I am a writer. I don't use Grammarly.com because...

[ContentWriter]

I once had a client who insisted the use of Grammarly.com in checking the grammar score of my work. I am not a fan of proofreading tools. For me, the best proofreading tool is our pair of eyes.

I don't use Grammarly.com because it has recommendations that bend the writing style or personality of the writer. There are cases when my train of thought can be best expressed by using the passive invoice instead of the active voice. When Grammarly detects sentences in the passive invoice, it lowers the score of the article and prompts you to change it.

Now, if a client, who is not a writer in the first place, is an avid fan of Grammarly, you are torn between satisfying your client's avid-ness (if there's such a word) to Grammarly and bending your own "persona" in writing.

I really believe that while a content writer must really satisfy his client's requirements, he should not take his "persona" in writing for granted. Sacrificing your style in writing is similar to opening the doors for a writer's block. When a writer's block hits you, it affects your ability to deliver on or before the deadline.

Here's my question to forum members who are looking to hire article writers. Do you prefer your writer to pass Grammarly's standards by hook or by crook or you'd rather let him do his thing for as long as there are no obvious grammar errors?

 

[Reaver]

Even when I was writing for $1/100 words, none of my clients insisted I use Grammarly. I actually didn't even know what that was until I joined this forum. I had a couple of editors breathe down my neck about stupid stuff, but I mostly ignored them.

When I hire content writers, I let them do their thing. Too many restrictions on a writer makes for poor work.

 

[ContentWriter]

Even when I was writing for $1/100 words, none of my clients insisted I use Grammarly. I actually didn't even know what that was until I joined this forum. I had a couple of editors breathe down my neck about stupid stuff, but I mostly ignored them.

When I hire content writers, I let them do their thing. Too many restrictions on a writer makes for poor work.

Hi, @alwaysinvisible! It's good to know that we have the same stance on this.

 

[elitebill]

I believe Grammarly should only be used as a guideline. You shouldn't correct everything it suggests otherwise your article loses some character.

 

[ContentWriter]

I believe Grammarly should only be used as a guideline. You shouldn't correct everything it suggests otherwise your article loses some character.

That's exactly the point, @elitebill. Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I always have to give a brief "customer education" to my prospect if and when I see Grammarly in his or her pre-determined requirements.

 

[Kn9Isler]

Grammarly is great for a quick overview and finding typos. If I open an article in Grammarly and see that every third sentence is written in passive,
then I don't need to read it. It is a badly written article.

 

[Conor]

Complete the job as the client wants, and then fire him.

You could even link future clients to this thread if they're adamant about using Grammarly.

 

[mrankin]

I agree with a set of eyes being the best way to go. I don't mind the odd mistake being made, however when you have writers that have no idea then I highly recommend they use Grammary. Isn't it?

 

[THUNDERELVI]

It seems like you found a client who has no idea what he is doing. I order tons of articles for my money sites and for SEO purposes and I don't care what Grammarly says - for money sites, if they convert my visitors to buyers, I'm fine with that. The writer can use whatever he wants, active or passive, short/long sentences, etc... I don't really care. For SEO purposes, as long as you follow my guidelines, again I'm fine with that. A computer generated score would be the last thing I would use as a metric to measure my articles' efficiency. Having said that though, I do require my writers to have a "good" readability score.

 

[Jurr]

When I first got Grammarly, I tried to correct everything it advised me to. Now I don't bother anymore because it really cramps my style. If you write 1000-2000 word articles and try to fix everything, you will go crazy and butcher your style. But it's really good for finding mistakes.

 

[ContentWriter]

Grammarly is great for a quick overview and finding typos. If I open an article in Grammarly and see that every third sentence is written in passive,
then I don't need to read it. It is a badly written article.

Hi, @Kn9Isler. It makes sense from that perspective.

Complete the job as the client wants, and then fire him.
You could even link future clients to this thread if they're adamant about using Grammarly.

Hi, @Conor! Thank you for your response. Hehe, I am hesitant to fire a client just because of a Grammarly-related requirement. I don't want to see myself looking for a new client every other day. Hehe.

I agree with a set of eyes being the best way to go. I don't mind the odd mistake being made, however when you have writers that have no idea then I highly recommend they use Grammary. Isn't it?

Hi, @mrankin. Thank you for your comment. If the person isn't on top of the "English 101", I don't think you should be hiring him or her in the first place.

 

[ContentWriter]

It seems like you found a client who has no idea what he is doing. I order tons of articles for my money sites and for SEO purposes and I don't care what Grammarly says - for money sites, if they convert my visitors to buyers, I'm fine with that. The writer can use whatever he wants, active or passive, short/long sentences, etc... I don't really care. For SEO purposes, as long as you follow my guidelines, again I'm fine with that. A computer generated score would be the last thing I would use as a metric to measure my articles' efficiency. Having said that though, I do require my writers to have a "good" readability score.

I couldn't agree more. It is always an exciting and fulfilling experience to work with someone who gives you the freedom to do what you got to do for as long as you deliver the results your client needs. It looks like you're a good client to work with, @THUNDERELVI.

When I first got Grammarly, I tried to correct everything it advised me to. Now I don't bother anymore because it really cramps my style. If you write 1000-2000 word articles and try to fix everything, you will go crazy and butcher your style. But it's really good for finding mistakes.

Exactly, @Jurr29. Writers should be given the liberty to work with their creative style without disrespecting the basic requirements in English writing.

 

[xinga]

Well...Grammarly is wonderful to pick up missing commas and typos..other than that, why not just ignore it? While I agree, that too much passive voice sounds awkward (in English), it really depends on the article you are writing. Sometimes longer sentences do the job. think of a research paper, no passive voice and just short sentences would really be weird

 

[ContentWriter]

Well...Grammarly is wonderful to pick up missing commas and typos..

Hi, @xinga. Thank you for your comment. Aside from Grammarly, GingerIt is also a nice tool to have to check missing or incorrect punctuation marks.

 

[RedMango]

Find someone else. There's nothing worse than someone hiring you and telling you how to write.

Put your prices up, then they tend to not think they can control you so much, as the price dictates that you're pretty good and should be trusted/left alone.

 

[ContentWriter]

Find someone else. There's nothing worse than someone hiring you and telling you how to write.

Put your prices up, then they tend to not think they can control you so much, as the price dictates that you're pretty good and should be trusted/left alone.

Thank you for the moral support, @RedMango. On the other hand, the sad reality nowadays is that most prospects are looking for "cheap" and "high-quality" content at the same time. I say it respectfully that those two adjectives is an oxymoron, especially when their definition of "cheap" is almost close to the word "free". While it's normal to aim to get more for less, I have this feeling that most people put a higher regard on price than the experience and expertise of the writer nowadays. Maybe this topic deserves a separate thread.

 

[Reaver]

Like I tell every writer here: there are plenty of prospects who will pay a good price for quality work. If you've got mostly cheap prospects, you're looking in all the wrong places.

Thank you for the moral support, @RedMango. On the other hand, the sad reality nowadays is that most prospects are looking for "cheap" and "high-quality" content at the same time. I say it respectfully that those two adjectives is an oxymoron, especially when their definition of "cheap" is almost close to the word "free". While it's normal to aim to get more for less, I have this feeling that most people put a higher regard on price than the experience and expertise of the writer nowadays. Maybe this topic deserves a separate thread.

 

[ContentWriter]

Like I tell every writer here: there are plenty of prospects who will pay a good price for quality work. If you've got mostly cheap prospects, you're looking in all the wrong places.

That's right, @alwaysinvisible. I've learned how to politely turn down cheap offers. Overall, there are still prospects who respect the time and experience of skilled writers.

 

[SoccerLover]

If I'm purchasing article from you, I won't prefer Grammarly
There is issue all the time with Active and Passive voice.

 

[ContentWriter]

If I'm purchasing article from you, I won't prefer Grammarly
There is issue all the time with Active and Passive voice.

Hi, @soccerlover! It looks like you've experienced using Grammarly in the past, too.