Ratings for writer logicallygenius
 |
Real name Username |
logicallygenius |
This account has been discontinued |
|
| Overall rating |  | |||
Rated with
by tylerherman 2012-07-25lots of spelling and grammatical errors, misuse of some words
Rated with
by rrice2020 2012-07-25Rated with
by webular 2012-07-24Rated with
by chardee42 2012-07-24Looks good. Thanks.
Rated with
by cindysimes 2012-07-24Rated with
by chardee42 2012-07-22Pretty good article.
Rated with
by majorian 2012-07-21Very Good.
Rated with
by achrafha 2012-07-20looks very well written, and contains 90% of what I asked for
4 stars from me
4 stars from me
Rated with
by levanchik 2012-07-20Rated with
by drewthershooter 2012-07-17Misspelled words and word placement.
Responded with comment: No solid reason for rejection.
Rated with
by mcardenal99 2012-07-17Rated with
by Sharabi 2012-07-17All the articles I've requested on task management are all similar, almost identical. Nothing new. Need a new point of view.
Responded with comment: This is not a valid reason for rejecting an article. I request the iWriter authorities to ban this requester. I wrote a very good article on Task management, but this requester has rejected it without any solid reason.
Rated with
by supersophia 2012-07-17Thank you. A nice quick result.
Rated with
by jmk909er 2012-07-16At least 6 grammatical errors. I think it was written by someone that English was not their first language
Responded with comment: whatever.
Rated with
by sjrh43 2012-07-16This reads like the writer has taken an existing articles and spun it. Most of the sentences do not make sense. Please ensure that all articles are well researched and are in perfect, grammatically correct English
Responded with comment: Check your grammar first, then point at others. Senseless comments.
Rated with
by abuyer 2012-07-16Nice
Rated with
by jposey 2012-07-15There were a number of grammatical errors and the use of the wrong words but the overall content was good.
Rated with
by jdtate51 2012-07-15instructions were not followed
Responded with comment: no solid reason to reject the article.
Rated with
by NatashaTEAM 2012-07-13thanks
Rated with
by MrManvsclock 2012-07-12Rated with
by cardinalws 2012-07-12Needs proofreading and improved structure, but on the right track.
Rated with
by mrsztuczkens 2012-07-11Good job!
Rated with
by JV2pt0 2012-07-10Made a rather boring subject interesting. Thanks
Rated with
by allpedal 2012-07-10Very nicely put together. Will be using again.
Rated with
by amykmrw 2012-07-09