@Tiffany S wrote:
@Natasa M wrote:
Katrina, my comment was regarding taking just inactivity as a measure--not cheating and stuff. And I explained why-- I just think there would be a lot of talents and clients lost in the process, if they would just take that inactivity as a criterion. And of course, just my opinion.
You asked what harm they were doing, though, and there is a clear answer to that--new freelancers who want to be active are being turned away because of the number of freelancers already registered in that area. If many of those freelancers aren't actually using the platform, doesn't it make sense to clear the way for those who want to work?
Not necessarily. Upwork is perfectly capable of basing its admission bar on the number of active, productive, or profitable contractors, according to its own business needs, while still carrying inactive providers on its rolls—which has a client-facing marketing benefit: "Eight jillion providers just salivating over the chance to work for you!" I rather suspect that's exactly what they do.
Is this also being done when submitting work in the portfolio section of a freelancer's profile? I noticed it when I had a sample uploaded in my portfolio. It says "Under review"
Thanks for sharing your feedback and for reporting questionable profiles. I see Natasha shared the announcement thread Garnor posted at the beginning of February for the users not familiar with the registration review process. I can confirm that we have a dedicated team reviewing cases like the ones you mentioned, to ensure skilled professionals' registrations are approved and they are able to use Upwork.
Rene, as we posted before, Upwork doesn't tolerate fake profiles and stolen Portfolio items. I'm sure you noticed the number of users whose accounts have been suspended after being reviewed by our team and found to be in breach of our ToS.
Noel, reviewing new portfolio samples is an unrelated process that you can read more about here.
Boot people for inactivity? There is already an option to search freelancers by last time active. Its at the client discretion to use it or not.
The review process will probably only increase the number of people working under the umbrella of an agency. The more a place seem exclusivist, the more it will be created the need of assisted registration
I don't think inactive contractors are a big factor in anything we are talking about. Inactive contractors are not competing against me when I bid on jobs.
Upwork algorithmically tries to emphasize active contractors when making recommendations to clients.
And I think genuine numbers of active contractors and new applicant profile quality are the overwhelming factors in whether new applicants are being rejected or not.
The reason I was saying this is because most of the letters the new contractors are getting state there is no room in the marketplace and booting inactive contractors would make room in the marketplace.
IF Upwork is including inactive contractors in their calculations, they should NOT be. They should stop doing so.
I don't think that they are, though.
I can't prove it, though. If someone knows more about that than I do, their input would be welcome.
What is unsaid in that message, out of a desire to be polite, is that really awful contractor profiles are being rejected, and it doesn't really matter how much opportunity is in the marketplace.
Also, the language of the rejection message is intended to help minimize the extant to which bad contractors game the system by knowing precisely why they're being rejected, and implementing targeted adjustments to their approach.
Aha, good point. I see what you're saying now.