Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
ZenMasterBullshit
Nov 2, 2011

Restaurant de Nouvelles "À Table" Proudly Presents:
A Climactic Encounter Ending on 1 Negate and a Dream
Do you include the payment for that first month of labor in that first payment or is it actually working nothing?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Putty
Mar 21, 2013

HOOKED ON THE BROTHERS
The "indie" aspect is irrelevant. It doesn't matter how small or big you are, all companies pay for requested labor. If you pay for a published article and the writer chooses not to write another you got exactly what you paid for, which is the article.

mycophobia
May 7, 2008
i think that writers would want to keep working for you if you paid them for their articles, personally

Lowtax
Nov 16, 1999

by Skyl3lazer

mycophobia posted:

i feel like you're not going to attract many writers with this policy
Then oh well, it will fail. I'm not sure exactly what else I can do to change this policy we've had for two decades now, since we're an independent site. Paying a writer $40 for an article, that grosses less than $3.00 in our current ad setup, is not a winning financial outcome. If we saturated the page with a ton more ads, like Vice and The Hard Times do, then we might make double that. Regardless, I have always, absolutely always, lost money paying writers, for at least 20 years. I have no idea why this is suddenly now an issue, because none of this has changed and I've always been exactly transparent with it when speaking to each and every author, but I guess we gotta bitch about something around here and once again predict doom and gloom because there's no way to do anything correctly on SA at this point due to my insistence to stay an indie site.

The Bloop
Jul 5, 2004

by Fluffdaddy
I am not trying to bitch or whine or piss you off, Lowtax, but I think that if you told people you would pay for any article published it would get a lot more people to throw one or two your way.

Not everyone can churn out good content at a fast rate for a number of reasons. So what if you only get 1/year from someone? if you get enough of those, you have a lot of content!

Bad articles don't get published and don't get paid. Good articles do. It feels like the focus on retention is going to seriously hinder attempts. What does it matter (serious question) if its 30 from one author or 1 each from 30?




Honestly, truly trying to help. I want this place to prosper and you with it.

qnqnx
Nov 14, 2010

Lowtax posted:

Pay begins at two months of work. Always been that way. Always will be that way. We were paying people for writing back in the mid 2000s when volunteers got paid absolutely ZERO for their contributions. We can't just suddenly change all our policies because hey, some site financed by Vice is paying more. We can't fucken compete with Vice. If any of you want me to start paying like Vice's / The Hard Time's model works, then cool, get me a loving contact there and we'll join up with them and offer the same benefits. Until then, you're gonna have to realize you're dealing with an absolutely indie site with ZERO ties to anything corporate, and we cannot compete with that.

"Always been that way" is not helpful when you are searching for labor, especially given how patchy has been the front page content across the later years.
Although admitting that payment does come after "a month or two" sets what to expect, it is not good optics and you would maybe attract more writers if payment were not after an up to two months delay. Hell, I'd say you'd get more writers as unpaid volunteers than with a sketchy looking payment after two months.

Lowtax
Nov 16, 1999

by Skyl3lazer

mycophobia posted:

i think that writers would want to keep working for you if you paid them for their articles, personally
I loving DO pay them for their work, I do not see how you are missing this. Just because there's an interim / trial period, doesn't mean they'll never get paid. That period is to show consistency and an ability to meet deadlines, so I do not have to scramble and find somebody else to fill their position when they mysteriously disappear after they've received their first payment, which I used to do until people took advantage of it repeatedly.

Stop this whole loving "SA doesn't pay its writers." Ask literally ANY writer or former writer if they've been paid. 100% of them will say yes, and they were always paid on time. This is loving ridiculous and you people seem to have brain issues.

CharlestonJew
Jul 7, 2011

Illegal Hen

Lowtax posted:

Then oh well, it will fail. I'm not sure exactly what else I can do to change this policy we've had for two decades now, since we're an independent site. Paying a writer $40 for an article, that grosses less than $3.00 in our current ad setup, is not a winning financial outcome.

If that's the case then I think it might me more worthwhile to focus on the forums, that seems to be where the real money's at

Also considering the major changes the site's undergone in the past few months I don't think "it's always been this way" is going to cut it as a justification

Pissed Ape Sexist
Apr 19, 2008

Regarding scheduling, how many pieces are generally considered to be in one month of writing for a single writer? Is it sort of a stable-based scenario that relies on how many other writers are submitting work as well, or is it a set schedule for everyone regardless?

Lowtax
Nov 16, 1999

by Skyl3lazer

qnqnx posted:

"Always been that way" is not helpful when you are searching for labor, especially given how patchy has been the front page content across the later years.
Although admitting that payment does come after "a month or two" sets what to expect, it is not good optics and you would maybe attract more writers if payment were not after an up to two months delay. Hell, I'd say you'd get more writers as unpaid volunteers than with a sketchy looking payment after two months.
There is no "sketchy looking payment." I have never had a "sketchy looking payment." Again, find literally ANY writer for this site and they will absolutely back me up. I literally add all the current writers to my autopay system, ensuring they are paid the correct amount at the correct time. Your proposition of "people would work more if you didn't pay them, as opposed to consistently paying them after a two week trial" is beyond ridiculous.

Lowtax
Nov 16, 1999

by Skyl3lazer

CharlestonJew posted:

If that's the case then I think it might me more worthwhile to focus on the forums, that seems to be where the real money's at

Also considering the major changes the site's undergone in the past few months I don't think "it's always been this way" is going to cut it as a justification
We've repeatedly gone out of our way to avoid doing ANYTHING that would cause the forums any change for the negative. You want to bombard the forums with intrusive ads because "that seems to be where the real money's at?" I do not.

The Hard Times pays $50 IF they accept your article. We pay $40 FOR EVERY ARTICLE after an intern period. Yall are beyond insane if you think this is a huge dealbreaker and somehow SA is to compete with VICE.

Lowtax
Nov 16, 1999

by Skyl3lazer

Pissed Ape Sexist posted:

Regarding scheduling, how many pieces are generally considered to be in one month of writing for a single writer? Is it sort of a stable-based scenario that relies on how many other writers are submitting work as well, or is it a set schedule for everyone regardless?
Depends on the column. Nothing is set in stone.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Lowtax
Nov 16, 1999

by Skyl3lazer
Anyway I'm closing this thread because the arguments being made here are like beyond the scope of reasonable logic, and it's going absolutely nowhere.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply