-
The rules for submitting a Dispute have been clarified. Please make certain you read the rules clarification(s) OR read the full DR rules.
TextBoss.com - Lazy? Bad writer? Hire us to do the heavy lifting! Fast turnaround!
- Thread starter TextBoss
- Start date
Placed an order for 10 articles.
Received the first one to review.
Passed it through GPTZero AND Originality.AI - which both are PAID and trusted models people have been using.
Both came back as 100% AI, likely hood of a false positive is quite low if both are showing 100% AI.
From originality.ai
The seller kept tell me the work was not AI-generated, but a 100% score on popular AI detectors is a serious red flag of trust.
After doing further research about their site and their "team", it's a fake team, with fake profile pictures. This can be done via reverse image search (will not expose the real identities).
AVOID, and preferably delist this misleading service! 0/5.
P.S I did get a refund.
Received the first one to review.
Passed it through GPTZero AND Originality.AI - which both are PAID and trusted models people have been using.
Both came back as 100% AI, likely hood of a false positive is quite low if both are showing 100% AI.
From originality.ai
The seller kept tell me the work was not AI-generated, but a 100% score on popular AI detectors is a serious red flag of trust.
After doing further research about their site and their "team", it's a fake team, with fake profile pictures. This can be done via reverse image search (will not expose the real identities).
AVOID, and preferably delist this misleading service! 0/5.
P.S I did get a refund.
Last edited:
- Aug 31, 2011
- 946
- 118
Unbelievable. We’ve never used AI. The site has placeholder images. So what? I’ve had the same team for a decade. We’re all real. We’ve been writing 100% human-written content for a decade.
These AI detectors do give false positives sometimes. We research and write everything from scratch.
Something seemed suspicious about this guy from the get-go. I’m not sure what is going on here.
Taking back my previous review. LOUSY, BAD SERVICE. PERIOD.
Total of more than ~14+ articles delivered recently -- all shown 100% AI generated.
I got some good content from him previously, but something changed now. I think he just started using AI in a newbie way. Or hiring the cheapest indians he can find that just churns AI articles, puts them through a spinner or humanizer or etc.
Overall, the quality is SUPER-BAD.
I will quote a paragraph from his latest delivery and let you decide if it's human written (it's not even AI, it's a spinner from 2010 lol):
"Looking for a ranked guide? See Best Product for Muscle Growth.
After obligatory regulatory and safety context?
Don’t skip Are Products Safe for Muscle Growth?
Ready to contribute to scientific progress? Browse the collection."
Total of more than ~14+ articles delivered recently -- all shown 100% AI generated.
I got some good content from him previously, but something changed now. I think he just started using AI in a newbie way. Or hiring the cheapest indians he can find that just churns AI articles, puts them through a spinner or humanizer or etc.
Overall, the quality is SUPER-BAD.
I will quote a paragraph from his latest delivery and let you decide if it's human written (it's not even AI, it's a spinner from 2010 lol):
"Looking for a ranked guide? See Best Product for Muscle Growth.
After obligatory regulatory and safety context?
Don’t skip Are Products Safe for Muscle Growth?
Ready to contribute to scientific progress? Browse the collection."
- Aug 31, 2011
- 946
- 118
I have no idea what is going on here. We've never used AI. Ever. I've had the same writers for over ten years. I have a very small team, and we're all from the US. I'm based in Dallas, TX.
As he said, we've done a lot of writing for him. We've delivered dozens and dozens of articles to him over a long period of time. His niche is extremely scientific and tough to write about, and we've done a great job writing him for the better part of a year.
Nothing has changed. He did provide a new outline this time (midway through the project). I got some feedback from him, and I offered to make the edits for free. I also offered to provide GPTZero and Originality scans on all the articles from this batch. There isn't a lot of wiggle room in a densely scientific niche. We are (or rather were) in the process of making the edits as we agreed. This review is news to me. There is just something so foul about some clients these days. I don't know whether it's because of the kinds of people you find in some of these niches, the economy, or what.
I'm not sure what is going on with a small minority of clients these days in general (not just related to me or my services), but there is an extreme hypersensitivity to AI use (which we do not and have never used). There is also a concomitant kneejerk reaction.
Anyone can look back and see the 100s of reviews on this thread. We can also provide scans on any order, but these AI detectors do give false positives sometimes. This client had a very specific outline (which changed midway through the project) in a highly scientific niche. We've been writing for him the better part of a year with no problem.
I was happy to fix it, and we were working on it. This was one slight deviation from the norm with this client over a long period of time. Instead, I get this horrible review. There is just something awfully wrong with some clients these days. We provide a stellar service. I don't know whether it's the niches some of these people are working in or what. We've had 2,200+ clients, and I get 99% positive feedback.
Last edited:
UPDATE:
So far we've agreed on a solution with the writer. He will improve the quality and provide new versions of the articles.
I hope that was just a glitch in our long term business.
Please DISREGARD my previous review.
I will change this if anything goes bad. But so far we're on the right track.