New system aimed primarily at matching newer sellers with buyers
So now it seems I have to wait two hours before I can bid for a job. This is extremely unfair. Not only do experienced creatives/designers have to compete with an unfair playing field, ie people offered to do a job for £10 when it is clearly worth £100, we are now not allowed to bid for jobs as soon as they appear on PPH. What kind of system is this?!
Awful. Unfair. Unprofessional. Discriminatory.
Regards
C. Howe
-
The point of likes is to get exposure. The more people like something, the more will see it. I see where you and Paul are coming from, but I think you are wrong about why people buy likes and what difference they make.
Well 'exposure' may be on the mind of those that buy 'like' but the average person sees it as a sign of popularity. Buying 'likes' of any kind is a form of fraud.
We are discussing the buying and selling of likes in general and not the machinations of FB itself, which would be another discussion.
I do not see how you can say that there is a moral difference between buying links in order to get more exposure via search engines and buying likes
With the buying and selling of links, it's a little different. It's primarily about placement in Google results and not so much about a specific statement of endorsement ("like"). If I was a great dictator, I'd ban selling them too.
The SEO industry is responsible for filling the internet with dross created for SEO purposes and distorting our internet searches, purely on the basis of money, whether it be via fake "likes" or backlinks.
"I'm not here to be a moral arbiter."
No, but you are asking PPH to act as moral arbiters.
I'm asking them to not facilitate deception. Morals in general goes a lot further than that, but I take your point.
I kind of wish some very rich man would investigate whether some legal test cases around fraud and deception could close this industry down.
-
Now here's a VERY bizarre thing. Job 663179.
I apparently made a comment on this job, yet it's nothing like the job that I made a comment about.
It was apparently posted 3 hours ago, yet my comment is over 8 hours old and there is another 6 hours old.
I have never seen anything happen like this before. Either PPH has a fault or the buyer was able to alter the job significantly after it was posted. It's really odd.
-
@David, I appreciate that is what he asked for, I was speculating about what the bidders would actually supply.
@Paul, we are not going to agree, and short of commissioning market research into how people interpret FB likes there is no solid evidence either way. However, if you accept that it is likely that like buyers are paying for exposure, then there is no intent to deceive.
"We are discussing the buying and selling of likes in general and not the machinations of FB itself"
I think FB itself effectively selling likes is relevant, as is FB's tolerance of some methods of inflating like numbers.
-
I got the following today:
"We saw you’ve been delivering some Magento work to Buyers on PPH. We are reaching out to you to let you know that if you need any extra help our latest service offered on SuperTasker, Magento Fixes, is now available. And it costs only $20 !"
I have never done any Magento work and my knowledge of Magento starts at knowing what it is, and stops right there. How did PPH's system conclude that I had?
-
Job 665424 it's one where you make a template for the buyer and the buyer only pays you if someone buys the template.
I reported this to PPH and this is what they said (copy-writers turn away now):
"we have checked with out moderations team and they have informed us that it is not our T&C's. Also please note that this buyer is trusted member of PPH."
OK, so it's against PPH T&C's to ask for project specific samples, but it's OK to get work done and only pay for it if you can sell it on. Lovely.
Trusted buyer? great.
:-(
-
@ Paul
The double standards on this site beggar belief. I was big and brave and didn't look away as after the email response I got today re my query about the 'Magento' emails I've now come to the conclusion I'm impervious to their destruction of the English language.
Dear Deb,
We sorry for teh inconvence howeve if you adjust setting might stop could be mistake so passed on.
:/
When will they actually grasp the concept that being able to speak English does not mean one is able to write it coherently?
Also good to know all you need to be a trusted buyer is to be a level 1, have awarded 7 jobs and only received 3 feedback...
Today hasn't been all bad however as I have received the princely sum of £1.37 in royalties from my ebook so that early retirement is getting ever closer :)
-
I am going to be nice about the selection system. It actually found a job I sent a proposal for and that was not picked up by my emailed searches. It identified a phrase that describes work I do, but did not match any of the words in my profile keywords.
If the proportion of matches like this was higher it would be great and getting mostly false positives is very irritating, but I am going to be optimistic and take this as an indication that you could make this work.
-
@ David
That job is definitely not allowed and has been removed. There are some circumstances in which our moderation team may miss a posting, but we are always trying to improve this and available to correct a mistake.
And as far as I am aware PPH has not hired a freelancer to provide us with fake likes.
Wish a great day to all.
-
@Paul
To provide such a large number of likes means that we are talking about fake likes (bots) which cannot be delivered or even logically monitored. We allow for a small amount of likes and from mostly historically older members who have a good record of these sale son the site. I hope that makes a bit more sense.
-
Thanks for responding to half my question Michael.
I hope that makes a bit more sense
I'm afraid it doesn't to me. In fact I find your reasoning bizarre.
Most if not all of the 'FB like' sales on PPH involve numbers that are unlikely to be obtainable by getting real people to press on a button on a screen. The job values would never sustain such a network, so I think this industry is built upon bot networks.
If I allow your point that these are real people pressing a real button (though I think it's an unlikely scenario), they still aren't 'real' likes because the 'like' is a purchased service rather than voluntary expression of support or likeability. It's not a 'real like' it's a 'bought like'.
PPH is facilitating deception by allowing the sale of 'likes' on the website.
-
I am sorry you feel that we are facilitating deception Paul. We will have to agree to disagree on this subject. I think that a lot of discussion has been made in the last week regarding facebook likes, etc. I am happy to reject all such jobs and hourlies when we have a firm confirmation from a company about its usage. I have received formal letters from other companies asking for specific action and we are happy to cooperate in all ways. However, FB is not exactly condoning this, some might say they have actually allowed them for their own benefit. There are more forums and opinions than a logical person can stand on the net with both sides of the argument. And we do try to filter these so that they do not get out of hand.
-
@David I think the arms analogy is a step too far, but I understand it. I think that PPH or Michael looks unlikely to be diverted from their current course.
I don't think Michael presented a reasonable argument for the policy but at least he has engaged to a degree on the subject. I think there's only two of us on PPH arguing the moral stance, so we should move on perhaps?
I don't want to kill all engagement over a position where we are unable to make a difference.
-
@paul, looking at the hourlies selling likes, very few offered more than 1,000, which it is perfectly possible to deliver without bots.
It is still a useless product (I do not believe buyers get much benefit from bought likes - what benefits a business are real likes, and people sharing content, both from people whose friends match your target audience)
Post is closed for further comments because the limit of comments per post has been reached.
Comments
1902 comments