[vlokshin]

> Aside from 3/4 of your post being a gigantic ad about your own platform

I mention what I think is necessary for a platform in any vertical to work. We just happen to already be doing it for our vertical.

> how is it really a race to the bottom?

- Just about everyone has a 4.5+ star review, so the cheapest 4.5+ star review looks objectively better to a Co trying to cut costs. Just like any review system, it can be gamed.

- Customers get preferential treatment. That's not a fair two-sided marketplace -- that's a race to the bottom, for whoever keeps the customers happy, including the bad ones.

- Look at average salaries/hourly fees for different fields and look at UpWork. That should be the clearest "race to the bottom" evidence.

> Maybe the vetting process could be better, but Upwork is the best contract to hire marketplace for a variety of work, IMO.

They're the biggest. That's about it. Read OP's write-up, ask other freelancers, ask other customers. UpWork is a lame excuse for what part-time, remote work has the potential to become in the economy.

[fourstar]

When I vet candidates I do an image search on their profile photo, look at their resume (and other projects they’ve done on the platform), along with the number of hours worked on the platform. Focusing only on a rating system is short-sighted.

Re: it being an imbalanced marketplace in favor of customers, I guess you’d also say the same about eBay?

I understand your motive is driven to compete with Upwork, but it’s the most built-out and legitimate platform out there, and given their size, I trust them over some smaller operation.

P.S.: I read the OP’s naive writeup. He didn’t follow the platform rules and was surprised that it went against him. Shocking. $400 is a lesson to do more research next time.

[vlokshin]

I agree that if everyone vetted as extensively as you did, UpWork experiences would be more successful. But people don't, and it's unreasonable to assume the same vetting processes for 10 hours of work vs 10+ year careers (FT hires). The platform should be vetting both sides, and they don't really.

I would say the same about eBay. Would you rather bet on eBay or Amazon today?

> given their size, I trust them over some smaller operation

Fair enough, but "trust the biggest fish" is a dangerous assumption.

> P.S.: I read the OP’s naive writeup. He didn’t follow the platform rules and was surprised that it went against him. Shocking. $400 is a lesson to do more research next time. Maybe the platform rules suck?

Any self-respecting professional would think the random screenshots thing is creepy. If talent is vetted and to be trusted, the screenshots/camera thing should be unnecessary.