Subscribe

RSS Feed (xml)

Powered By

Skin Design:
Free Blogger Skins

Powered by Blogger

If I am MIA here, I might be tapping the keyboard at MaKiMeJi. Come join us there.

Wednesday, October 08, 2008

PPP Reviewers Getting Sloppy?

I'm not sure it it's just me or other bloggers experienced having their posts rejected because PPP reviewers made a mistake. I've been doing work for PPP for a year now and it was only lately that I observed more of this inaccuracies. I actually saw this review mistakes for like five times -or more- already in the past couple of months. Makes me think if their reviewers are new - if they are, I could very well excuse the mistakes. But if they're not, I'm just ready to hear their excuse.

Anyway, being a believer of the feedback system or maybe I just love to complain, I send tickets to Customer Love always. In fairness, my concerns are properly answered.

Now the recent blunder a reviewer made so irked me because I made the revision (as specified) only to be sent another review remark (second) telling me it is disapproved (again) and that I will not be able to resubmit this particular post because it violates their Terms of Service in regards to Frequency of Posts. Isn't that great? Naturally, I contacted Love again.

And here's the reply I got:


Hi Zenaida,

Thanks for reaching out to us. I apologize for the frustration with this. If it helps at all, this subject was the very one that was communicated to all the reviewers this morning. You are absolutely correct that ALL review issues should be listed in a rejection notice so that more than one notice is not necessary.

Hopefully, your specific example will help to d(r)ive this point home and you('ll) not be inconvenienced in this way in the future.

All the Best,

Carri


So there. At least, it's good to know that we're all getting somewhere here. And I can only hope that the feedback system I so believe in will bring improvements for everyone - including me!

Note: In italics- corrections made by me


post signature

No comments:

 


>