Reinstate payment please
This project had a revision request that was incorrect. The pronunciation indicated was correctly pronounced. I flagged the project to explain there was not issue with the pronunciation, and then it was rejected without followup.
Please reinstate payment the payment due.
https://voicebunny.com/projects/#/timeline/60C9F5A814698D819CB1
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Hi,
The client instructions are a bit ambiguous on this one, ultimately it makes more sense to pronounce it the way you did. For this reason, we will remove this rejection from your stats.
However, your voice doesn't sound like a 21 year-old as requested by our client. For this reason, we can't really pay for it. Make sure to be more selective regarding the projects you apply to so they 100% fit with the client's brief. Otherwise, you're bound to get more rejections.
Sebastian: First, my question was why was my flag not pickup up because the revision request was invalid, but instead that being resolved, the audio was then rejected without further discussion. What kind of a process is this?
Next, there was nothing ambiguous about it for me, because I know what UWA is. It doesnt 'make more sense' that is the way it is pronounced. The only ambiguity was that your QC did not understand the institution or how to pronounce it. I tried to correct that with flagging but the process failed or does not exist. And the project still stands unfulfilled.
Next, this is the 2nd time you have done this: I go through this cumbersome community posting process to receive a very slow response for a specific rejection reason, and then you say "well dont worry about that issue" but now THIS is the real problem. If voice age was the real problem, why wasn't it caught in QC? This post is about an incorrect pronunciation rejection, so why do you keep moving the goal posts? I successfully submit and deliver for *young australian male" 90% of the time without an issue. Why are you making this determination for the client? It is entirely subjective and I strongly disagree.
I will say again this rejection and review process is deeply dysfunctional and you are not serving the end client, the talent or frankly your own platform.
Hi Nick
The issue with raising a flag in Speedies is that sometimes our Production Management team will not be able to reply to your request on time before the read expires. Which is why we can ignore the rejection so it doesn't affect your numbers, as we understand that sometimes further instructions may be needed and you are doing your best with the recording you upload to the platform.
When it comes to deliverables, our QC team has the responsibility of only approving those files that have already been assessed and that will likely be approved by our clients. We pay for a deliverable to then sell it to our client. That's why we must make the decision before the audio gets to our client.
We'd love to receive any suggestions you may think of that can positively impact our workflow.
Regards