWARE of the deadlines. I let Scott and the staff know that I couldn't commit to the deadlines. Obviously, the writers can't read or write. To me, he just picks anyone to write for them. They probably end up picking people out of a hat. Even if they hate their work, they keep them around for a while and let the proof readers suffer. If that's even the case.

I did love working for NAA. I wish they were open and honest with me. Why did they leave me hanging on since December is beyond me. Other companies would drop you if you had so many rewrites or rejections.

I'm sorry that this situation had to blow out of control. I'm sorry I had to learn Scott Foster's true nature. Warning to his writers: Don't get on his bad side.

Instead of name calling, Googling yourself, and swarming the forums, why don't you learn from this lesson? I have, now it's time for you to move on.

Let me explain something to the owner of this business. I don't know the original poster and I have never contracted with you. I didn't know you or your company from a can of paint until I typed needanarticle.com into google. I'm not going to bother reading your tit-for-tat responses as they are formatted in a way which is difficult to follow. Plus, they're largely pointless. I am in fact going to continue to come back and reply until the issue does get resolved.

A portion of your contractors do not appear to be very educated as they recite their poorly worded praises chocked full of grammatical errors. This is not meant to be an attack on all contractors, just a remark on how hypocritical some are. You admit yourself that you have not paid this contractor. You didn't pay her before she wrote on rip off report about www.needanarticle.com. What else was she supposed to do? Besides contacting the IRS, Department of Labor, Attorney General and the BBB, what other recourse does a contractor have against non-payment for services rendered. You seem to forget that just because you created a contract that doesn't mean that it is enforceable. By continuing not to pay her, you look like a fool, like a clown, like a real boob. Do you get it now? Pay what you owe. You are showing yourself to be a hypocrite and an unethical business person. Your business has succeeded only because you have a network of contractors. They provide services. You're supposed to pay them. By deflecting the real issue, you can continue pat yourself on the back for not giving in.

The issue is that you owe a contractor for services rendered. Am I speaking Swahili? Is this some inane concept you've never heard of before? I'll tell you what the issue is to you. You don't like not being in control. You're used to being a big man who calls all the shots, but here you can't do that. You can't squash the spirits of your current and ex contractors nor can you edit their words. That is eating you up inside. Instead of 'maning up', swallowing your pride and resolving this issue, you continue draw out this issue. This issue will not die easily. It will, however, resolve itself when you PAY. Pay what you owe or expect to have negative repercussions.

First of all, I would like to say that calling Chanels supporters scumbags and tools is pretty contradictory. So, Scott Foster and his goons can comment on how great he and his company is, but sweet Chanel has people that are backing her have decided to post a rebuttal then it is World War III.

How dare you! I am Scott Foster! I pay my writers pennies and peanuts or should I say a nice Big Mac with a large coke for the win! Stop the nonsense. Anyway, I used to work for this guy back in April of 2009. I literally begged this guy for my job back. Everything was sunshine and lollipops in the beginning (it always is!).

All of a sudden I keep getting alerts from Scotts main booty kisser Nancy. She was talking about my articles were poor and they need a ton of work. Granted, I wrote 227 articles within a months time I was there.

I got praise from almost all of my clients for my work, but my work must have sucked! I got paid for this poor work. If someone thinks your work is poor, why are they paying you? I got paid every Friday just like everyone else. The last few weeks I was with NAA I began to get rewrites.

I didnt get many rewrites and all of a sudden there are piling up. I wrote 17 articles this one day and I got 9 of them back. I had personal problems and these people do not care about their writers. Your mother died? I dont care, this article about horse pee needs to be done by 5:00 p.m. Do it now!

Hmm, my mother is on her deathbed or write a stupid article about lobsters? That is a tough decision! I didnt get paid for the work I did the same week. I thought there was a glitch in the system and Nancy said some ridiculous crap that I will post later on.

I was basically fired for no reason whatsoever. Scott and his goons are unprofessional and unethical. Freelance writers are expendable to them and as long as they have their content they are happy. I had to write a rebuttal because I was in the same situation and I felt like a fool if I didnt give my two cents.

I just checked my emails and I dont have the emails from Nancy. I was let go because I had a batch of articles (seven articles about stock photos) and I failed to follow instructions. I couldnt do another batch of 10 articles about bicycles and I even contacted the client about this and he said it was fine and he would do the articles himself.

Nancy said that my writing was not that good and I wasnt fit to be with NAA. Scott Foster loves to promote professionalism and all that jazz, but he and his proofreaders (I am talking to you, Nancy!) are far from being professionals. I was let go over trivial, petty stuff. I failed to follow instructions ONCE.

My writing was so poor that they paid me for it! If you accept someones work that means you think it is good and you MUST PAY THEM. I was fired from NAA and I was homeless because of this. I told them both about my situation.

I was going to be homeless and they didnt care. The articles come first, not our employees. It is disgusting that Scott Foster has brainwashed his writers to defend him over $60 like a little Catholic schoolgirl fighting over Girl Scout cookies at recess. NAA should be ashamed of themselves. NAA will let you go just to let you go.

If this was no big deal, Scott and it is over $60 (now $20, he is not playing by the rules! You are not even abiding by your own contract!) Why are you fighting Chanel so harshly? Pay the lady her money and get it over with. The sad part about this is I wanted to keep working for this company.

I now make six times as much money per article than I did while I was working for the proclaimed best content site on the Internet! $5 an article? You might as well work at McDonalds! The minimum I work per article is $25 and I can make a real living.

NAA, you are not doing yourself any favors by tricking your writers to slander a fellow writer because she was not paid for the work she did. If any of you were in this same situation, you wouldn't be acting like bloodthirsty sharks.

You would be on this website demanding your money. Scott Foster and your sidekick Nancy should both be taken to court. Scott Foster, you are a disgrace to the freelance writing community. Your whole website is a joke and you are a joke.

The only person laying the smackdown on anybody is the Rock, not you. Get over yourself and your ego. I can name 10 other people that are making more money than you in the same profession you are in. Dont get too cute.

No wonder freelancing writing has such a bad reputation. The people like Scott Foster and his company will have writers hide in foxholes and never emerge again. Chanel, I will do whatever it takes to help you.

This is coming from a person that wrote 10 or more articles in a month in a half for this guy and I was kicked to the curb because one of the proofreaders had PMS. Chanel, lets win this battle!

P.S. Her name is Nance not Nancy but who cares...She is as messed up in the head as Scott is.

First of all, I would like to say that calling Chanels supporters scumbags and tools is pretty contradictory. So, Scott Foster and his goons can comment on how great he and his company is, but sweet Chanel has people that are backing her have decided to post a rebuttal then it is World War III.

How dare you! I am Scott Foster! I pay my writers pennies and peanuts or should I say a nice Big Mac with a large coke for the win! Stop the nonsense. Anyway, I used to work for this guy back in April of 2009. I literally begged this guy for my job back. Everything was sunshine and lollipops in the beginning (it always is!).

All of a sudden I keep getting alerts from Scotts main booty kisser Nancy. She was talking about my articles were poor and they need a ton of work. Granted, I wrote 227 articles within a months time I was there.

I got praise from almost all of my clients for my work, but my work must have sucked! I got paid for this poor work. If someone thinks your work is poor, why are they paying you? I got paid every Friday just like everyone else. The last few weeks I was with NAA I began to get rewrites.

I didnt get many rewrites and all of a sudden there are piling up. I wrote 17 articles this one day and I got 9 of them back. I had personal problems and these people do not care about their writers. Your mother died? I dont care, this article about horse pee needs to be done by 5:00 p.m. Do it now!

Hmm, my mother is on her deathbed or write a stupid article about lobsters? That is a tough decision! I didnt get paid for the work I did the same week. I thought there was a glitch in the system and Nancy said some ridiculous crap that I will post later on.

I was basically fired for no reason whatsoever. Scott and his goons are unprofessional and unethical. Freelance writers are expendable to them and as long as they have their content they are happy. I had to write a rebuttal because I was in the same situation and I felt like a fool if I didnt give my two cents.

I just checked my emails and I dont have the emails from Nancy. I was let go because I had a batch of articles (seven articles about stock photos) and I failed to follow instructions. I couldnt do another batch of 10 articles about bicycles and I even contacted the client about this and he said it was fine and he would do the articles himself.

Nancy said that my writing was not that good and I wasnt fit to be with NAA. Scott Foster loves to promote professionalism and all that jazz, but he and his proofreaders (I am talking to you, Nancy!) are far from being professionals. I was let go over trivial, petty stuff. I failed to follow instructions ONCE.

My writing was so poor that they paid me for it! If you accept someones work that means you think it is good and you MUST PAY THEM. I was fired from NAA and I was homeless because of this. I told them both about my situation.

I was going to be homeless and they didnt care. The articles come first, not our employees. It is disgusting that Scott Foster has brainwashed his writers to defend him over $60 like a little Catholic schoolgirl fighting over Girl Scout cookies at recess. NAA should be ashamed of themselves. NAA will let you go just to let you go.

If this was no big deal, Scott and it is over $60 (now $20, he is not playing by the rules! You are not even abiding by your own contract!) Why are you fighting Chanel so harshly? Pay the lady her money and get it over with. The sad part about this is I wanted to keep working for this company.

I now make six times as much money per article than I did while I was working for the proclaimed best content site on the Internet! $5 an article? You might as well work at McDonalds! The minimum I work per article is $25 and I can make a real living.

NAA, you are not doing yourself any favors by tricking your writers to slander a fellow writer because she was not paid for the work she did. If any of you were in this same situation, you wouldn't be acting like bloodthirsty sharks.

You would be on this website demanding your money. Scott Foster and your sidekick Nancy should both be taken to court. Scott Foster, you are a disgrace to the freelance writing community. Your whole website is a joke and you are a joke.

The only person laying the smackdown on anybody is the Rock, not you. Get over yourself and your ego. I can name 10 other people that are making more money than you in the same profession you are in. Dont get too cute.

No wonder freelancing writing has such a bad reputation. The people like Scott Foster and his company will have writers hide in foxholes and never emerge again. Chanel, I will do whatever it takes to help you.

This is coming from a person that wrote 10 or more articles in a month in a half for this guy and I was kicked to the curb because one of the proofreaders had PMS. Chanel, lets win this battle!

P.S. Her name is Nance not Nancy but who cares...She is as messed up in the head as Scott is.

Scott,

This should be on Chanel's terms...not yours. You owe her money and you should have cooperated in relation to getting this post removed but it's not going to happen.

I would like to restate:

That I did not come onto ROR here and create this post.

As a matter of fact; I have NEVER in the 4 years I have been running the site, had to come here and do this. That ought to shut up the people here who keep saying "What's to stop him from doing this to the rest of the NAA writers" The 'fake' concern you are trying to show is a smoke screen for permission to sit here and simply  smear me and my company because you likely have nothing else better to do. Actually, I think you like doing this.

Btw,  I believe most of these replies are from people over at workplacelikehome.com reading a post that another writer in our site (Who basically decided to stab us in the back) who actually took/stole/ RIPPED OFF our copyrighted material and illegally posted it without permission there. Not to mention, stupidly trampled all over our confidentiality and privacy agreement in doing so. Golly! The sheer lack of brains being displayed here is enough to make anyone hurl.

So STWRITER picks it up - perhaps not knowing that he/she is actually aiding someone who has committed fraud - passing around something she has no right passing around. If you people want to give the impression that you actually have a brain in that head of yours, then I suggest you mind your own businesses and back off! There is illegal activity going on here with the people you are trying to defend.

I would like to restate:

That I did not come onto ROR here and create this post.

As a matter of fact; I have NEVER in the 4 years I have been running the site, had to come here and do this. That ought to shut up the people here who keep saying "What's to stop him from doing this to the rest of the NAA writers" The 'fake' concern you are trying to show is a smoke screen for permission to sit here and simply  smear me and my company because you likely have nothing else better to do. Actually, I think you like doing this.

Btw,  I believe most of these replies are from people over at workplacelikehome.com reading a post that another writer in our site (Who basically decided to stab us in the back) who actually took/stole/ RIPPED OFF our copyrighted material and illegally posted it without permission there. Not to mention, stupidly trampled all over our confidentiality and privacy agreement in doing so. Golly! The sheer lack of brains being displayed here is enough to make anyone hurl.

So STWRITER picks it up - perhaps not knowing that he/she is actually aiding someone who has committed fraud - passing around something she has no right passing around. If you people want to give the impression that you actually have a brain in that head of yours, then I suggest you mind your own businesses and back off! There is illegal activity going on here with the people you are trying to defend.

When a prospective client goes to your ill run and designed web site, they are hit with how your writers are compared to the food that you eat. To make matters worse, now clients see you do not always pay your writers. Then you come over here and talk about how everything must be compared to a cell phone bill. How about talking about how you stole your writers earnings? That would be in keeping with the topic at hand.

 Your style is like circus and it not without reasoning, because so is your web site. When you try to click off your awful web site it begs you to stay; it will not let you leave. It is like one huge virus of a thing.  It is a maze of dangers for people that value high quality writers, which are paid and treated fairly.

Sure, you will have some people on here that are singing your praises. I mean, when you tell them they have been attacked you rally the call. The truth is YOU are the only one attacking and manipulating your writers. Who hear does not want to get paid today? If you were not paid or told that your money was in trouble what do you think would happen? I know the word think is strong, but take it for what it is.

You should pay everyone that works for you for the service that they provided. No one cares to hear about the cost of a cell phone bill, much less what you eat. When you are in business you have to consider the ramification of each decision, and work hard for growth.  There is no need in name calling here.

 A business will dictate that you pay people what they are owed.  You need to pay this woman what she is owed and maybe think about cleaning up your site. You should treat people with some respect and, perhaps, take a business class.  I think it would be a better investment for your business than running around acting like it is a privilege to work for free. It is illegal; I do not see any volunteer writers here.

You might get some ideas on how to operate a business successfully, from a class. It is better than complaining. In four years Blah..it looks like you are saying it took you four years to figure out how NOT to pay a writer and mud sling all at the same time. Great job and I am sure it cost you less than a bye one get one free pizza. In four years, you should have learned how to invest, leverage and work for continued growth. Pay this lady and move on.

Below is YOUR Statements (Copy and Paste).  Looking to Smack a writer down? How about just pay one.

Want to defend NAA? Here's your chance. 2010/02/15
Dear NAA team! When someone attacks you, the natural response is to defend yourself.
Recently, we had a small altercation with a writer here who attempted to strong arm us into submission. It was not pretty to say the least.
Yes, that's right! We are now going to grace the halls of Search engine archives for years to come because posts CAN'T removed on Rip off report.
Anyway, because this was not only an attack on me personally, but it was also an attack on the company that you receive a paycheck from. I think it is safe to say it was an attack on you, too.
I don't know about you! But when someone tries to damage the very thing that produces money for bills and food on the table, I will defend it with a passion!
It was unfortunate that this former writer stooped this low. But I am not going to stand by for one minute and let one's 'stoopyness' tarnish what I have poured my life into for nearly 35,000 hrs. (4 years) :)
Want to lend a few words?
Well, by all means... I give you the floor.
Be nice now ;)
Let the 'smack down' be smacked down! Scott

(Copy and Paste from YOUR Site)

Here's how it works: For a small monthly fee of $14.97 (Likely going up!) $9.95 today (about the cost of a cup of coffee per day) I'll let you have complete, uninterrupted access to my secret Automated system I use for my own article writing needs.

I have personally hand-picked a select team of article writing warriors that are standing by to write articles for about the cost of a Big-mac and a coke! Actually, a Big-mac value meal is more! Priced around $6.00+ after tax. And to purchase a small article (Up to 550 words) in the system is $5.52

The memo posted that was posted is very telling. I held my tongue a bit because it appeared as if the owner had made a few mistakes, but now it is obvious that he is an unethical person who has no business sense. To all the 'employees' posting replies about how their work is of a high caliber, please spell check your replies. Even the 'well-educated' owner has a typo in the title of one of his responses. I'm not trying to be petty, but it looks pretty ridiculous to state that the owner of the company in question to has good reason to withhold payment for a lack of quality work. Try putting that same magnifying lens on yourself if and when you have the same issues regarding non payment for services rendered.

Even so, the majority of these responses are off topic. I admit, I wrote about things which are not important to the issue at hand. See how easy it is to admit when you've been wrong? I didn't burst into flames. The real issue is that this independent contractor has not been paid as agreed. Any real business person knows that they cannot write a contract and deem it as enforceable simply because they said so. There are laws in the United States, which is where this company is based. Those laws must be complied with to make a contract enforceable. That's in Business 101. Then there's damage control. You know, not letting a minor issue escalate out of control. Clients will see this exchange. Existing clients will be upset because the owner is spending valuable time encouraging contractors to get involved in a payment issue while they are waiting for orders. Potential clients will question the owner's ethics. A percentage of these will be turned off from doing business with this company. Some contractors may think that they have a vested sake in this payment dispute, but they are missing the real issue.

This company did NOT pay one of their contractors as agreed. What is so hard to understand about this? Who gives a flying fox if you've written for them for two years and have never needed to re-write an article. Were you paid as agreed? Right, that's what I thought. A contractor for needanarticle.com was NOT paid. And to Michael Hamilton - you, sir, are a pompous a*s. Supposedly you know the intricate workings of this business well enough to say that the original poster doesn't deserve to be paid as agreed? What planet do you live on? Businesses have something called operating costs. A business that sells articles is going to have to pay editors. The work she completed was accepted irregardless of quality. The issue with payment apparently did not become an issue until after the original poster ended her contract with the company. See how I keep throwing in the words 'independent contractor', 'contracted' and 'services rendered' in? That's because it is totally different from an employee-employer relationship. Could you imagine an employee quitting his or her job, then having payment held so that 'an assessment of the damage' could be done? That employer would be in court quicker than his/her head could spin. But unethical businesses such as www.needanarticle.com count on their contractors not having the resources to haul them into court.

The more I write about this the more angry I get. How dare these contractors support a business model that withholds payment for whatever reason they deem as appropriate? Really, shame on you all. You all know that your ulterior motive is to keep the checks rolling into your bank account with no concern of whose doesn't. The business owner is doing a treat job by keeping this tennis match up. Soon, this will be on page one of google when anyone searches for his business. Then he'll have some real 'spaining to do, Lucy. Haha, I couldn't resist that one. To the original poster, good luck dealing with this business school drop-out. Please do contact the IRS and the Department of Labor in his state, as well as the Attorney General. They may not get directly involved, but they will offer helpful information.

I was accepted to work for NAA in 2009. I did log in to the site, perused the available work, and accepted a few assignments. They were accepted without revisions, but I just could not keep working for the price of a big mac and a coke. There are a number of other content outlets that pay far better than NAA.

What really turned me away from NAA was not just the pay, but the attitude on the website. NAA does not seem to respect its writers at all. NAA brags about how poorly writers are paid, and this is not a website I would ever list on a resume. I can only imagine if a serious and reputable employer were to visit this website, knowing I was an employee here. How embarrassing. For ME, that I used to work there. As far as the owner of the company goes, he seems to have absolutely no limits to shaming himself publicly, so I do not think he is capable of being embarrassed.

Another former writer for NAA told me about this report, and I had to add my comments as an employee. While I can still log in there and work, I will never do so again after reading this. This company is far worse than I thought they were.

I thought NAA was just a cheesy low-rent content mill that treated its writers like cow dung. Oh no, it is so much more than that. It is a cheesy low-rent content mill that treats its writers like cow dung AND refuses to pay them for the privilege of doing so.

I know several other writers who briefly worked there and I will be sure to let them know about this report.

I would like to point out that I did not come onto ROR here and create this post.

As a matter of fact. I have NEVER in the 4 years I have been running the site, had to come here and do this. That ought to shut up the people here who keep saying "What's to stop him from doing this to the rest of the NAA writers" The 'fake' concern you have is a smoke screen, so you can sit here and simply  smear me and my company because you likely have nothing else better to do. Actually, I think you like doing this.

The author of the post  (Chanel Adams - formerly a writer here at Need An Article) mad this post.

And she has since rallied a few of her friends to come to her aid and make comments about something that they themselves have nothing to do with, or know nothing about.

I would like everyone to look at her opening sentence in her last message:

"If he wants me to respect NAA's privacy, then why is he telling him about my business?" 

I believe she meant to say: "If he wants me to respect NAA's privacy, then why did he inform his writing team about this public report I posted here, which I think violated my privacy"

Surely this is what she wanted to convey. Please note, this was the sort of thing our proofers dealt with, and more frequently as she went along - they basically got tired of it!

The typo of inserting "him" instead of "them" is normal and we are happy to correct such things.

But the absence of logic, and grasp of reason is not a 'skill-set' we care to subject clients to.

Think about it!

Here is a post on a site that indexes pages into Google faster than you can blink an eye! She was the creator of the post; she posted private correspondences that took place between her and us. AND now comes back in a rebuttal and complains about her privacy being violated? What is she smoking?

If she wanted to keep this private, then WHY MAKE THE POST? Certainly, if you are going to try your hand at freelance writing and client fulfillment, then you better have reasoning abilities. 

This whole thing is one big display and lack sound reasoning. Hey, if you want to hire her as a writer - be my guest!

If Chanel doesn't like dirt in her face, then she should learn not to sling mud at others. Or at least weigh the cost before slinging.

Bashing a company or someone in a PUBLIC setting is one of the lowest things you can do in my opinion. I mean who wouldn't retaliate?

If you throw a swing at someone then expect a swing back. Where is the common sense here?

The logic being used in her and her friends' replies is totally one-sided. It is very bizarre because WE ARE the ones who were attacked. So if any "COACHING" is taking place... Chanel is the head coach of the barrage of replies to the positives here.

Btw,  I believe most of these replies are from people over at workplacelikehome.com reading a post that another writer in our site (Who basically decided to stab us in the back) and actually took/stole our copyrighted material and illegally posted it without permission there. Not to mention stupidly trampled all over our confidentiality agreement in doing so. Golly! The sheer lack of brains is driving me insane!

So STWRITER picks it up - perhaps not knowing that he/she is actually aiding someone who has committed fraud - passing around something she has no right passing around. If you people want to give the impression that you actually have a brain in that head of yours, then I suggest you mind your own businesses and back off! There is illegal activity going on here with the people you associate with.

And yes, Chanel,  if you attack the site, YOU are attacking the livelihood of other people. Attempting to make me out to be a coward, or some idiot for making the very people who work her aware is their RIGHT TO KNOW.

Once again, you came out into a public setting AND disclosed confidential information while under a legal contract with us and totally broke the rules of diplomacy. And you ended your post with a 'kick in the face' approach and stated nonfactual information.

To me, it was like declaring war. You also broke the TOS of ROR by doing that. Go back and read them and you will see.

When I saw this report, I gave her the choice to remove it. I even called her on the phone and told her flat out that I did not want trouble; and even offered to go ahead and pay her for what she thought I owed her. (Even though we can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that NONE of the work she had submitted was used - each job was reopened). I even apologized if I had offended her. After ending the call and providing my number to call me and discuss it, I get an email response back from her where she basically lays out the rules and conditions for getting it removed.

I was appalled! Because she actually had the audacity to try and hold us to her rules, after breaking our confidentiality agreement - not to mention the issue with her work and the inconvenience it caused for our clients.

I was being the nice guy, and now I was basically being told what I had to do in order to get this person to agree to something she had already agreed to in the first place? Sorry! I wasn't going to succumb to manipulation.

I felt as though I was dealing with someone here who didn't have a good grasp of reality. I mean she had already thrown the first punch here folks. And the fact that I withheld throwing one back ought to cause the naysayers she has squawking for her here to be quiet.

Chanel brought this on herself. And she brought others over here that have NOTHING to do with this situation. Now I am sure the same argument here that I had no right to bring my team over here and respond to this nonsense is going to be rattled off again. Hey, let me clue you in! Have you ever seen a player from another team take a sock in the face only to have the whole team come off the bench? Even fans come out of their seat. This is America people! We stand up for each other. It's called Loyalty

Also; I would like to set the record straight on the continual nibbling that her and her gang is doing on our sales page. That was written in 2006 people! The site was a very different place then. The price of a 'Big mac and coke' - i.e a 500 word basic piece of content, written where some minor word padding is acceptable, is just an analogy. If these dummies here responding on her behalf (without the facts) could just take a look inside the site and see that we have guidelines; higher price points; an upgrade funds option; a client side writer tipping feature etc...

Also, if we don't have the best interest of writers in mind here on the site, then I guess the thousands of dollars spent over the last 6 months designing and creating an entirely whole new site is just something we're doing for kicks.

Also, if I am such loser, and running a scam of a website, well perhaps I should let our clients in on the little tiff going on over here and see what they would have to say. But hey! I am sure most of you have a life than to waste your time over here on this. I hope that you would.

I rest my case.

I would like to point out that I did not come onto ROR here and create this post.

As a matter of fact. I have NEVER in the 4 years I have been running the site, had to come here and do this. That ought to shut up the people here who keep saying "What's to stop him from doing this to the rest of the NAA writers" The 'fake' concern you have is a smoke screen, so you can sit here and simply  smear me and my company because you likely have nothing else better to do. Actually, I think you like doing this.

The author of the post  (Chanel Adams - formerly a writer here at Need An Article) mad this post.

And she has since rallied a few of her friends to come to her aid and make comments about something that they themselves have nothing to do with, or know nothing about.

I would like everyone to look at her opening sentence in her last message:

"If he wants me to respect NAA's privacy, then why is he telling him about my business?" 

I believe she meant to say: "If he wants me to respect NAA's privacy, then why did he inform his writing team about this public report I posted here, which I think violated my privacy"

Surely this is what she wanted to convey. Please note, this was the sort of thing our proofers dealt with, and more frequently as she went along - they basically got tired of it!

The typo of inserting "him" instead of "them" is normal and we are happy to correct such things.

But the absence of logic, and grasp of reason is not a 'skill-set' we care to subject clients to.

Think about it!

Here is a post on a site that indexes pages into Google faster than you can blink an eye! She was the creator of the post; she posted private correspondences that took place between her and us. AND now comes back in a rebuttal and complains about her privacy being violated? What is she smoking?

If she wanted to keep this private, then WHY MAKE THE POST? Certainly, if you are going to try your hand at freelance writing and client fulfillment, then you better have reasoning abilities. 

This whole thing is one big display and lack sound reasoning. Hey, if you want to hire her as a writer - be my guest!

If Chanel doesn't like dirt in her face, then she should learn not to sling mud at others. Or at least weigh the cost before slinging.

Bashing a company or someone in a PUBLIC setting is one of the lowest things you can do in my opinion. I mean who wouldn't retaliate?

If you throw a swing at someone then expect a swing back. Where is the common sense here?

The logic being used in her and her friends' replies is totally one-sided. It is very bizarre because WE ARE the ones who were attacked. So if any "COACHING" is taking place... Chanel is the head coach of the barrage of replies to the positives here.

Btw,  I believe most of these replies are from people over at workplacelikehome.com reading a post that another writer in our site (Who basically decided to stab us in the back) and actually took/stole our copyrighted material and illegally posted it without permission there. Not to mention stupidly trampled all over our confidentiality agreement in doing so. Golly! The sheer lack of brains is driving me insane!

So STWRITER picks it up - perhaps not knowing that he/she is actually aiding someone who has committed fraud - passing around something she has no right passing around. If you people want to give the impression that you actually have a brain in that head of yours, then I suggest you mind your own businesses and back off! There is illegal activity going on here with the people you associate with.

And yes, Chanel,  if you attack the site, YOU are attacking the livelihood of other people. Attempting to make me out to be a coward, or some idiot for making the very people who work her aware is their RIGHT TO KNOW.

Once again, you came out into a public setting AND disclosed confidential information while under a legal contract with us and totally broke the rules of diplomacy. And you ended your post with a 'kick in the face' approach and stated nonfactual information.

To me, it was like declaring war. You also broke the TOS of ROR by doing that. Go back and read them and you will see.

When I saw this report, I gave her the choice to remove it. I even called her on the phone and told her flat out that I did not want trouble; and even offered to go ahead and pay her for what she thought I owed her. (Even though we can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that NONE of the work she had submitted was used - each job was reopened). I even apologized if I had offended her. After ending the call and providing my number to call me and discuss it, I get an email response back from her where she basically lays out the rules and conditions for getting it removed.

I was appalled! Because she actually had the audacity to try and hold us to her rules, after breaking our confidentiality agreement - not to mention the issue with her work and the inconvenience it caused for our clients.

I was being the nice guy, and now I was basically being told what I had to do in order to get this person to agree to something she had already agreed to in the first place? Sorry! I wasn't going to succumb to manipulation.

I felt as though I was dealing with someone here who didn't have a good grasp of reality. I mean she had already thrown the first punch here folks. And the fact that I withheld throwing one back ought to cause the naysayers she has squawking for her here to be quiet.

Chanel brought this on herself. And she brought others over here that have NOTHING to do with this situation. Now I am sure the same argument here that I had no right to bring my team over here and respond to this nonsense is going to be rattled off again. Hey, let me clue you in! Have you ever seen a player from another team take a sock in the face only to have the whole team come off the bench? Even fans come out of their seat. This is America people! We stand up for each other. It's called Loyalty

Also; I would like to set the record straight on the continual nibbling that her and her gang is doing on our sales page. That was written in 2006 people! The site was a very different place then. The price of a 'Big mac and coke' - i.e a 500 word basic piece of content, written where some minor word padding is acceptable, is just an analogy. If these dummies here responding on her behalf (without the facts) could just take a look inside the site and see that we have guidelines; higher price points; an upgrade funds option; a client side writer tipping feature etc...

Also, if we don't have the best interest of writers in mind here on the site, then I guess the thousands of dollars spent over the last 6 months designing and creating an entirely whole new site is just something we're doing for kicks.

Also, if I am such loser, and running a scam of a website, well perhaps I should let our clients in on the little tiff going on over here and see what they would have to say. But hey! I am sure most of you have a life than to waste your time over here on this. I hope that you would.

I rest my case.

Why would a company harass and insult a writer's work when they are in business to succeed? It really annoys me that someone has chosen to aid this person by using sneaky tactics instead of being upfront. I have written for NAA for 2 years and have no complaints whatsoever! In fact, I have never written for another site where the owner is so accessible as Scott is to his writers. The office staff, Nance and Angie, are exemplary in responding to emails. NAA is an ideal place to write to gain experience and practice our craft. If the complaining writer was owed anything, they would have been paid. I am very sorry that Scott and all of us at NAA have had our site put into question and this writer and her cohort owe us an apology!    

I've read through the rebuttals after mine and I have to say this - some of you might say that the "employees" sound like we are rehearsed - but we are not.

By the way, we aren't employees...we are FREELANCE writers.

To address the issue of Chanel being "owed" this money.

Think smart people. Scott DOES NOT PAY WRITERS FOR ARTICLES - clients pay writers for articles. You want to explain to the client why he or she should pay double the money for one article because one writer was unable to complete the request? You want to explain why Scott should pay her out of his own pocket for incomplete work?

Chanel, I don't care if you had personal problems-family problems- if your lights went out or if your computer blew up. You DID NOT complete your work - and therefore - you DO NOT get paid. Period. This is freelance work. You are self employed. If you were a contractor and you installed half a roof on a house - you had your motor blow in your work truck - therefore could never complete the work - would you be demanding full pay? This is essentially the same thing.

To those who claim that it's kind of funny that all these writers suddenly flock to Scott's defense - couldn't I say the same thing about all of you? Are you friends of Chanel? Or Chanel herself? I'm not saying you are but you should really think before you point fingers.

IF ANY of the above posts saying that Scott should just pay her what she is owed - if you are writers, I would be embarrassed if I were you.

Ever hear of Demand Studios? Their articles appear on eHow along with other places. If you are a real freelance writer- you have. If not, then you aren't a writer or you are VERY new. If an article with them is sent back for a rewrite- you are given a set amount of time to complete the rewrite. If you do not complete it, the article is automatically thrown back into the writing pool to be picked up by another writer and you are not paid for that work. A well known site called TEXTBROKER does THE SAME THING! What Scott does is NO DIFFERENT!

In fact, just about EVERY SINGLE CONTENT site out there has this rule. Suddenly, because this writer is pissed off that she didn't cut it - she is "owed" payment. If this was how freelance writing worked - places like Demand Studios would be out of business. No one would survive. Freelance writers would not be able to make as much money as easily.

This rule is in place and Chanel obviously ignored it when she started writing through NAA or she would not be complaining. That's like running a red light...getting a ticket but complaining that you had good reason to run the red light. The law is the law and rules are rules. NAA has rules in place and you just need to follow them.

I would also like to address the posts that claim it was wrong of Scott to post his memo about the complaint to writers.

Here's the thing....we are freelance writers. Some us of just write for "fun money" - others, like myself write full time to pay our bills. This is how I feed my children and put clothes on their back.

I DO NOT WRITE FOR SCOTT. I write for the clients that I meet through Scott's site. If someone is attacking the site where I earn my bread and butter - I EXPECT to be told about it and I thank Scott for doing so.

Also, to those who think it's funny that all the writers seem so thrilled with Scott - maybe because we are "acting" thrilled because we ACTUALLY ARE THRILLED with Scott and the site. Believe it or not, I have an opinion, just like the other writers that posted here and I don't need someone to tell me what to think or feel. I happen to get very irritated with stupid people all on my own and I don't have to have someone to tell me how to fell about them. I don't have time to BS. THE ONLY REASON I posted here was to defend a site I work through because I know that the complainer is full of it.

Maybe she is just a big old sour grape. Maybe she doesn't understand the term "completed article". Personally, I really don't care.

By the way, I don't care how many visitors you get to your personal blog. Someone showing up to your blog through a link or random stumbling around on the Internet does not mean that you have quality work. I have a favorite blog of this nice lady who write about being a homeschooling mother of 5. She couldn't write a full paragraph without at least 4 major errors with grammar. But you know what, she is funny, she has a great "voice" and I enjoy her blog - even with the mistakes in it. I take it for what it's worth. Chanel may have a fun blog that people enjoy...that doesn't mean she can turn in articles full of errors - ignore the proofreading rewrite requests and expect clients to pay her for it.

Chanel's issues at NAA were related to grammar and being late. 900 daily hits on a blog does not mean that she is great with her grammar.

TO THE CLIENTS WHO MAY READ THIS: ALL writers who complete properly written articles are paid and are paid on time. This should only serve as a testimony that Scott is doing what you expect of him - he is connecting you with QUALIFIED writers.

I would like to point out that I did not come onto ROR here and create this post.

The author of the post did. (Chanel Adams - formerly a writer here at Need An Article)

And she has since rallied a few of her friends to come to her aid and make comments about something that they themselves have nothing to do with, or know nothing about.

I would like everyone to look at this opening sentence:

"If he wants me to respect NAA's privacy, then why is he telling him about my business?" 

I believe she meant to say: "If he wants me to respect NAA's privacy, then why did he inform his writing team about this public report I posted here, which I think violated my privacy"

Surely this is what she wanted to convey. Please note, this was the sort of thing our proofers dealt with, and more frequently as she went along - they basically got tired of it!

The typo of inserting "him" instead of "them" is normal and we are happy to correct such things.

But the absence of logic, and grasp of reason is not a 'skill-set' we care to subject clients to.

Think about it!

Here is a post on a site that indexes pages into Google faster than you can blink an eye! She was the creator of the post; she posted private correspondences that took place between her and us. AND now comes back in a rebuttal and complains about her privacy being violated? What is she smoking?

If she wanted to keep this private, then WHY MAKE THE POST? Certainly, if you are going to try your hand at freelance writing and client fulfillment, then you better have reasoning abilities. 

This whole thing is one big display and lack sound reasoning. Hey, if you want to hire her as a writer - be my guest!

If Chanel doesn't like dirt in her face, then she should learn not to sling mud at others. Or at least weigh the cost before slinging.

Bashing a company or someone in a PUBLIC setting is one of the lowest things you can do in my opinion. I mean who wouldn't retaliate?

If you throw a swing at someone then expect a swing back. Where is the common sense here?

The logic being used in her and her friends' replies is totally one-sided. It is very bizarre because WE ARE the ones who were attacked. So if any "COACHING" is taking place... Chanel is the head coach of the barrage of replies to the positives here.

Btw,  I believe most of these replies are from people over at workplacelikehome.com reading a post that another writer in our site (Who basically decided to stab us in the back) and actually took/stole our copyrighted material and illegally posted it without permission there. Not to mention stupidly trampled all over our confidentiality agreement in doing so. Golly! The sheer lack of brains is driving me insane!

So STWRITER picks it up - perhaps not knowing that he/she is actually aiding someone who has committed fraud - passing around something she has no right passing around. If you people want to give the impression that you actually have a brain in that head of yours, then I suggest you mind your own businesses and back off! There is illegal activity going on here with the people you associate with.

And yes, Chanel,  if you attack the site, YOU are attacking the livelihood of other people. Attempting to make me out to be a coward, or some idiot for making the very people who work her aware is their RIGHT TO KNOW.

Once again, you came out into a public setting AND disclosed confidential information while under a legal contract with us and totally broke the rules of diplomacy. And you ended your post with a 'kick in the face' approach and stated nonfactual information.

To me, it was like declaring war. You also broke the TOS of ROR by doing that. Go back and read them and you will see.

When I saw this report, I gave her the choice to remove it. I even called her on the phone and told her flat out that I did not want trouble; and even offered to go ahead and pay her for what she thought I owed her. (Even though we can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that NONE of the work she had submitted was used - each job was reopened). I even apologized if I had offended her. After ending the call and providing my number to call me and discuss it, I get an email response back from her where she basically lays out the rules and conditions for getting it removed.

I was appalled! Because she actually had the audacity to try and hold us to her rules, after breaking our confidentiality agreement - not to mention the issue with her work and the inconvenience it caused for our clients.

I was being the nice guy, and now I was basically being told what I had to do in order to get this person to agree to something she had already agreed to in the first place? Sorry! I wasn't going to succumb to manipulation.

I felt as though I was dealing with someone here who didn't have a good grasp of reality. I mean she had already thrown the first punch here folks. And the fact that I withheld throwing one back ought to cause the naysayers she has squawking for her here to be quiet.

Chanel brought this on herself. And she brought others over here that have NOTHING to do with this situation. Now I am sure the same argument here that I had no right to bring my team over here and respond to this nonsense is going to be rattled off again. Hey, let me clue you in! Have you ever seen a player from another team take a sock in the face only to have the whole team come off the bench? Even fans come out of their seat. This is America people! We stand up for each other. It's called Loyalty

Also; I would like to set the record straight on the continual nibbling that her and her gang is doing on our sales page. That was written in 2006 people! The site was a very different place then. The price of a 'Big mac and coke' - i.e a 500 word basic piece of content, written where some minor word padding is acceptable, is just an analogy. If these dummies here responding on her behalf (without the facts) could just take a look inside the site and see that we have guidelines; higher price points; an upgrade funds option; a client side writer tipping feature etc...

Also, if we don't have the best interest of writers in mind here on the site, then I guess the thousands of dollars spent over the last 6 months designing and creating an entirely whole new site is just something we're doing for kicks.

Also, if I am such loser, and running a scam of a website, well perhaps I should let our clients in on the little tiff going on over here and see what they would have to say. But hey! I am sure most of you have a life than to waste your time over here on this. I hope that you would.

I rest my case.

I would like to point out that I did not come onto ROR here and create this post.

The author of the post did. (Chanel Adams - formerly a writer here at Need An Article)

And she has since rallied a few of her friends to come to her aid and make comments about something that they themselves have nothing to do with, or know nothing about.

I would like everyone to look at this opening sentence:

"If he wants me to respect NAA's privacy, then why is he telling him about my business?" 

I believe she meant to say: "If he wants me to respect NAA's privacy, then why did he inform his writing team about this public report I posted here, which I think violated my privacy"

Surely this is what she wanted to convey. Please note, this was the sort of thing our proofers dealt with, and more frequently as she went along - they basically got tired of it!

The typo of inserting "him" instead of "them" is normal and we are happy to correct such things.

But the absence of logic, and grasp of reason is not a 'skill-set' we care to subject clients to.

Think about it!

Here is a post on a site that indexes pages into Google faster than you can blink an eye! She was the creator of the post; she posted private correspondences that took place between her and us. AND now comes back in a rebuttal and complains about her privacy being violated? What is she smoking?

If she wanted to keep this private, then WHY MAKE THE POST? Certainly, if you are going to try your hand at freelance writing and client fulfillment, then you better have reasoning abilities. 

This whole thing is one big display and lack sound reasoning. Hey, if you want to hire her as a writer - be my guest!

If Chanel doesn't like dirt in her face, then she should learn not to sling mud at others. Or at least weigh the cost before slinging.

Bashing a company or someone in a PUBLIC setting is one of the lowest things you can do in my opinion. I mean who wouldn't retaliate?

If you throw a swing at someone then expect a swing back. Where is the common sense here?

The logic being used in her and her friends' replies is totally one-sided. It is very bizarre because WE ARE the ones who were attacked. So if any "COACHING" is taking place... Chanel is the head coach of the barrage of replies to the positives here.

Btw,  I believe most of these replies are from people over at workplacelikehome.com reading a post that another writer in our site (Who basically decided to stab us in the back) and actually took/stole our copyrighted material and illegally posted it without permission there. Not to mention stupidly trampled all over our confidentiality agreement in doing so. Golly! The sheer lack of brains is driving me insane!

So STWRITER picks it up - perhaps not knowing that he/she is actually aiding someone who has committed fraud - passing around something she has no right passing around. If you people want to give the impression that you actually have a brain in that head of yours, then I suggest you mind your own businesses and back off! There is illegal activity going on here with the people you associate with.

And yes, Chanel,  if you attack the site, YOU are attacking the livelihood of other people. Attempting to make me out to be a coward, or some idiot for making the very people who work her aware is their RIGHT TO KNOW.

Once again, you came out into a public setting AND disclosed confidential information while under a legal contract with us and totally broke the rules of diplomacy. And you ended your post with a 'kick in the face' approach and stated nonfactual information.

To me, it was like declaring war. You also broke the TOS of ROR by doing that. Go back and read them and you will see.

When I saw this report, I gave her the choice to remove it. I even called her on the phone and told her flat out that I did not want trouble; and even offered to go ahead and pay her for what she thought I owed her. (Even though we can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that NONE of the work she had submitted was used - each job was reopened). I even apologized if I had offended her. After ending the call and providing my number to call me and discuss it, I get an email response back from her where she basically lays out the rules and conditions for getting it removed.

I was appalled! Because she actually had the audacity to try and hold us to her rules, after breaking our confidentiality agreement - not to mention the issue with her work and the inconvenience it caused for our clients.

I was being the nice guy, and now I was basically being told what I had to do in order to get this person to agree to something she had already agreed to in the first place? Sorry! I wasn't going to succumb to manipulation.

I felt as though I was dealing with someone here who didn't have a good grasp of reality. I mean she had already thrown the first punch here folks. And the fact that I withheld throwing one back ought to cause the naysayers she has squawking for her here to be quiet.

Chanel brought this on herself. And she brought others over here that have NOTHING to do with this situation. Now I am sure the same argument here that I had no right to bring my team over here and respond to this nonsense is going to be rattled off again. Hey, let me clue you in! Have you ever seen a player from another team take a sock in the face only to have the whole team come off the bench? Even fans come out of their seat. This is America people! We stand up for each other. It's called Loyalty

Also; I would like to set the record straight on the continual nibbling that her and her gang is doing on our sales page. That was written in 2006 people! The site was a very different place then. The price of a 'Big mac and coke' - i.e a 500 word basic piece of content, written where some minor word padding is acceptable, is just an analogy. If these dummies here responding on her behalf (without the facts) could just take a look inside the site and see that we have guidelines; higher price points; an upgrade funds option; a client side writer tipping feature etc...

Also, if we don't have the best interest of writers in mind here on the site, then I guess the thousands of dollars spent over the last 6 months designing and creating an entirely whole new site is just something we're doing for kicks.

Also, if I am such loser, and running a scam of a website, well perhaps I should let our clients in on the little tiff going on over here and see what they would have to say. But hey! I am sure most of you have a life than to waste your time over here on this. I hope that you would.

I rest my case.

I would like to point out that I did not come onto ROR here and create this post.

The author of the post did. (Chanel Adams - formerly a writer here at Need An Article)

And she has since rallied a few of her friends to come to her aid and make comments about something that they themselves have nothing to do with, or know nothing about.

I would like everyone to look at this opening sentence:

"If he wants me to respect NAA's privacy, then why is he telling him about my business?" 

I think it meant to say: "If he wants me to respect NAA's privacy, then why did he inform his writing team about this public report I posted here, which I think violated my privacy"

Surely this is what she wanted to convey. Please note, this was the sort of thing our proofers dealt with, and more frequently as she went along - they basically got tired of it!

The typo of inserting "him" instead of "them" is normal and we are happy to correct such things.

But the absence of logic, and grasp of reason is not a 'skill-set' we care to subject clients to.

Think about it!

Here is a post on a site that indexes pages into Google faster than you can blink an eye! She was the creator of the post; She posted private correspondences that took place between her and us. AND now comes back in a rebuttal and complains about her privacy being violated? What is she smoking?

If she wanted to keep this private, then WHY MAKE THE POST? Certainly, if you are going to try your hand at freelance writing and client fulfillment, then you better have reasoning abilities. 

This whole thing is one big display and lack sound reasoning. Hey, if you want to hire her as a writer - be my guest!

If Chanel doesn't like dirt in her face, then she should learn not to sling mud at others.

Bashing a company or someone in a PUBLIC setting is one of the lowest things you can do in my opinion. I mean who wouldn't retaliate?

If you throw a swing at someone then expect a swing back. Where is the common sense here?

The logic being used in her and her friends' replies is totally one-sided. It is very bizarre because WE ARE the ones who were attacked. So if any "COACHING" is taking place... Chanel is the head coach of the barrage of replies to the positives here.

And yes, if you attack the site Chanel, YOU are attacking the livelihood of other people. Attempting to make me out to be a coward, or some idiot for making the very people who work her aware is their RIGHT TO KNOW.

Once again, you came out into a public setting AND disclosed confidential information while under a legal contract with us and totally broke the rules of diplomacy. And you ended your post with a 'kick in the face' approach and stated nonfactual information.

To me, it was like declaring war. You also broke the TOS of ROR by doing that. Go back and read them and you will see.

When I saw this report, I gave her the choice to remove it. I even called her on the phone and told her flat out that I did not want trouble; and even offered to go ahead and pay her for what she think I owed her. (Even though we can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that NONE of the work she had submitted was used - each job was reopened). I even apologized if I had offended her. After ending the call and providing my number to call me and discuss it, I get an email response back from her where she basically lays out the rules and conditions for getting it removed.

I was appalled! Because she actually had the audacity to try and hold us to her rules, after breaking our confidentiality agreement - not to mention the issue with her work and the inconvenience it caused for our clients.

I was being the nice guy, and now I was basically being told what I had to do in order to get this person to agree to something she had already agreed to in the first place? Sorry! I wasn't going to succumb to manipulation.

I felt as though I was dealing with someone here who didn't have a good grasp of reality. I mean she had already thrown the first punch here folks. And the fact that I withheld throwing one back ought to cause the naysayers she has squawking for her here to be quiet.

Chanel brought this on herself. And she brought others over here that have NOTHING to do with this situation. Now I am sure the same argument here that I had no right to bring my team over here and respond to this nonsense. Hey, let me clue you in! Have you ever seen a player from another team take a sock in the face only to have the whole team come off the bench? Even fans come out of their seat. This is America people! We stand up for each other. It's called Loyalty

Also; I would like to set the record straight on the continual nibbling that her and her gang is doing on our sales page. That was written in 2006 people! The site was a very different place then. The price of a 'Big mac and coke' - i.e a 500 word basic piece of content, written where some minor word padding is acceptable, is just an analogy. If these dummies here responding on her behalf (without the facts) could just take a look inside the site and see that we have guidelines; higher price points; an upgrade funds option; a client side writer tipping feature etc...

Also, if we don't have the best interest of writers in mind here on the site, then I guess the thousands of dollars spent over the last 6 months designing and creating an entirely whole new site is just something we're doing for kicks.

Also, if I am such loser, and running a scam of a website, well perhaps I should let our clients in on the little tiff going on over here and see what they would have to say. But hey! I am sure most of you have a life than to waste your time over here on this. I hope that you would.

I rest my case.

I would like to point out that I did not come onto ROR here and create this post.

The author of the post did. (Chanel Adams - formerly a writer here at Need An Article)

And she has since rallied a few of her friends to come to her aid and make comments about something that they themselves have nothing to do with, or know nothing about.

I would like everyone to look at this opening sentence:

"If he wants me to respect NAA's privacy, then why is he telling him about my business?" 

I think it meant to say: "If he wants me to respect NAA's privacy, then why did he inform his writing team about this public report I posted here, which I think violated my privacy"

Surely this is what she wanted to convey. Please note, this was the sort of thing our proofers dealt with, and more frequently as she went along - they basically got tired of it!

The typo of inserting "him" instead of "them" is normal and we are happy to correct such things.

But the absence of logic, and grasp of reason is not a 'skill-set' we care to subject clients to.

Think about it!

Here is a post on a site that indexes pages into Google faster than you can blink an eye! She was the creator of the post; She posted private correspondences that took place between her and us. AND now comes back in a rebuttal and complains about her privacy being violated? What is she smoking?

If she wanted to keep this private, then WHY MAKE THE POST? Certainly, if you are going to try your hand at freelance writing and client fulfillment, then you better have reasoning abilities. 

This whole thing is one big display and lack sound reasoning. Hey, if you want to hire her as a writer - be my guest!

If Chanel doesn't like dirt in her face, then she should learn not to sling mud at others.

Bashing a company or someone in a PUBLIC setting is one of the lowest things you can do in my opinion. I mean who wouldn't retaliate?

If you throw a swing at someone then expect a swing back. Where is the common sense here?

The logic being used in her and her friends' replies is totally one-sided. It is very bizarre because WE ARE the ones who were attacked. So if any "COACHING" is taking place... Chanel is the head coach of the barrage of replies to the positives here.

And yes, if you attack the site Chanel, YOU are attacking the livelihood of other people. Attempting to make me out to be a coward, or some idiot for making the very people who work her aware is their RIGHT TO KNOW.

Once again, you came out into a public setting AND disclosed confidential information while under a legal contract with us and totally broke the rules of diplomacy. And you ended your post with a 'kick in the face' approach and stated nonfactual information.

To me, it was like declaring war. You also broke the TOS of ROR by doing that. Go back and read them and you will see.

When I saw this report, I gave her the choice to remove it. I even called her on the phone and told her flat out that I did not want trouble; and even offered to go ahead and pay her for what she think I owed her. (Even though we can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that NONE of the work she had submitted was used - each job was reopened). I even apologized if I had offended her. After ending the call and providing my number to call me and discuss it, I get an email response back from her where she basically lays out the rules and conditions for getting it removed.

I was appalled! Because she actually had the audacity to try and hold us to her rules, after breaking our confidentiality agreement - not to mention the issue with her work and the inconvenience it caused for our clients.

I was being the nice guy, and now I was basically being told what I had to do in order to get this person to agree to something she had already agreed to in the first place? Sorry! I wasn't going to succumb to manipulation.

I felt as though I was dealing with someone here who didn't have a good grasp of reality. I mean she had already thrown the first punch here folks. And the fact that I withheld throwing one back ought to cause the naysayers she has squawking for her here to be quiet.

Chanel brought this on herself. And she brought others over here that have NOTHING to do with this situation. Now I am sure the same argument here that I had no right to bring my team over here and respond to this nonsense. Hey, let me clue you in! Have you ever seen a player from another team take a sock in the face only to have the whole team come off the bench? Even fans come out of their seat. This is America people! We stand up for each other. It's called Loyalty

Also; I would like to set the record straight on the continual nibbling that her and her gang is doing on our sales page. That was written in 2006 people! The site was a very different place then. The price of a 'Big mac and coke' - i.e a 500 word basic piece of content, written where some minor word padding is acceptable, is just an analogy. If these dummies here responding on her behalf (without the facts) could just take a look inside the site and see that we have guidelines; higher price points; an upgrade funds option; a client side writer tipping feature etc...

Also, if we don't have the best interest of writers in mind here on the site, then I guess the thousands of dollars spent over the last 6 months designing and creating an entirely whole new site is just something we're doing for kicks.

Also, if I am such loser, and running a scam of a website, well perhaps I should let our clients in on the little tiff going on over here and see what they would have to say. But hey! I am sure most of you have a life than to waste your time over here on this. I hope that you would.

I rest my case.

I have already had my say on what I think about this company. I work for them and love my job. That being said I felt it necessary to respond to the many people who feel this writer should be paid regardless of what they did.

For months, MONTHS writers have been warned about the work quality. We have been made aware that if our articles are not fixed and the quality does not come up we either will not be paid or we will share the money with the people who do fix it. That is fair and reasonable. Most of the other sites out there that do something similar will not pay a writer until the client has cleared the article. NAA pays us on time and sometimes the client has not had time to proof the request. We are then honor bound to fix the work if it comes back to us later.

I am not here defending the site because Scott requested it but because I truly enjoy the work and do not want to see my bottom line affected because of a bogus claim by an irritated writer. Chanel knew all along what these articles pay and accepted the position anyway. Claiming now that the pay is not good enough is ridicules.

Writers know what they are getting into before they accept work and should not be complaining now.

I can't believe Scott called me a scum bag, you piece of garbage. I hope NAA burns to the ground.

People NAA will use you and then throw you away when they don't want you anymore.

Yes, I have been writer for NAA for over 2 years and have been freelance/ghost writing since 2006.  They are my main source of income and I can assure you that if you actually "work," you can make plenty of money.  I would also like to note that the statement revolving around the "Big Mac and a Coke" is obviously misunderstood from those that are calling the company a scam.

The truth is, this statement referred to the fact that you could request an article from NAA for less than the cost of a Big Mac and Coke (and fries if you want to get technical).

Then of course is the so-called "strong arming" and "unprofessionalism" that is supposedly used by the company or Scott himself.  When I joined NAA in January of 2008, I was referred by another writer at the time.  The company asks that you submit samples, and after Admin has a chance to look over them, they decide whether or not the initial samples reflect positively on your writing skills. 
"
When you are hired you have the opportunity to pick up as many articles as your "Bin" can handle.  In the beginning it is usually around 10.  Now, the cost of an article varies on the word count, the research, and other variables.  So it's important to understand that not every article costs less than a Big Mac and Coke.

The site handles press-releases, blog posts, ebooks, squidoo lenses, ehow articles, and regular content you find in various corners of the Internet.  So, if you have the expertise or are willing to learn different facets of article marketing, there is plenty of opportunity available.

Okay, now let's talk about this $60 everyone is concerned about that Mr. Foster wasn't relinquishing to the writer.  If you own a website and want 10 articles on "gardening" and already have keywords ready, don't you want the work to have quality?  If the writer is throwing out low quality work that means the client is upset.  Obviously they do not want to pay for it.  When proofreaders have to spend more time on articles that shouldn't have mistakes of a quality writer, it means others clients get their articles later, and later, and later.  The domino effect continues, and eventually we come to where we are in this report today.

What most people don't understand is that NAA has an open ticket area where clients can request changes to be made so they are happy with the work.  All NAA writers know about this, and there are even video tutorials on the site for those who say they don't.

I have personally written well over 10,000 articles for Need an Article in the course of 2 years.  Overall I bet I haven't had more than 10-15 open ticket issues.  Now, it's not to say I didn't make mistakes along the way, but if they were minor the proofreaders just fixed them.

However, when you are continuously trying to push through work that is causing a complete back-up of the articles being sent to clients, then there is definitely a problem.  So for those who think that Scott should just pay the $60 and it would be done are being naive.

If every writer just pushed through work, proofreaders would be unhappy, clients would be unhappy, Scott would be unhappy...well lets just say everyone would be. 

It's also important to note that as a writer, you will get criticized for your work time and time again.  It's a part of the business so suck it up or you won't last long in the industry. 

Now, did we come over here to stick up for NAA?  Of course we did.  Did Scott tell us what was going on?  Yep, and I would have as well.  This is my livelihood and when someone tries to take that away I get defensive. 

Just because one or two people has a bad experience doesn't mean every writer or client that utilizes NAA hates the place and thinks it is a scam.  Need-an-Article.com is by far one of the best places I have worked for in my entire life.  This is not a joke, or some fake way to boost their ego. 

It's the truth.  99.9% of the time our payments are on time.  The other .1% is when PayPal is having maintenance or issues.  The staff comes up with ways to make extra money through contests (I won a few myself).  Scott also is adding various elements to the site that will eventually make it more plentiful for writers.  This means more cash. 

I could go on an on about the benefits of the company as writer and a client, but you should get the point by now.  So before you feel sorry for someone who didn't do their work appropriately and then expected to be paid, think about the real situation.

This isn't some "David vs. Goliath" incident.  If you owned the company and had a writer who continued having issues even after you explained it to them, why would you pay them if they didn't fix them?  See, all those articles had to be given to other writers.  Do you think the other writers offered to do someone else's work for free and watch them get paid? 

Last but not least, this "horrible" man you are trying to portray Scott out to be is not even close to the real person.  Over the course of my existence on the site, we have had 5 separate occasions where writers were struggling with serious issues.

One writer's daughter needed life or death surgery and she had no clue how she was going to come up with money to pay the medical bills.  Scott started a donation pool with his own money, as well as admin, proofreaders, and the other writers on the site.  It was a great feeling knowing that the one of the places you worked for online was that inclined to help those that have helped him for the last 4 years.

The last one I remember vividly because the writer's father was about to pass away and with all the normal bills in his/her household, paying for a plane ticket was virtually impossible.  So again, everyone put money into the fund so this writer could see his/her father.  Unfortunately he died, but being there when a parent passes is important, which Scott and the NAA team made it happen.

So when it looks like employees here are being fake with their remarks, it's actually an excitement and satisfaction of working for a good person. 

If it were me personally and I was running my own business, I would try to settle any problem I had with a worker to try and get the matter out of the way to PREVENT other workers from finding out about it. But no, Scott being the genius that he is, shot himself in the foot by airing his bad business practices out to all his other writers. It was like him strapping a sign on himself saying "Look What a Dumba$$ I Am!" Does he honestly think that every writer there is going to take his side and agree that it's ok to not pay for work that has been completed? I think as this whole mess continues, his groupie list will gradually start to dwindle away.
Come on NAA writers, he could very well have done and may do the same to you! Are you willing to take that chance for $5 an article? And for goodness sakes, look at how he reels in clients by advertising how cheap his writers work! If I had paid more attention to that page when I first applied to NAA, I would have turned away right then and there.
I have worked enough for NAA to know how much can be made there and it is in no way a comparison to what other freelance writing jobs pay. As for the person who says they can earn as much as they want from NAA, how is that possible when it is a common thing for them to run out of work sometimes?
I have worked for many different writing businesses and I have NEVER had any of them to run out of work and then ask the writers who have projects to do to give them up for those who didn't get to grab any of their own projects. What professional establishment EVER does that? But then, if you need to release an article for some unforseen reason to allow another writer to finish it, that is almost out of the question. Good Ole Scott seems to have dug his business degree out of the bottom of a Cracker Jack box.

I worked for this company for several months as well. I don't know Chanel, and I'm not a scumbag either.

The NAA/MyAMS websites and email communications are riddled with spelling and grammar errors. Some of the so-called editors could use a few grammar lessons, too. The owner brags that his writers work for a Big Mac and a Coke. (Trademark/copyright infringement there?) He's proud of the fact that his business is one of the lowest paying writing gigs out there! Also, Scott hires writers as "independent contractors." Then he has the audacity to threaten account deactivation if the writers aren't working "enough" or haven't logged in to the system in a few days. The legal IRS definition of an independent contractor doesn't give you the right to demand how much or when the writer works. Maybe we should turn you in to the IRS for misclassifying your "employees" as "independent contractors?" The writers are doing you the favor, hon. You don't treat them like garbage and refuse to pay. We're the only reason you make ANY money at all! Have some respect, dude. And grow up! You're making yourself and your joke of a business look bad by further engaging Chanel and refusing to pay her.

As for the "spy" post on your business message boards, you haven't given anyone reason to be loyal to you and your company. Lousy pay, bad attitude, and condescending tone from an illiterate person. We're all more intelligent than you are, you know.

I'm currently a writer for the site this former employee worked for. The work they turned in was filled with errors and didn't follow the rules posted on need-an-article.com. All writer on the site are told to correct their own work (new articles and/or rewrites) before submitting it for proofreading. This also includes plagiarism. The writer that filed this report didn't and therefor was asked to rewrite their articles. I've got family issues as well, but I still made sure to correct my mistakes and tell the clients I was running behind if I went passed my deadlines. 

I have never met nor do I know Chanel, I simply check this site out when I'm looking into jobs. My neighbor knows I've done this work for years and asked if I'd ever heard of Need an Article...she called it NAA but, anyone who's spent anytime online at all knows that the internet world is filled with abbreviations...LOL, ROFL, OMG, BRB..you get it right?  So it's natural for those of us who are posting here and who have probably posted at a forum or on a message board at one time or another to abbreviate your company name.

As I was saying, my neighbor asked if I'd heard of your company because her grandson is looking for a way to make a few extra bucks while in college.  I hadn't heard of your company so I went to the usual places where we freelance writers go to investigate job leads and honestly, I never saw one bad thing about your company until I came here and VIOLA, look what I found.

It's not just that you've not paid this girl for her work (that happens in the world of freelancing as there are dishonest clients who'll steal your work) it's the behavior that you've exhibited in the process that makes you and your company look bad.  The tone of the emails that you sent her, that memo to your employees about letting the snackdown begin, sending your employees here to brag about your company, coming here calling people scumbags and making the assumption that those defending her are her friends ( and what if some are, YOU sent YOUR friends here to defend YOU right? She had just as much right to have her friends here as you do ) this behavior just makes you look petty, immature and well, ridiculous.  

Wouldn't it have been simpler to just pay her for her work.  If she was a poor writer why didn't you fire her? Why did you make your people continually rework her articles, there are plenty of freelance writers out there eager for work, you could have replaced her in a heart beat with someone who's much better.  I have friends who are copy editors and they don't put up with it when it's extreme, they speak to those in charge and poof..bye bye writer.  It just doesn't make sense that you kept someone as incapable as this girl working for you, wouldn't you want your employees to be the best?

And let me reiterate..I do not, nor have I ever known Chanel. I've not encountered her in any way other than here. As a writer it's my responsibility to be informed about clients and the way that they treat writers.  I've pointed many of my friends to online writing jobs and most have done well.  Sites like the Ripoff Report help those of us who want to work from home sift through the good companies and bad companies and right now pal, you're company isn't looking so hot.  You could easily fix it all by just doing what's right but, from what you've shown here, I doubt that you'll do it.

Ok so this guy Scott is the owner and just my opinion but he is starting to sound a little desperate to prove that he is right. I do not know who taught him how to be professional but calling people "scum bags" is not polite. Play nice, abide by the laws and other regulations and just pay the lady. She did the work, you didn't like the work for whatever reason, but she DID the work and should be paid. This is not about he said, she said. This is about letting others like myself that do freelance work from home have a small glimmer of hope that they will be hired for a job have their work evaluated and regardless of if the work done was liked or disliked that the hiring comapny or OWNER will actually have the integrity to pay for services rendered. Some companies like this unfortunately some times have a Holier-than-thou mentality (like you Scott) about them.

I am very glad that this was posted about this company so that in the long run when people stop applying and some may even quit, that the owner and others that think like him will think twice before not paying someone for work preformed. I just hope that in the future there will be stricter laws in place for companies such as this.

According to the Random House Dictionary, the American Heritage Dictionary, the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, and the Encyclopedia Britannica, an accomplice is a person who assists in wrong-doing or criminal activity. Last I checked, posting your experience online is NOT a criminal activity.

I applied for NAA (hate to tell ya Scott but y'all ain't the only people who use acronyms) and I'm so very glad that I never heard back. I can only assume because I used previously published content as a writing sample.

I feel it is important to respond to this rip-off report as it is tarnishing the name of a company that I hold in high regards.  I have been working for NAA for a little over a year now.  I have never had any major issues.  Until recently I have not had any articles flagged by the proof reading staff, but recent changes have made the guidelines stricter and so I expected this.  We (all that work at the company) were made aware that guidelines were being made stricter.  

I am not a friend of Chanel nor am I writer for NAA.  Scott to address your statement that NAA is a term only used by your writers that is totally false. I am a writer (not with your company) that belongs to a forum that offers the members leads to jobs such as yours and those initials are used for your company in the forum. Those comments could have very well come from a person that is not familiar with your writer Chanel.

I find it incredibly insensitive and unprofessional that instead of trying to find a solution to the problem you would rather argue this out like a two year old in this open forum. You stand to lose more than Chanel. She can always find another writing gig but your business reputation could be potentially damaged forever. Not only do writers read these reports but so do potential paying customers. Are you seriously willing to lose business over $60. To me that says so much about your character and I would never chose to do business with you. You should have been reported and I am only sorry Chanel didn't chose to pursue legal actions. Chanel, you should also contact the better business bureau in the city and state where his brick and mortar business is.  It is totally unprofessional for you to try to change the terms of your contract with her after she completed the work. If you agreed to pay her $5 for her work you can not go back and say this isn't worth $5 so I am only going to pay you $2. That is unethical. If you felt it was only worth $20 instead of $60 you should have discussed it with her and tried to come to an agreement. If you use her work and don't pay her she have every right to pursue legal action and I would if I were you Chanel.

Another things I find amazing and utterly childish on your part is that you would asked your writers to join in on a dispute between you and this writer. If you paid the lady what you agreed this wouldn't have been reported. I can't believe that in this hard economy you would try to demean her or anyone's effort to make an honest days pay. It just seems your company is really trying to take advantage of this women. If you weren't pleased with her work you should have told her or warned her about her quality.  It just makes no sense that her quality would be as poor as you have stated and you would keep her on with not so much as a warning. There is no way, a for profit business will continue to allow a person who is making them lose money due to constant proofreading and rewrites allow that worker to continue on with them. Either your business is not professionally managed or there is some falsehood in those statements about her work.

 Good luck Chanel and I hope you get what he originally agreed to pay you? 

No, Scott, I am NOT a writer for you. You could not be so lucky, and I could not be so desperate. However; I did copy/paste the memo from one of your writer's (not naming names). And as far as referring to your company as NAA...it's call an abbreviation in the sake of not having to spell out the companies name (yes, some of us are smart enough to come up with abbreviations all by ourselves...imagine that). Again, I am not a writer for you. I only accept jobs from clients who are respectful and pay a decent wage. As someone else stated, your website is very poor quality. I could not take you seriously based on that alone. And I surly cannot take you seriously after your posts here. Chanel doesn't need people to vouch for her here. You are burying your own business quite nicely already.

As a consumer I am appalled that all this is going on for $20-$60??? Seriously? Why doesn't the owner, Scott, send her some money, everyone move on....I think the amount you all are fighting over is pathetic.......

Many of the replies to the original report seem coached. I don't write for NAA and if some writers are happy with the company, I wish them well. I hope that they don't end up having to file a report here over a few dollars. 

I don't understand how anyone could write for a company that brags about the low wages that the writers are paid. The phrase "for the price of a Big Mac and a coke" is downright insulting.    

I can't believe that Scott would tell his writers to fight against this report. Oh wait, yes, I do believe it. If he wants me to respect NAA's privacy, then why is he telling him about my business?

I'm a good person and a good writer. I have been a freelance writer since 2007. I have written a few editorials for The Lowell Sun, and I have written for other freelance writing companies. Never have I ever been treated so poorly because of my writing. I even have a fashion blog that is read by 900 people per day. There are people out there who do like my writing, and believe that I'm a good writer.

It's a shame that Scott is blindedly telling his writers to fight against me. It makes him even more unprofessional and irrational. Obviously, he's still losing sleep over this. If this is what he wants, then this is what he'll get.

Those writers have no clue what I've been through! Shame on them for judging it one sidedly. When this happens to them, they'll be kicking themselves.

I received an email from Scott saying that my work was worth $20, not $60. I can't trust him to even send me $20, so I went against it. $60 doesn't matter to Scott Foster. He doesn't know how important it is for people to make a living off their work. He gets paid by the clients and writers. He's set for life! He doesn't know how hard it is to make a living and to not get paid. No, he loves the fact that his writers get paid $5 a pop. Yet, he's worried about losing $60.

I just want to warn writers that this could happen. I don't think this makes me a bad person at all. I just don't believe I was treated fairly. I have enough in my life going on to not worry about situations like this. I shouldn't have been dragged in the dirt like this.

If only his writers could be aware that this could happen in ANY freelance writing job. I don't care how long you've been around for. It does happen and unfortuanately, it's happened to me.

I'm sorry that his writers have to go through with this. If they don't, they probably would get the boot. He knows what he could do.

I find it hilarious that he thinks Angela Hoy (from WritersWeekly.com) was giving me false advice. She's made that site for freelance writers to be AWARE of these situations. I'm not trying to make anyone look bad; I'm trying to create an awareness. It can happen anywhere to anyone.

It's absolutely absurd that Scott Foster needs to grow a back bone. And no, I didn't make my friends do this. They did it because they care-and to create awareness as well. My friends are smart enough to know that this was shady of Scott Foster to do this to me.

Next time you hate a writer's work, fire them right away.

The person below "Vtwriter" who posted: "Point of View from a Non-NAA Writer" is an accomplice AND is a writer on the site. Only writers on our site refer to us as "NAA" - no one's buying this!!

He/she says they are not a writer on the site - but that is totally BOGUS! This person has access in one way shape or form to our private writer area and went in and STOLE, (Took without asking) the post we made to our writing team - informing of this attack made by the author, which btw, we have EVERY right to inform them of.

Also, the other post "Shame on you" from "Chloe 319" is an accomplice as well. The author of the main post is rallying her scum bag friends to come to her aid.

I do still have a writer position w/NAA, for the moment. However, I have no plans on ever writing for them again. Why? Because thanks to this report and a few others I have seen about NAA, I have now seen the light. When I first started writing for NAA, I thought they were great. Boy, was I wrong. There are several things that make this LOW paying freelance writing gig not worth my time anymore. 1. They only give you 24 hours to complete an article. Both my other jobs give from 4 days - 7 days. 2. If you grab a writing assignment you only have 1 hour to change your mind. One of my other writing jobs allows writers a whole week to change their mind and send a project back if something comes up and you can't finish it. 3. The pay is by no means enough to earn a decent living at. NAA articles pay an average of $5.00 each for 550 words. One of my other jobs pays $15 for a 400 word article. 4. When they run short on work they have no problems with asking their writers who have projects lined up to give some of their work to other writers whom they had no available work for. However, if you ask them to let you return an article that you are unable to get completed so that other writers can do it, they act like you are letting them down.

Aside from these reasons, it also completely burns me up that Scott compares the price of our work as the same or less than a fast food value meal. I mean really now, are you so desperate for clients that you stoop to the level of saying we work cheap? Why not put more emphasis on the great quality of work that many of your writers produce day in, day out?

But, what really makes me sick about this company is the fact that they have not paid a writer who obviously did the work she agreed to do. It does not matter if that work was perfectly done or of horribly poor quality, the fact of the matter is YOU accepted it. If it was so terrible that it could not be accepted, why not reject it completely. Instead you prefer to accept it, supposedly let the proofreaders do all these corrections and THEN not pay the writer who did the original work. That's just plain wrong!

The thing is, Chanel IS a great writer. I have read some of her work and was very impressed. She also had a long list of great feedback left for her from clients on the NAA writer website. But regardless of the quality of work from any writer, if it is accepted they should be paid.

Just by reading the emails Scott sent Chanel, it is easy to see he was very rude and unprofessional to her. As for his post asking the other writers to put rebuttals against Chanel on here, he absolutely did make that post, word for word. I read it on the NAA memo board earlier. How professional is it to ask other writers to get involved in this? Not professional at all in my opinion. Sounds more like he has a guilty conscious and is trying to brainwash his writers to back him up.

So, no matter how many groupies Scott has tagging along after him, the proof lies in what he has said. All he's concerned about is getting them to help him "smackdown the smackdown." He doesn't treat his writers in a professional manner, unless they are helping him clean up his mess. It is just so pathetic that so many wonderful writers settle for working for NAA and getting paid way less than what they deserve.

I will probably get locked out of the company website once Good Ole Scott reads this. I may even get a few of those charming emails like he sent Chanel. But that's ok, let him send them! I'll just come here and share even more of his unprofessional stunts with everyone who reads this report.(:

To the person who said I could be making a lot more at NAA, the truth is, I could make as much as I wanted. NAA is set up in such a way that you can take as much work as you see fit. I choose to not work any more than that because it affects my sanity. Here's the deal people, you can think what you want about NAA. You can say what you want, but it pays my bills, it lets me eat, and it keeps the customers happy.

I am very, very sorry that Chanel convinced her friends to file rebuttals here at Ripoff Report. I am also sorry that someone decided to breach the privacy of NAA by posting the memo that Scott sent out.

NAA is the best place I have ever worked for, and their guidelines are quite clear. What's happening here is disrespectful, it is rude, and it has turned into a useless flame war. If you have any dignity left Chanela, please end it.

Need An Article is such a scam and the most unprofessional company I have ever seen. I don't understand how a company can't just pay an employee the money they owe him or her and move on with it. Instead Scott post's on his website to come on and attack that individual. Desperate much? You obviously can't stand up for yourself.

I applied here long ago and received no response. I later realized it was a great thing. The companies website looks like it was coded by a monkey and Scott pretends that his writers are a hamburger and drink? How odd.

For all of those who came on and defended him cause he asked you too, you are all pathetic. It makes me laugh your just doing this cause he pays you in pennies, woo h*o!

Anyways, have a nice day.

Having worked as a freelance writer for years, I must say, this isn't the first time I've encountered this sort of bully mentality.  Seriously, talk about abuse of power, you have one employee who's just trying to get her money, money she's earned and you send your troop of kool-aid drinking followers to praise you and your company.

I wonder how many of them would be so eager to rush to your defense if you'd cheated them out of the hard earned wages that are paying their bills, feeding their families and keeping them out of debt. 

Take the rose colored glasses off people, this man is cheating someone JUST LIKE YOU. She is a writer who did her job and trusted him to pay her, she is someone who needs that 60 dollars, someone who's paying bills and trying to make ends meet, someone who worked hard and did the best she could and just wants what's owed her.  Can you afford to let 60 dollars go down the drain? Heck, she could have used that money to, hmmm, pay a cell phone bill! First he keeps Chanel's money, next month, your articles might start going down hill, they might start sounding immature and before you know it...you might be locked out of the site and you might not get paid for your work. Don't think it can happen?  It already did.

Take a good look at the bigger picture. She wasn't here to attack him, to smack him down, she was here to post this so others like her didn't go through the same thing with this company.  She was trying to HELP you people, people who are susceptible to the exact same kind of treatment.  Just think about that when you're working hard to make your 300 dollars next week. It was easy for him to do this to her, it'd be just as easy for him to do it to you.

I am not a writer for NAA; however I have been following this story, and I feel that the company is definitely in the wrong here. I do not know the whole story, and as the saying goes: "no matter how flat you make the pancake, there is always two sides". That said, I don't know Chanel, nor have I seen the articles she has written for the company; however, I feel that the company has been very unprofessional in the way that they have handled the situation. Even if the articles were trash (and I am not saying they were), nobody has the right to treat anybody with such disrespect. She wrote the articles, you owe her the money. That's that. You sound very offended by her posting this report over "$60", or, as you put it, the cost of an average cell phone bill. If that's the case, why couldn't YOU just pay her. YOU allowed things to get to this point over the $60. If $60 is no big deal, then just pay her and stop being a right-fighter.

I would also like to post a copy of the memo that Scott has posted on his website, asking his writers to come here and stick up for him. I want to point out the shear un-professionalism in the last line:

"Want to defend NAA? Here's your chance. 2010/02/15


Dear NAA team! When someone attacks you, the natural response is to defend yourself. Recently, we had a small altercation with a writer here who attempted to strong arm us into submission. It was not pretty to say the least.
Yes, that's right! We are now going to grace the halls of Search engine archives for years to come because posts CAN'T removed on Rip off report.
Anyway, because this was not only an attack on me personally, but it was also an attack on the company that you receive a paycheck from. I think it is safe to say it was an attack on you, too. I don't know about you! But when someone tries to damage the very thing that produces money for bills and food on the table, I will defend it with a passion!

It was unfortunate that this former writer stooped this low. But I am not going to stand by for one minute and let one's 'stoopyness' tarnish what I have poured my life into for nearly 35,000 hrs. (4 years) :)


Want to lend a few words?


Well, by all means... I give you the floor.


Be nice now ;)


Let the 'smack down' be smacked down! -Scot"

I am not sure why anyone would want to write for this man. Someone stated this company pays them $300 a week. That is great. But you could be earning so so so much more for a company who is respectful. I am a freelance writer, making $500+ per week (part time, mind you. I could make way more, but I choose to spend the time with my children). I would never write an article for a man who is as disrespectful as to say that his writers get paid "less than the price of a Big Mac". Ever. I highly recommend you look into much more respectful and better paying companies. They are out there. This guy is a joke. End of story.

I stumbled upon this while doing some research on needanarticle.com. I had heard good things about them in the past, but this was a real eye opener. I just wanted to say that the flurry of recent rebuttals look somewhat suspicious. Some of these 'employees' may be making true statements, but the tone does not seem genuine. There have been 21 employee rebuttals filed in the last 48 hours alone. Could it be that the owner of the company brought this matter to the attention of his contractors after complaining about the lack of confidentiality? Perhaps he asked that they write statements on his behalf although they have nothing to do with the situation at hand. That would seem hypocritical.

Out of all that has been written, only one fact remains clear. The independent contractor (because that is what this person is) has not been paid as agreed. If the declining quality of her work lead to her dismissal, then so be it. Why has she not been paid? What else is there to say? It appears that the company owner prematurely went on the offensive and it backfired. BTW- when you search for 'Need An Article', this rip-off report is on the third page of results. With all this activity it won't be long before it's on the front page. This will affect the owner's business. All because this person felt that he didn't need to pay his contractor as agreed. It's amazing that he feels only the portion of the agreement which benefits his interests are enforceable.

Lastly, I would urge the original poster to contact the IRS, and the Department of Labor in the state that this company operates in. It is not legal to withhold payment. That is a fact, not an opinion.

I have only good things to say about my time writing for Need-An-Article. NAA has allowed me to stay at home and bring in a second income as a single mom, which has enabled me to keep my home, bring food to my table and be home with my teenager. If not for NAA I would be outside my home working 16 hours a day and rarely see him.

I have been writing for NAA for about a year or so now. In that time I have had not one problem with them being unreasonable about my work or any difficulty with payment either in tardiness or judgment of monies due me. They have been extremely sympathetic whenever I have had a problem. At times I was ill or a family member was ill. At other times I have had computer problems. Each and every time they were understanding, cooperative and offered their help with unburdening me of my workload so that I could concentrate on myself or my family problems. Not once did they give me a hard time about it, but rather were kind and sympathetic.

I have dealt with Scott, Nance and Angie numerous times through messaging. Each and every time they were prompt, respectful, courteous, kind and considerate. Scott has even offered his personal telephone number so that he can be reached at anytime, for any matter. I don't know of too many who would go to that extent for their workers.

NAA and the people who work there have been a blessing in my life and I appreciate being able to write for them.

I am a freelance writer.  One of my clients is NAA, whom I've worked for twice now, and I have nothing but positive things to say about them.

My wife was recently in the hospital unexpectedly, and this seriously impeded my ability to keep up with work.  NAA was nothing but understanding and generous towards me in this situation.

The only difference between our experiences, Chanel, is that my articles are NEVER flagged by the proofreading department.  You seem to imply that your articles were being flagged in order to justify terminating you.  This is implausible from my standpoint, for if that were common practice at NAA, mine would also have been flagged.  No, I don't think that's what is going on here.

My experience with NAA has been that they are reasonable.  Work is always available and, provided it is done correctly, gets paid on time every time.  As I said, I've never had an article flagged at NAA for any reason having to do with grammar, plagiarism, spelling, keyword use, or other technical issue.  Only once, due to a misunderstanding on my part of a poorly written request by a customer, did anything of mine require rewrite.  It was easily resolved, and we moved on.  I might add that this was a multiple article request that was being completed at the very time my wife took ill.  I had no such problems as you are describing with anyone at NAA.

My personal take on your description of the altercation between you and NAA is that even by your own recounting of the events, they come off looking far more reasonable and fair than you.  Your feelings appear to be hurt, and no doubt the lost income created bad and embarrassing moments for you.  However, lashing out against a client of yours in an emotional response to an unfortunate situation in your own life cannot be justified in any public forum. 

Hands down! I've been writing for NAA for a year now, and I have NEVER had any problems with ANYTHING, and I'm a newbie to freelancing! I've only been doing it for about 2 1/2 years, and Scott, Nance, Angie and the ENTIRE administrative staff are absolutely superb! As others have said, everything is clearly stated on the site so that there are no questions. If you have concerns that you need to communicate with the staff, they will work with you on the issue. Just like all other employer's, NAA has their own personal set of rules -it seems that Chanel simply did not understand that. You cannot NOT do your work, and expect to get paid for it! Who does she think she is?

Furthermore, everyone will have to do a rewrite at sometime or another - it's no big deal, just follow the instructions. I just don't see what is so difficult about that... obviously this business is not for her. It seems like she is the one who has the problem, not NAA.

So, she had a couple of rewrite requests..it happens to everyone! And yes, it is a part of the business! You make mistakes and you correct them! Personally, I love it when I recieve feedback on my articles from the staff because it helps me to zero in on the areas of my writing that need improvment and become a better writer. Bottomline - there is no sense in whining about HAVING to do your job properly!!! NAA is wonderful and they are undoubtedly the most patient and understanding website out there that I know of personally. Without NAA, I do not know what I would do. There is an unlimited supply of work, and pay is on time every single week. The staff responds within just a few hours regarding any concerns that you may have. NAA needs people that are passionate about their writing, not WHINERS!!!

I have been writing at Need An Article for several months. I must say - the idea is brilliant!
I was quite impressed by Scott and his ability to persuade the clients that this is the right place to order articles. Remember, the client has no right to "reject" the piece!
This means, the delivered pieces should be ALWAYS good (or at least, decent).
And the writers actually get paid even if the quality is mediocre - while the client might actually decide to look elsewhere next time (damage to NAA - but no damage to the writer)... Payment is done on WEEKLY basis!
Of course, Need an Article has to feature a proofreading stuff that can deny all sort of BAD content reaching the client. And, by the way, the writer is ALWAYS given a chance to correct his errors. I have been requested to correct some of my pieces - and the comments were ALWAYS relevant (and very appreciated).
In addition, Scott is a very nice person, answering messages with remarkable speed!

In short - Need An Article is GREAT place for GOOD writers!

Hello, my name is Debbie Tehin and I'm from Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. I have worked with NAA for almost 2 years.

Although I am working as a part-time writer for NAA, working with Scott and the Admin team of NAA has been a great experience. Scott gave me a chance to be an English writer and to earn some when I was jobless, even though I obviously come from a country where English is not our first language.

To be honest, my account at NAA was suspended twice. Sometimes I have Internet problems that couldn't be avoided, and if you don't log on to NAA at all within 48 hours, this will happen. However, my account would be reinstated immediately each time after sending an explanatory email to NAA. This shows that Scott and his admin team (Angie and Nance) are highly professional and they will not simply suspend your account for no valid reason.

Furthermore, out of the 73 articles that I have written for NAA, only once (that I can recall) did my article needed to be amended because I missed a word and my sentence did not make sense. I have never had any problems with the proofreading (PR) team. My point is, if you are a good writer, you will not have much problems with Copyscape that is used by the PR team to detect plagiarism.

Anyway, I would like to state that I strongly support Scott and NAA. I love working with NAA!

Thank you so much, Scott for the opportunity.

As an established freelance writer, I found Need-An-Article.com better than three years ago. Within just a few months of the site becoming a reality, Scott hired me as a writer. Since I had already been in the freelance writing industry, I had seen more than my share of scams, and unfortunately been taken in a time or two. However, let me emphasize, Need-An-Article.com is NOT one of them.

Since I have been privileged to be a writer with this company, I have always been paid. The site offers payments every single week - an income that a freelance writer can always depend on. Not only can you depend on the pay, but you can depend on Scott, the founder and owner of Need-An-Article. Whenever I have had a question or a problem, Scott has called, emailed, or messaged me in some way to deal with it. He has been there as a leader 100% of the time, something that is uncommon in the business world today.

I have personally seen this company grow. I have been a part of it's growth, and I take pride in this company. I personally was hired some time ago as a proofreader for the site, so I personally have dealt with the writing of Chanel. I can attest to the fact that there have been problems with the quality of writing, and that this problem HAS been addressed with the writer prior to termination. Writer's are not randomly targeted and terminated on a whim. The entire situation has been handled by Scott and the NAA administrative team in a very professional way, even while threats were given and childish games were played by Chanel in attempts to get her way.

When every writer is hired to the company, each writer must agree to the terms of the site in order to be employed. EVERY writer, including myself, agrees to these terms. If writers are unwilling to agree to the terms of the site, they should go elsewhere.

As a longtime writer for Need-An-Article, I feel that I have plenty of experience and knowledge about this site. The pay is excellent, it is paid each week and on time, and Scott is a top notch person to work for and with. It is unfortunate that a person would choose to take issue with such an excellent company to cover up their own inadequacies.  

Need An Article pays fairly and quickly.  I thank the Lord every day that I have this way to add to my income and stay home with my teenager in the evening.  If Scott or Nancy or Angie told me I had a problem with grammar, I would realize I had a problem with grammar.  Maybe that's what this other person should realize.  Get a Strunk and White's instead of Waaah waah waah.   --Linda (wrtsister2)

I have been a writer for Need an Article for almost a year now and I can tell you with 100% certainty that if it had not been for this opportunity my family would have lost a lot in the past economic state of this country! The fact that I can work from home and be here for my children while supplying a much needed second income was a God send!

I do not know the writer above but I can tell you the rules are very clear, and we have been getting notifications for weeks now to recheck our work and do all we can to improve the quality of our articles. So much so I was beginning to worry that mine were bad and I simply did not know. So I sent a message to Nancy about it and she informed me that I would be contacted by a proof reader if there were any problems. Big sigh of relief on that end.

The only other thing that I can say about this company is they will not boot you out the door when you are having family problems. This past year has been very hard for my family and I hate to admit it but I know my work suffered for it. They were very patient with me, even when I had late work. The key difference is I communicated with them and my clients every step of the way. I took responsibility for any poor work I performed and fixed it immediately. I even had to tell a client that yep I totally missed your instructions, it was all on me no excuses!!

Scott has worked tirelessly at getting us an improved site, more money and more opportunity for money through Need an article. If you have ever worked with building sites, server issues, and bugs you have a small clue to what this man and his team have gone through... and they didnt have to. They could have continued to cash in on the old site and way of doing things but instead they have worked tirelessly to continuously improve the way the site works, that is not the type of company that would try to rip someone off for a few articles!

It is just my opinion but as far as I can see what you have above is a person attempting to ruin a business because they are ticked off. Bear in mind that there are more than 100 writers who will give you an exactly opposite report and I hope they come on here and do so. My family and many other families depend on their earnings from this site to feed, clothe and house their children and trust me if they were scamming us we would go elsewhere!1

It makes me sad to see such a report against Need An Article. I have been a writer on their site for close to a year and have never experienced anything like the what the OP has stated here. I believe that the ex-Need An Article writer may have misunderstood what qualifies as a completed article.

A completed article is an article that SUCCESSFULLY makes it through the proofreading bin - is given to the client - and the client is happy with the work. This is when - and it is the only time when - an article is considered completed. When the article is completed then yes, the writer receives pay for that article.

If the work is NOT COMPLETED - then it will NOT BE PAID FOR. I am pretty sure this is a standard policy at every site such as Need An Article. I sure know that this is the case for other places such as Textbroker, Internet Brands, WiseGeek, Demand Studios and Just Articles - just to name a few.

As the OP admitted, her work was left in the proofreading bin because she was unable to complete the rewrites. Personal issues or not, there are guidelines in place. I would NEVER assume that this writer is making up something about family issues, but there have been people out there who have done such things. This is why guidelines are set in place.

I have had personal issues as well and I have NEVER been harassed by Scott or anyone at Need An Article. I've sent emails through the site. I sent emails personally to Scott. I've sent him text messages, left voice mails and spoken to him on the phone a number of times. Communication is something that Scott is great at so it does perplex me that there is such an issue going on.

I would like to point this out...

"Regardless of rewrites, Ive been paid every week by NAA." - quote from OP.

Freelance writers are not employees and should not be expected to be treated as such.

As freelance writers, we are simply asked to do a job, if we complete the job, then we are paid. If the work is not completed, there is no pay. Simple.

In regards to the comment about NAA being "tacky" in regards to an advertisement to clients: it is not tacky, it is creativeness, something that writers are good with.

Yes, there are $5 articles. But these are low word count, incredibly simple articles. I write many of these on subjects I am well versed in and I can easily make $20 an hour. There are also $12 articles and some articles are even more, depending on the word count of the article.

I make anywhere from $100 - $700 a week through Need An Article, depending on how much I decide to write, and I have no complaints.

Scott is the most upfront, genuine and honest person that I have worked for to date. No matter what other gigs I come across in time, I will never leave Need An Article.

I also have never had any problems with Nance or any other person in Admin or proofreading - even though I have had an article or two come back to me for revision, not for grammar, but for something small I may have overlooked. Mistakes happen. Need An Article realizes this. When writers address the mistakes, they get paid. Period.

The guidelines on article submissions, rewrites and other policies are very clear and to the point - if a writer simply takes the time to read them. There should be no confusion. In addition to the clear cut guidelines posted on the site, Scott is always sending out mass emails and memos. I can't count how many times Scott has sent emails to everyone reminding them of the rules.

As long the emails are being read, there should be no confusion. This alone should show how well Scott works with writers. I know many sites that would not bother to send emails. They would simply let the writer go for the sheer fact that they did not read the guidelines for article submissions.

Before deciding to write for Need An Article I did my own research and all I could find online were nothing but praises from current writers, past writers and clients alike.

I have no problem being contacted. My user name is JenMarie on Need-An-Article and my email address is: [email protected]

Okay, back to work, I have bills to pay  :)

-Jen

I have worked with NAA for quite some time with no problems at all.  I follow all the rules, read all the emails, memos, etc. from Admin. and understand my duty.

What is missing from Chanel's report is that it is stated quite clearly that we are responsible for several things to retain ourselves on the "payroll".  A freelancer doesn't mean we are free to come and go as we are able or please without constant communication on how the jobs are going, when we expect to have them completed, and keep the client(s) up to date so they know what to expect.

There have been memos to all writers for months and months stating that proofreading needs to be done first before submission, grammar needs to be correct, and if necessary the articles will be bounced back to the writers and pay withheld if the articles are not completed properly.  We have also been told that we could be locked out of the site if we did not follow the rules properly, to our job in a timely and accurate fashion and stay in contact with site and clients.

Perhaps all this information was missed while at hospital with family, but we have all been told our duties.  Despite the effort, it seems as though Chanel did break the contract we have with NAA.

I have been working for Need an Article for several months now and have never experienced anything other than professionalism and respect from the staff and the owner, Scott.  I think some people are just not meant to be writers and it may hurt their feelings to hear such a thing.  It takes attention to detail, a strong sense of conveying the customers message, and commitment to meet the required timelines and requirements.  My response to this negative post would be that the originator needs to explore a different source of income.  Apparently writing is not for you.  

My name is Stephanie Partridge and I was one of the first writers to work with Need an Article (NAA), meaning that I started with them in late 2005, I think. I have been a freelance writer, though, for more than 20 years, mainly doing it on a part time basis. I have written everything from news copy to press releases to print articles to SEO web content.

Chanel should really have considered before filing a bogus rip off report against Scott Foster and Need An Article. I began as a client of NAA and later became a writer from them. I have worked for NAA since mid 2007 and have only had the best experiences a person can have with a company, both as a client and as a writer.

Scott has gone out of his way to create a place where each of us can make a living without having to battle the normal day-to-day working conditions found outside our homes. Every person that is a part of NAA, Scott, admin, proofreaders and the writers are like family. We have all pitched in and helped when there have been issues beyond our control.

Chanel makes a statement about how much money she was making and how many articles she was putting out. Well if the articles are causing a problem with the proofreaders, then she really has nothing to brag about. Many writers at NAA put out 10, 15 and 20 articles a day, some probably put out even more, without problems.  Even still, there are times when we have all had to make corrections to an article because we missed something, it's part of the job; we don't take it personally, that's what the proofreaders are for. I never heard of anyone complain about an extra set of eyes.

Let me give you some insight to Scott Foster and NAA....Scott is a man that hopes to make a home for writers that are a part of his team. He wants all of the writers to be like a family that works together and he wants them all to be happy. He also wants the clients to be a part of that same family and he wants to make sure that we all are able to have a working relationship that will continue indefinitely. One time, my little girl got very sick, I was terrified and had no money to pay for the medical care she needed. Scott, from his loving and giving heart posted a letter to the clients and writers of NAA telling her story and they all chipped in to help pay for her medical expenses....other writers have experienced this same type of help, some who were about to lose their homes and others who had a death in the family who could not afford to travel.

Does this sound like company or a person that should be reported because Chanel did not want to do her job? No! Chanel is being vindictive and hoping that her post will cause financial harm to NAA. The fact is that she attacked more than just Scott and NAA, she attacked all of the writers and clients of NAA as well.

If anything should be said or done to Scott, then it should be in recognition of the extensive time and work that he has put into creating NAA for the rest of us. It should tell you something about him and NAA to see those of us that are willing to stand up for him when an injustice such as this is done.

I have been writing through Need An Article since October of 2009 and have been freelancing online for several years through a variety of other sites. Need An Article (NAA) is by far the most professionally operated online writing service that I have found. I am now a single mother and thanks to NAA I have great confidence that I will be able to support myself through my writing. I thank Scott Foster and the other hard workers at NAA for that security. 

I think this is an inaccurate report from a writer. I've worked with clients on NAA who have been happy to let me take my time. However, the situations were always handled professionally and I would turn in work needed quickly as well. Ratings from clients have been stellar and communication from both proofreaders and the owner of NAA has been wonderful. He even took time on the phone with me to make sure I understood everything.

I am totally happy with them.

My name is Kate and I have been a writer for NAA for the past six months.  I am also a professional writer and editor and was the senior editor for Art-to-Art Palette for 10 years.  I have owned my own business and have degrees in writing and interior design. 

Never have I had the opportunity to work for such a fair and reasonable company as I have found in NAA.  I write for several other companies but this one is special.  Any professional writer who has ever written for money knows that there is NO excuse to miss a deadline and the first time it happens, you're history.  Everyone at NAA knows the rules going in and if you don't like them you don't have to stay.  If the staff at NAA has any bad points, it is being too lenient with people that they feel are honestly trying. 

This past employee seems intent on crushing the livelihood of an organization just because they tired of giving her breaks.  There is nothing wrong with NAA from a professional or an ethical point of view.  Very few writers are given the opportunity that NAA offers.  And the most important thing that you learn from being a professional writer is that you never, and I mean never, disgrace a company or an individual through your words.  This will bring instant death to your career.

I hope that this is considered an isolated incident as it should be.

I have been a writer for NAA for well over a year and have never had any kind of situation with them. 

I have worked for Need An Article since December, 2007. I have developed a good reputation there and have many clients who reserve work in my name. This didn't happen overnight. I have had to provide consistently good work for my clients in order to earn my standing.

While writing for an article service isn't glamorous, it provides me with a weekly paycheck I can count on and it helps pay the bills and support my family. Scott, Nance and the entire Admin staff work hard to make this a decent place to work. I am grateful to have a job like this that allows me the freedom to be home with my children and attend to their needs on their schedule, not someone else's.

In my time with NAA, I have only had a handful of articles that needed to be reworked for clients. They were all pleased with the resulting revisions and we all went merrily on our way. Yes, it is frustrating when it happens. Yes, you spend more time working basically for free to revise the work. But I recognize that if I had met the client's expectations the first time on those few articles, I wouldn't have had to revise them.

We all have times when family duty calls. In my experience, Scott and the Admin team have been very understanding and helpful at those times.

I am disappointed in Ripped Off for even allowing this report to be filed by this "writer."

I have been writing for Need an Article for the last 3 years. My work is well received by the clients and by the staff. Anytime I have had an issue, personally or with a client I have gotten in touch with Scott or Nance and they have been understanding and helpful in finding a resolution for the issue.

I have received my pay every week, on schedule. I have even received my pay early when I needed it due to personal issues I was having. They will work with you if you do what you are suppose to do, which is turn in quality articles for the clients.

I don't think that Chanel understands that the clients at NAA pay for their articles up front. Which means that if a writer sends them garbage content the client has to request a revision. The revision is to be completed in 24 hours, which should not be a problem on an article you have already written. We aren't talking about academic articles here, these are web content articles.

If the original writer cannot complete the revision then the support team has to try to find another writer that can make the revisions so the client is happy. If the original writer did not deliver a quality article why in the world should that writer get paid for the work?

It is unfair to write a report and accuse a company of ripping you off when you didn't do the work that you think you should get paid for. If you had time to go in and request a payment and check your email then you had time to get your rewrites done.

It's also unfair to file a report and tell people the half of the story that makes you look good. I am thankful that Scott posted the whole story here, hopefully people will read that post and see that Need An Article is an excellent place to work. That they are willing to work with you providing you hold up your end of the bargain.

If you can't do the rewrites, don't request the pay.

If you are concerned over the number of rewrites you are getting, perhaps you need to take a look at the work you are turning in. It is possible that with all the personal drama you have going on that your work quality suffered.

If you can't write a quality article so that clients are happy with your work, take an English course... don't write a "Ripped-Off" report accusing someone of scamming you. In all honesty... it was you that was trying to rip off Need An Article and their clients by turning in trash and trying to get paid for it without making it right.

I hope the next writing company or client you have reads your report here... providing you are honesty enough to tell them your possible pen names... so that they can see the type of person they are considering contracting.

I understand that this may seem like a personal attack on "Chanel" but then this report that was file was an attack on Need An Article, Scott and every writer that works here.

There are a few things wrong with this report. First of all, NAA is a workplace. As such you are expected to act in a professional manner. What does this mean exactly? It means that you are an employee, and you need to represent the company. This isn't the after-school grocery job you had five years ago. What we are doing here is delivering a product to clients who expect it to be done within a certain period of time, and they expect it to be done right.


On the subject of that grocery store, what if you were to stock the shelves and put the milk on the canned food shelf? Do you suppose they would keep you on? No, most likely they would not, and you would be back on the street looking for another job.


As for them 'looking' for a way to get rid of you, I highly doubt you were costing them money because you made $340 in one week. I personally make $300 per week and I have been doing so for the past year. I make my living on NAA. It gives me food, it lets me pay bills, it keeps my car insurance current. If I lost NAA, then I would most likely be that man outside Wal Mart with a cardboard sign. NAA does not look for a way to get rid of you; if they want you gone, you will be gone, but they need good writers. The keyword here is 'good writers'. In order to remain a reputable service it must maintain a level of excellence unmatched by any other writing service. When you logged into your desk, did you happen to see a huge list of article requests? Did you ever wonder why there were so many? I'll fill you in: It's because NAA offers the best content creation services on the web. Working for them is not your God given right; it is a privilege that you must respect.


I speak so highly of this service because it has allowed me to live a normal life without getting into my car at six in the morning, driving down the road, and stumbling into a cubicle. How many people can say they make that kind of money without leaving home? How many people can write off their USB mouse at tax time?

I have to say that I am very unhappy with this report. Not only have you threatened this great workplace, you have threatened my very way of life Chanel. NAA has accommodated every single request I've made of them, and I can hardly say the same of any other place I've worked for. Everyone reading this, NAA is a great place to work if you can meet the demands of a lax schedule and you have a basic grasp on grammar. For those who need content, NAA is the place to go. So there you have it, this Rip-Off report is a Rip-Off in itself and a waste of bandwidth.

I joined NAA as a writer in October 2009.  I have had nothing but good experiences with this company.  Not only did Nance personally answer many of the questions I have had as a beginner but she has always answered my inquiries in a timely manner.

Yes, I have been requested to make corrections on articles I have sent to the proof reading bin and have always found that the asked for corrections were indeed needed. I have never gotten a request to make a correction that was not absolutely necessary to meet the guidlelines set forth by a client.

Never have I been asked to do a complete rewrite by PR and can only assume that such a request would become necessary if the writer completely ignored the client's initial request for the article or if the writing was of exceptionally poor quality. 

However, the site has warned all their writers that serious mistakes are happening much too often because some writers are getting careless with their writing and not taking the time to proof read their own work.  If this was the problem in this case, I feel that perhaps Channel should have taken time to read and heed the messages that have been sent to us all.

I for one am glad that Scott and the rest of the staff are so dilligent in keeping NAA a great writing site with competent writers. Good writers means more clients and more income for us who make our money writing online.

I think the problem here is that this particular got overwhelmed with school and family illness and unintentionally began slacking off and then resented being ask to make corrections because she was so stressed.  Perhaps, it would have been better for her to request a leave from the site until she got her personal problems taken care of and could pay more attention to her work.

I am sorry for her problems, but don't feel as though trashing a wonderful site is the way to solve any of her problems.

As for myself and many other writers we are proud to be a part of NAA.

I started working for Need-An-Article.Com on the 14^th day of August in the year 2007. Prior to this, I had worked for several online writing websites that are similar to Need-An-Article.Com. These included AdSense Real Estate and Internet Research Associates. I also wrote for Associated Content and eHow during the same time period. While I was initially hesitant to start writing for Need-An-Article.Com, the individual that referred me to the company spoke of it highly. I remember finding it interesting that regular, automatic payments were sent out and that we got to choose what work we wanted from the open jobs available.

I decided to accept the position. I am now extremely happy that I did. I quickly became acquainted with the main Administrator, Nancy, and the website owner, Scott Foster. I found them and still find them to be very friendly, professional, and easy to work with. This is why, in part, I am responding to this report left by the writer Chanel. Both Nancy and Scott were there right from the beginning and helped me to master the skills that I possessed. In November of the same year, I was promoted to the Administration team. Here, I assisted in proofreading, writer issues, and other tasks as deemed appropriate for the position.

Within months, I approached Nancy and Scott about creating a Quality department where writers would be evaluated on their responsibilities. These include logging in regularly, ensuring work is delivered to clients in a timely manner, and that all of the Terms of Service/Policies and Procedures were adhered to. Naturally, because I had previous jobs where I was involved in Quality Assurance, they agreed to allow me to start the program. I really appreciate and thoroughly enjoy the fact that the company recognizes the strengths and weaknesses of their writers and allows them a certain level of customization when it comes to their career with the company.

To date, I am still an Administration and focus primarily on quality. I am also still a writer. When it comes to being involved with the company, I am able to see both the Administration side of things and the Writing side of things. I can assure anyone that reads this report that as long as the articles are properly composed, optimized according to the specifications outlined by the client, turned in on time, and that if standard, professional accountability is exhibited, that you will be paid. Not only will you be paid for the work that you do, but you will also have many opportunities for growth and professional success.

Out of all the places I have written for, Need-An-Article.Com is by far the best. Not only is there a steady supply of projects (I have well over 500 articles with my name on them right now to be written), there is an opportunity for advancement within the company. If a particular skill or talent is exhibited in a writer, the Administration team works diligently to determine how those skills and talents may be used to benefit not just the company, but themselves. The pay is steady, and the work is plentiful. I highly recommend Need-An-Article.Com to both writers and clients alike. This still after nearly three years with the company!

I am a writer for Need An Article and have written for them since 2008. I have been treated with the utmost of respect by Scott Foster and the staff at Need An Article ever since I stated writing for the site. I will take issue with what Chanel is saying against the site.

The first problem I have with what Chanel is saying is that you cannot sign up as a writer off the website. The website is for clients to sign up on. Someone within Need An Article has to give you the writer's sign up website.

Whatever problems she was having because of not correcting her work she was causing others problems and the clients to be inconvenienced. Without clients being satisfied the writers would not have assignments to write and to make money from. Our first responsibilities to the site is to do quality work that pleases the clients.

The rules are not hidden or vague at Need An Article everything is very plainly spelled out. The staff has been nothing but polite to me and has at several times had my back when the clients were wrong in their opinions or actions. They are on the writers side and understand how hard our jobs are at times.

Scott Foster is continually trying to expand the site to give us writers more opportunities. As far as I am concerned this is the best place I have ever worked on or off the Internet and will continue to work for Need An Article as long as they stay in business.

Chanel is also not telling the whole truth about what Need An Article pays their writers it is not just $5 an article. The writers get paid starting at $5 an article but it can go on up from there depending on the length of the articles.

I love working for Need An Article! They are the most honest people I know!

You can contact me at [email protected] for further information and my name is Peggy.

DBA: Need AN Article, located at the following URL's:

http://www.need-an-article.net
http://www.needanarticle.com
http://www.need-an-article.com

founded in early spring of 2006 by Scott Foster.

first and foremost, I'd like say that as the owner of this site, it was my intention from the start to provide a place where both client and writer could meet and satisfy each of their demands.

I also have no intention to bash anyone, or violate the privacy of any individual.

However, our privacy has been unprofessionally compromised and violated in this "Rip off" report (So called).

Mind you, the individual who made this report agreed to our confidentiality agreement prior to accepting a position with our company. We don't take it lightly when we post clear and concise terms on our site in good faith, only to have them trampled on.

Clients want/need content for their websites, copy for marketing campaigns, ebooks, mini reports, etc.

Writers want/need a place to work and receive a 'steady' flow of work. A freelance writer also desires to work with ethical people who will pay them - and pay in a timely manner.

Well, we do all of that here NAA - and have been successfully since early 2006. So if you are a writer looking for a place where you will be treated fairly we would love to meet you.

However, after reading the report above, you may be a bit leery. If so, it is absolutely normal and I can't blame you. I mean shoot! Anyone who would spend that amount of effort and verbiage creating a report like that must have really been raked over the coals. Surely, from the sound of it, this writer had been 'jipped' out of a load of articles and money.

One thing that is for certain... the old adage of: 'There are always two sides to a story' is one bit of wisdom I've learned to carefully take into consideration. I have had it happen (And I'm sure you have too) where I refused to listen to the other side, and end having it come back and bite me in the butt. Always listen to both sides ;)

So I guess the spot light is on me now, to deliver a convincing rebuttal.

Well, here it is one short burst: (I hope)

We have many writers who work here on the site. And each of them understand that we have a proof reading stage - and rightly so... we want to make sure that consistency and quality is maintained before a finished piece goes to a client. Certainly, not an unreasonable requirement.

Secondly, writers here at NAA also understand that in the event that issues arise within a piece they have submitted, proofers will either correct it, or they will flag it and ask the writer to fix it. We give up to 24 hrs for issues to be cleared up and dealt with. Surely this is only fair to the client - being that they that they typically wait around 24-48 hrs for a turn around, which is fine for most.

Usually, things run hunky-dory; and writers gladly address issues in a very prompt manner.

Now, in the event that a writer submits *MULTIPLE*, back to back pieces to proof reading with issues... well, we don't take that lightly.  We will, and have taken precautionary measures to deal with matters of this nature. Writers understand this - as it is stated in our policies.... that will will hold pay and shut down a writers ability to take more work until we can ascertain the problem.

I feel I should mention that we do allow some writers work to bypass the proof reading stage via a system setting from our admin side. This of course, is only if they have earned it. Some writers just have a knack for consistency and hardly ever have an issue arise.

Ask any of our proofers, and they can usually tell you right up front in much detail, what it is like to have to proof read work from some writers.  They are trained to report repetitive issues to admin - and so is the case with this writer.

She claims that a few weeks before I said that she was doing a good job. Well, that is just a stretch if I ever saw one!

No, what she is talking about is the email I sent to her where I asked her to do the following after receiving notice from the proof readers that they were tired of all the repetitive issues they were noticing with her work. (See attached image below)

On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 2:39 AM, Scott Foster

Hi Chanel,

Would you be so kind to address the article in proof reading at your earliest convenience?

Thank you in advance. Also, can you please be extra careful about copyscape results. Close to 100 words showed up in copyscape.

Now, I don't know about you... but ONE HUNDRED words showing up in copyscape is enough to ruffle the feathers of any client. Not only is it irresponsible, but unprofessional to take content from elsewhere on the net and try and pass it through to a client.

Mistakes happen. But copyscape results and constant grammar issues on a weekly basis is not something we have the patience, nor the desire to deal with.

And frankly, we have stated this more than once that repetitive issues - AND repetitive copyscape results, is a sure one-way ticket to being banned.

So did I tell her she was doing a good job? Well, if I did... it could have been a mistake on my part. In the daily deluge of hundreds of emails and customer service inquiries, I have made mistakes. Run this site for a day in my shoes, and I am sure you'll get the point :)


Her was the rest of the correspondence
Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2010 10:44 AM

Hi Scott,

I addressed (name withed) about the article in proof reading. I will be careful the next time. Thanks for the heads up! Chanel

My response:

On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 3:39 PM, Scott Foster
 

Thank you Chanel,

I sure do appreciate it. I know you are doing your best it shows

=== end of correspondence ===

Bear in mind that she stated the following in her report:

"...I was writing 10 to 14 articles a day for them."

We were well aware that she was taking a lot of work and submitting it. And I am aware it takes effort to do that. And we appreciate it when writers don't just sit around and do a job here and there. We have lots of work, so doing 10-14 jobs in a day is pretty convincing that someone is doing their best.

(Side note: My appreciation was taking care of the issue.)

However, sometimes someone's best is just not up to par. As was the case with this writer. She continued to submit work that had to be reworked, redone, or worse, reopened to another writer at the behest of the client. (See attached image in this post below)

So, we simply put a stop to it - locked the account and held all work pending, and pending payments until we could ascertain the degree of work needed to fix the issues. This is basically what we state in our policies with writers. Objecting to them after the fact or indicating she thought they were absurd... is ridiculous!

"Another thing is that I believe their policies are completely absurd"

What kind of person agrees to your policies and then turns right around and objects to them when they are enforced?

What kind of person agrees to a confidentiality and privacy agreement prior to working with you... and then turns around and breaks it because they think you owe them $60.

I mean that is what she's wanting. $60 dollars!

Actually, our calculations came out to be about $20 she had coming. I know the economy has some people riled up. But you don't sell your soul to the devil for the price of the average cell phone bill.

She claims the reason for her report here was that she wanted to to "alert" other freelance writers. Well, I disagree! I think anyone with a brain can see this for what it is! A malicious attempt to basically 'get back at' and smear.

Think about it for a second! She ends her message with the following:

"One last piece of input is that Need an Article gloats about how much they pay their writers on their website. Their website (which now reminds me of business website scams) states that the pay is as much as a Big Mac and a Coke! Its amazing how incredibly tacky they are. Hopefully other freelancers that are writing for NAA will how ugly this business is. They will try to get rid of you or have you write for free. Then theyll move on to someone else who is willing to write $5 articles until theyre done with them."

If this was such an issue, WHY did she accept a position with us in the first place? Only now is it brought up, which is absolutely irrelevant.

Btw, we do need to do a bit of updating to the sales page of our site. We have added so much (And continue to add) since. Ask any of our many writers here on the site, and they'll tell you that we are on one of the best places they have ever worked for. We have writers who have been with us since the site's inception. (4 years)

If we are such an ugly business; or requiring writers to "write for free" as she purports, then why such a lack of complaints here and elsewhere on the net? Surely! There would be quite a ruckus floating around out there if we were a company with "shady business practices".

Back to work :)

DBA: Need AN Article, located at the following URL's:

http://www.need-an-article.net
http://www.needanarticle.com
http://www.need-an-article.com

founded in early spring of 2006 by Scott Foster.

first and foremost, I'd like say that as the owner of this site, it was my intention from the start to provide a place where both client and writer could meet and satisfy each of their demands.

I also have no intention to bash anyone, or violate the privacy of any individual.

However, our privacy has been unprofessionally compromised and violated in this "Rip off" report (So called).

Mind you, the individual who made this report agreed to our confidentiality agreement prior to accepting a position with our company. We don't take it lightly when we post clear and concise terms on our site in good faith, only to have them trampled on.

Clients want/need content for their websites, copy for marketing campaigns, ebooks, mini reports, etc.

Writers want/need a place to work and receive a 'steady' flow of work. A freelance writer also desires to work with ethical people who will pay them - and pay in a timely manner.

Well, we do all of that here NAA - and have been successfully since early 2006. So if you are a writer looking for a place where you will be treated fairly we would love to meet you.

However, after reading the report above, you may be a bit leery. If so, it is absolutely normal and I can't blame you. I mean shoot! Anyone who would spend that amount of effort and verbiage creating a report like that must have really been raked over the coals. Surely, from the sound of it, this writer had been 'jipped' out of a load of articles and money.

One thing that is for certain... the old adage of: 'There are always two sides to a story' is one bit of wisdom I've learned to carefully take into consideration. I have had it happen (And I'm sure you have too) where I refused to listen to the other side, and end having it come back and bite me in the butt. Always listen to both sides ;)

So I guess the spot light is on me now, to deliver a convincing rebuttal.

Well, here it is one short burst: (I hope)

We have many writers who work here on the site. And each of them understand that we have a proof reading stage - and rightly so... we want to make sure that consistency and quality is maintained before a finished piece goes to a client. Certainly, not an unreasonable requirement.

Secondly, writers here at NAA also understand that in the event that issues arise within a piece they have submitted, proofers will either correct it, or they will flag it and ask the writer to fix it. We give up to 24 hrs for issues to be cleared up and dealt with. Surely this is only fair to the client - being that they that they typically wait around 24-48 hrs for a turn around, which is fine for most.

Usually, things run hunky-dory; and writers gladly address issues in a very prompt manner.

Now, in the event that a writer submits *MULTIPLE*, back to back pieces to proof reading with issues... well, we don't take that lightly.  We will, and have taken precautionary measures to deal with matters of this nature. Writers understand this - as it is stated in our policies.... that will will hold pay and shut down a writers ability to take more work until we can ascertain the problem.

I feel I should mention that we do allow some writers work to bypass the proof reading stage via a system setting from our admin side. This of course, is only if they have earned it. Some writers just have a knack for consistency and hardly ever have an issue arise.

Ask any of our proofers, and they can usually tell you right up front in much detail, what it is like to have to proof read work from some writers.  They are trained to report repetitive issues to admin - and so is the case with this writer.

She claims that a few weeks before I said that she was doing a good job. Well, that is just a stretch if I ever saw one!

No, what she is talking about is the email I sent to her where I asked her to do the following after receiving notice from the proof readers that they were tired of all the repetitive issues they were noticing with her work. (See attached image below)

On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 2:39 AM, Scott Foster

Hi Chanel,

Would you be so kind to address the article in proof reading at your earliest convenience?

Thank you in advance. Also, can you please be extra careful about copyscape results. Close to 100 words showed up in copyscape.

Now, I don't know about you... but ONE HUNDRED words showing up in copyscape is enough to ruffle the feathers of any client. Not only is it irresponsible, but unprofessional to take content from elsewhere on the net and try and pass it through to a client.

Mistakes happen. But copyscape results and constant grammar issues on a weekly basis is not something we have the patience, nor the desire to deal with.

And frankly, we have stated this more than once that repetitive issues - AND repetitive copyscape results, is a sure one-way ticket to being banned.

So did I tell her she was doing a good job? Well, if I did... it could have been a mistake on my part. In the daily deluge of hundreds of emails and customer service inquiries, I have made mistakes. Run this site for a day in my shoes, and I am sure you'll get the point :)


Her was the rest of the correspondence
Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2010 10:44 AM

Hi Scott,

I addressed (name withed) about the article in proof reading. I will be careful the next time. Thanks for the heads up! Chanel

My response:

On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 3:39 PM, Scott Foster
 

Thank you Chanel,

I sure do appreciate it. I know you are doing your best it shows

=== end of correspondence ===

Bear in mind that she stated the following in her report:

"...I was writing 10 to 14 articles a day for them."

We were well aware that she was taking a lot of work and submitting it. And I am aware it takes effort to do that. And we appreciate it when writers don't just sit around and do a job here and there. We have lots of work, so doing 10-14 jobs in a day is pretty convincing that someone is doing their best.

(Side note: My appreciation was taking care of the issue.)

However, sometimes someone's best is just not up to par. As was the case with this writer. She continued to submit work that had to be reworked, redone, or worse, reopened to another writer at the behest of the client. (See attached image in this post below)

So, we simply put a stop to it - locked the account and held all work pending, and pending payments until we could ascertain the degree of work needed to fix the issues. This is basically what we state in our policies with writers. Objecting to them after the fact or indicating she thought they were absurd... is ridiculous!

"Another thing is that I believe their policies are completely absurd"

What kind of person agrees to your policies and then turns right around and objects to them when they are enforced?

What kind of person agrees to a confidentiality and privacy agreement prior to working with you... and then turns around and breaks it because they think you owe them $60.

I mean that is what she's wanting. $60 dollars!

Actually, our calculations came out to be about $20 she had coming. I know the economy has some people riled up. But you don't sell your soul to the devil for the price of the average cell phone bill.

She claims the reason for her report here was that she wanted to to "alert" other freelance writers. Well, I disagree! I think anyone with a brain can see this for what it is! A malicious attempt to basically 'get back at' and smear.

Think about it for a second! She ends her message with the following:

"One last piece of input is that Need an Article gloats about how much they pay their writers on their website. Their website (which now reminds me of business website scams) states that the pay is as much as a Big Mac and a Coke! Its amazing how incredibly tacky they are. Hopefully other freelancers that are writing for NAA will how ugly this business is. They will try to get rid of you or have you write for free. Then theyll move on to someone else who is willing to write $5 articles until theyre done with them."

If this was such an issue, WHY did she accept a position with us in the first place? Only now is it brought up, which is absolutely irrelevant.

Btw, we do need to do a bit of updating to the sales page of our site. We have added so much (And continue to add) since. Ask any of our many writers here on the site, and they'll tell you that we are on one of the best places they have ever worked for. We have writers who have been with us since the site's inception. (4 years)

If we are such an ugly business; or requiring writers to "write for free" as she purports, then why such a lack of complaints here and elsewhere on the net? Surely! There would be quite a ruckus floating around out there if we were a company with "shady business practices".

Back to work :)

×

1 / 1

2 / 1

❮ ❯