

Draft Preview: Uber for writing - nate
http://ninjasandrobots.com/draft-preview-uber-for-writing

======
huhtenberg
A couple of notes, based on my prior experience with online proofreading
services, some of which were pretty decent if a bit expensive. All of them
lacked the following -

1\. A way to communicate with the editor. To say "Thanks", for example.

2\. A way to retain the same editor for future requests. Some editors are
_much_ better than others and an ability to go back to the same person is very
useful.

~~~
anandkulkarni
That's very interesting. Premier supports this interaction and retention
directly, so perhaps Draft will in the future, too!

~~~
nate
Yeah, it's great feedback. Noted. I'll start exploring this soon.

------
chanced
This is awesome; in fact I was thinking about building something similar a few
days ago. Judging by the screenshots, it looks like you did a good job on the
MVP so I can comfortably set that idea aside.

Do you mind disclosing the fee structure? Is it word count based, editor
count, or a combo of both?

Also, do the reviewers get to see the versioned accepted/rejected/proposed rev
history) or just the original?

~~~
nate
Thank you very much!

At the moment I'd like to keep it at just a single flat fee: $10 for a review.
(It's only $5 right now for people beta testing)

No matter what the size. So if you have a short doc you'll get lots of edits,
and a long doc will get a good look and some comments on how to improve but
not a detailed proof read.

I like keeping it that way so you can hit the button and always know what to
expect. You don't have to worry "how much is this one going to cost me now".
You'll just know.

I see a lot of other folks charging per word. I might play with that if folks
don't like the flat fee.

Reviewers currently only see the original. I don't have a feedback mechanism
in place yet for the reviewers to see how their changes are getting accepted.
It's on the todo list.

~~~
chanced
You're welcome!

Re:price

I guess for me the current pricing structure is a bit more vague. I get that
knowing how much I'll be billed before I hit the button is a good thing but I
don't really know what I'll get in terms of quality or quantity of reviews.

My recommendation is to setup brackets based on word count and then tiers
within those. So, for instance, (using completely arbitrary numbers):

0-50 words: 5 reviews ($5), 10 reviews ($8), 25 ($12); 51-100 words, 3 reviews
($5), 10.....and so on. Rigging up the javascript to make that determination
would be trivial.

The reason I prefer this approach is that the content that I would need
reviewed are fragments. Writings such as product blurbs and headlines are
often extremely small in length but are the content that is likely to be hot-
swapped most frequently, thus needing the most reviews, for AB tests.

In more cases than not, getting those small content blocks right is far, far
more crucial than having a blog reviewed. A small blurb may only need 3
passthroughs but I may want to start with 10 on a headline and continue to buy
revisions until I'm satisfied or the AB tests are concluded.

    
    
      Reviewers currently only see the original. I don't have a feedback mechanism in place yet for the reviewers to see how their changes are getting accepted. It's on the todo list.
    

The revision structure, imo, is your most powerful feature. Perhaps something
as simple as the owner is the only one that can accept but anyone that knows
the publicly facing url can submit changes would work at first. It would be
akin to a lot of the pastebin-esk sites out there with a bit of a twist.

This way, I could submit my changes into you (and you send them over to
whomever) for review but I could also send them over to my wife (whom is also
subject to my persistent requests for reviews).

Most importantly though, the history gives the reviewer a sense of state and a
better indication of intent and direction.

Anyway, good luck man. Keep HN informed and I look forward to kicking the
tires.

~~~
nate
This is tremendous feedback. I'm insanely appreciative of that. Great insight
I'll chew on. Want to email me for an invite? nate.kontny gmail.

------
anandkulkarni
We couldn't be more excited to support this here at Mobileworks. We use
Premier ourselves to write a bunch of our content.

As far as I know, this is one of the first times a crowd has been embedded in
a software application for the general public.

~~~
huhtenberg
This looks exceptionally useful.

However, if you don't mind me asking - how a "college educated crew"
reconciles with being "super cheap"? Who are the editors exactly?

~~~
anandkulkarni
Good question. Mobileworks helps folks in the developing world participate in
the web's labor economy. Much of our workforce comes from places where
prevailing wages are much lower.

In this case, the editors are located outside the United States. They're
nurses, retired professors, writers, and more.

~~~
gamblor956
In other words, people least familar with the idiosyncracies of U.S. grammar,
spelling, and linguistic differences...

This site is probably still worth it if you are aiming for international
English, but it's useless if your audience reads and expects U.S. English.

Note that if you are U.S.-based, and your audience will primarily be
U.S.-based, you can probably get better quality proofing and editing for not
much more by posting Help Wanted's in your local college's student newspaper.

~~~
anandkulkarni
I gently disagree.

Take a look at our blog (dogfooded), and let me know whether you think the
editing quality reflects US or international English usage.

~~~
gamblor956
Edit: Just so that we're clear, I think the dogfooded blog post demonstrates
poor proofing in both U.S. and International (U.K.) English.

 _One constant I’ve recognized in my writing is how much feedback I like to
have._

The constant is not in your writing, but in your writing process.
Alternatively, choose a more appropriate preposition, such as "about." This is
a subtle error, but one that a US college graduate would have caught.

 _I’ll write an email, and I’ll send a draft to a colleague to see if it’s
right. I’ll write an application to something, and get feedback from friends
to see if it makes sense. I’ll write a blog post, and send it to my wife._

While this is technically correct, it is poor writing. The second phrase in
each sentence is logically connected to the first as a continuation of action,
so the second phrases should not be set apart as independent clauses. Either
eliminate the ", and I'll..." or make them separate sentences.

 _But being a solo entrepreneur and working alone at home, I often find myself
stuck, not being able to get a friend to look at my work._

It is permissible but not proper to start a sentence with "But" when you are
discussing the immediately preceding sentence. It is not okay to start a
_paragraph_ with "But." Use "However" or "In contrast" or some such similar
word or phrase. Alternatively, move the sentence to the preceding paragraph.

 _My wife can only take so much._

A single sentence is not a paragraph.

Especially not when it is logically part of the previous paragraph.

Unless you are doing it for emphasis.

But you already had a single-sentence paragraph, so the emphasis is lost.

I got bored of proofing the blog post after that, but it definitely gets
_worse_ from that point on and if I were to continue I would have further
edits for every single sentence remaining in the post. The level of proofing
is perfectly acceptable for a personal blog where you aren't too worried about
it being read professionally...but why would you bother pay to have a personal
post proofed? If this is the level of quality that can be expected from Draft,
it is simply not adequate for any professional purpose.

~~~
RaphiePS
Note that you proofread Nate Kontny's blog, not Mobileworks' dogfooded blog as
suggested.

~~~
gamblor956
You're right, I assumed Kontny was dogfooding too.

Some thoughts on the actual MobileWorks blog: _Here’s an idea. What if the
network of disruptive startups being created in Silicon Valley could band
together to disrupt unemployment itself, right here in the US? Today, we’re
announcing a new experiment to try and do exactly that._

After "idea" there should be a semicolon. Also, in the U.S., formal
abbreviations such as U.S. and U.S.A. are always punctuated in professional
writing (see, e.g., the NY Times). Bloggers and commenters get away with not
punctuating because they are not expected to be professional, but that is not
an excuse a proofreading service should make. Note that this is exactly what I
was referring to originally, as the standard convention in most European
countries is that formal abbreviations in English are _not_ capitalized, i.e.
UK rather than U.K.

 _pick up the last few slots" should be "fill up...", as slots cannot be
picked up.

_ It's a chance* should be "This is a chance" because they are referring to
WFA, not the project work, unless they truly are referring to the project work
and not WFA.

The list has improper punctuation. Each item should end with a semi colon; the
third item should not have a period; there should be a conjunctive or
disjunctive joinder after the third item or the "and more" shold be made its
own separate item.

 _participants will be able to take skills learned working on Silicon Valley’s
projects with them as they're placed_

As written, it means that participants' skills will only be useful in the
initial stages of job-hunting rather than useful in the jobs in which they are
placed; it should say something like "Participants will learn skills working
on Silicon Valley projects. They can take these skills with them to full-
time..."

There are more, but you get the idea. This service is decent but pointless for
non-professional writing and not up-to-par for professional writing.

~~~
anandkulkarni
You had it right; I'm referring to the linked post.

But you seem to be looking for proofreaders who can apply the particular set
of proofing standards expected of print writers, as opposed to suggested edits
an informal writer can incorporate into blog posts.

I'm not sure that's what Draft claims to do -- or why it's so interesting!

------
bperry87
A friend and I have been working on a similar'ish product that's best
described as Editing-as-a-service. <http://www.edithero.com>

We're about push out a new 'plan' and set of copy. We'd love some feedback and
questions. Thanks everybody!

------
chrisfromto
Awesome, awesome idea. I would definitely use such a service (assuming quality
editing).

