Improve your writing

Do You Know About This Triond Page – Information Without Context Can be Easily Misunderstood

Information, without context, can be easily misunderstood. A follow up piece to an article written by Shelpeare called Do You Know About This Triond Page?

Information, without context, can be easily misunderstood!

To seek knowledge is admirable. To learn more is a worthy pursuit. Gathering information is one way to a greater understanding of things. Said information could be true or false, or somewhere in between. It is easy to be misled by false information, even though the information itself may not be deliberately false! Confused? You could be. But then again, information, without context, can be easily misunderstood!

On the 9th August 2011 Triond writer Shelpeare published an article called ‘Do You Know About This Triond Page?‘ . In the article, Shelpeare discussed his finding of a web-page called ‘Triond For Publishers‘ which, on face value at least, looks like it may be contradictory to the current Triond that we publish on. A very quick cursory look at it would easily have alarm bells ringing in anyone who publishes on Triond as it implies that Triond could be selling our work off to other sites without our permission or consent. 

On revealing this information, Shelpeare asks the most important question regarding the ‘Triond for Publishers’ page – “(1) Is this an abandoned plan or is this how Triond operates at present?”. In looking at that question solely, if it is the former then there is no issue whatsoever, but if it’s the latter then it does appear to contradict the Triond TOS! To answer that question then more information is required. Shelpeare himself did not offer up more information to definitively answer the question either way, he merely asked the question.

However, that didn’t stop the vast majority of commenters on his article presuming the worst. The overall feeling gathered from the comments was simply that Triond had a ‘Triond for Publishers’ site that was being used to sell off our work without our permission and that that contradicts the Terms of Service of Triond. As usual, the pitchforks came out. One person said they were leaving Triond over this! Another said they don’t trust Triond! Triond aren’t trustworthy said another!

Potentially, it’s the proverbial mountains out of molehills.

The best place to start then is to address the question that Shelpeare asked - ”(1) Is this an abandoned plan or is this how Triond operates at present?” – and the way to do that would be to first look at the ‘Triond For Publishers’ page and see what information we can garner from it. On the page itself there is very little information that could help to answer the question. However, there is a banner of ‘Featured Content’ that circles through a total of 4 articles, here are the four articles with the dates they were published:

As can be seen clearly, those four articles from Triond users that are ‘Featured Content’ on the ‘Triond For Publishers’ page, and which have been published on sites other than those owned by Triond itself, were all published within a 30 day period in 2008! There is no indication of anymore being latterly published since then.
Another thing that some people were claiming was that Triond were selling the work of Triond users to the highest bidder without the Triond users permission or consent. That theory is totally blown out the window by the evidence though. Having looked through the portfolio on each of the above four named Triond users each of the articles are still listed on their portfolio as normal, but with the name of the site they are published on.

The implication is clear. With the articles listed on the portfolio of the user then the user must still be earning from the article! Another thing that should be noted is that on the article by Chan Lee Peng, ‘Odd Looking Marine Animals’, he himself leaves a message on it saying: “Thanks for all dearest readers who have read this article.” If Triond were selling his article without his permission do you honestly think that he would be commenting on it thanking people for reading it? Clearly not. Therefore it was done with the permission of Chan Lee Peng and everything was above board!
As already noted it appears that the ‘Triond For Publishers’ was something that happened a few years ago and doesn’t happen anymore. So that clearly answers the question that Shelpeare asked about whether it was abandoned or still happening. Even the other questions that Shelpeare asked have also been answered. Even if it was still happening just now it would not be a case of Triond selling our articles without our permission. In fact it would be with our permission and we would still be benefiting from it.
Shelpeare asked the question without making any contention to what the answer might be, but, as sometimes happens, many of the readers answered the question with a ‘worst case scenario’ and presumed the worse based on some of the information that Shelpeare provided. With more context to the information though it is easier to see the truth behind it all. One has to keep in mind that…

information, without context, can be easily misunderstood!

Liked it

Tags: , , , , , ,

26 Responses to “Do You Know About This Triond Page – Information Without Context Can be Easily Misunderstood”
  • Frederick Dewar
    February 2nd, 2012 at 5:57 pm

    Good information, thanks for sharing. Seems that you have put some effort in to your research and come to a conclusion that solves the problem sufficiently. :)

  • Alistair Briggs
    February 2nd, 2012 at 6:07 pm

    Well I hope it just offers up more information to come to the conclusion. ;)

  • worried user
    February 2nd, 2012 at 6:23 pm

    mmmm I don’t know. Are we meant to just think that all is rosy behind the scenes without knowing what actually is going on? Unless someone from the Triond management actually comes out and starts being transparent about how Triond works there is no surprise that so many people think the worst about them imo

  • True
    February 2nd, 2012 at 6:46 pm

    People generally don’t care about finding out the truth, they just want to see things that fit their own perception. Too many people think that Triond is dodgy so they only believe things that back that up, even though Triond are not dodgy.

  • Alistair Briggs
    February 2nd, 2012 at 6:52 pm

    Yep, it’s like, take a look at some of the articles on Writinghood bemoaning the low pay Triond pays. Who says it’s low? Some users. But what are they comparing it to? Only their own expectations of what they should be earning. It’s crazy. All you hear is moan moan moan but then when you look deeper in to how it actually works you realise why these people are not making money from Triond, because they are doing it wrong to start with. It’s infuriating and counter-productive. Those that moan about the low pay on Triond (which is only low compared to their own expectations!) actually put other people off and then it creates a downward spiral that makes things worse not better. And their solution to it is for Triond just to pay more, but they can’t because the advertisers aren’t paying more money. ARGH!

    Sorry about that rant. lol

    February 2nd, 2012 at 6:53 pm

    Thank you for writing this article. I had been part of the above aforementioned Triond in the past. Before Triond used any of my articles to sell to another publisher; Triond management asked me if I wanted to be part of the program. They had chose one of my articles, and then got my permission before selling it to the publisher. I had gotten paid for the article at least for a while.

    I do not believe that Triond is pursuing the Triond for Publishers any longer. I haven’t heard anything more about the program in a few years. Triond probably just did not remove the page for whatever reason. Your guess is as good as mine.


    Nelson Doyle

  • shelpeare
    February 2nd, 2012 at 6:53 pm

    Alistair, you said that the articles rotating on are only from a 30 day period in 2008. But we can’t use this as an indication that that plan is defunct because then we would have to say the same thing about the “Who’s Using Triond?” feature on the Triond homepage as it usually features about six writers from 2008 and two from 2007 and none from 2009-2012 yet Triond is still in operation. I wrote a very detailed article about that here:
    It seems then that it is a norm for Triond to do things that seem like nothing has been done for years. Even people who have died are on the “Who’s using Triond?” feature as well as those who no longer write here. I have never seen anyone from the 2009-2012 featuring on that Triond feature. It always goes back to 2008 and 2007.
    Apart from that the other lists have not been updated for quite a while. Yet that does not mean that Triond is now defunct. Well, I did say in my article comments that it is a case of copyright and not of Triond selling our work and I quoted where they said as much.

  • lucia anna
    February 2nd, 2012 at 7:06 pm

    Thanks for the share

  • Alistair Briggs
    February 2nd, 2012 at 7:14 pm

    @ Nelson Doyle

    It is very good to hear from someone who was around on Triond at the time as it gives a more accurate perception on it. The very fact that you yourself say that Triond asked for your permission before ’selling’ it to the publisher is just further proof that it was all above board.

    As for the page still being there; yeah it could just be a case that Triond just haven’t removed it. There is also the probability that it is just now a ‘dead’ page – signing in to it, or attempting to would lead to a non-existent page (404). :)

  • Alistair Briggs
    February 2nd, 2012 at 7:43 pm


    The comparison you make there is between two different things; 1) A rotation of articles 2) A rotation of users. They are two distinctly different things entirely. A more apt comparison would be between the rotation of articles on ‘Triond For Publishers’ and rotation of articles on ‘What’s Been Published’ on the Triond home page.

    At this exact moment in time, this very article is on the list of ‘What’s Been Published’ on the Triond home page and this was published today! In fact, the three other things that were also on that list at this moment were all published today.

    So what we then have is two comparative lists, one where all four things were from 2008 and the other where all four things are from today. The conclusion is obvious.

    When you mention about it being ‘a case of copyright and not of Triond selling our work’, the two things are linked. If Triond are selling our work then it infringes our copyright if they do so without our permission! However, Nelson Doyle said that they did ask for permission…

    Anyway, as for the ‘Who’s Using Triond’ on the home page, you are quite right that it does seem to show older users more than anything (although I have seen people who joined in 2009 appear on it, myself included). It does appear that whatever algorithim they use to work it out is not fit for purpose (depending on what the purpose is).

    However, one can make the argument that Triond should be doing all they can to promote the more successful writers and the argument could be that those who have been here for longer could be more likely to be successful than newer users. So while on face value it may appear unfair to not give everyone the same exposure, when one looks at it from the other side it makes sense.

    One also has to consider how much exposure is gained from the Triond home page. How many people do you think are going to the Triond home page who aren’t members of Triond to see what is published on Triond? That would be such a small number to make it worthless. Members of Triond go straight to their dashboard. And non Triond members searching the web for things will end up going straight to the page! If Triond removed those two lists from their home page it would make no difference whatsoever.

    I digress!

    Don’t get me wrong, there are things that Triond could/should do to improve things – of course there is – but there is always a flipside to it and sometimes what looks odd to us from an outside perspective may make perfect sense if we saw the bigger picture.

    There is always the option though, if thinking something is wrong, coming up with a better solution and taking it to Triond. The worst they can do is say no. ;)

  • shelpeare
    February 2nd, 2012 at 7:53 pm

    By the way, even if this plan was abandoned in 2008, and I’m not saying it wasn’t, that means that it came AFTER Triond started in 2006 not before.

  • Julian Simmons
    February 2nd, 2012 at 9:17 pm

    Where did my comment go? See, this is why I hate triond.

  • Julian Simmons
    February 2nd, 2012 at 9:19 pm

    Motherfucker won’t show up no matter how many times I post it. Al, are you seeing my comment? Apart from this one and the one above.

  • Brenda Nelson
    February 2nd, 2012 at 9:19 pm

    Wow this is all crazy stuff, good reporting and clearing it up.

  • Jo Oliver
    February 2nd, 2012 at 9:42 pm

    Excellent article. I agree 100%. Sometimes I think people use the hyperbole or suspense to get ppl reved up and rev their own revenues up, but in other cases, I think its just lazy writing. Either way, you’re right in that readers get no context and get bent out of shape about nothing. I remeber this program, and was asked if one of my articles could be published. This was years ago, and Triond, to my knowlede, does not use it any longer. It certainly wasnt any thing shady.

  • Jo Oliver
    February 2nd, 2012 at 9:45 pm

    Geez … No more posting comments from Android:) Keys are just too small for spelling:)

  • Alistair Briggs
    February 3rd, 2012 at 4:11 am


    By the way, even if this plan was abandoned in 2008, and I’m not saying it wasn’t, that means that it came AFTER Triond started in 2006 not before.

    The fact it came after 2006 just means that in 2008 Triond attempted something and then abandoned it cause it didn’t work.

    All websites evolve over time and sometimes they launch features somewhere down the line that just don’t work so they have to remove them.

    Something else to keep in mind, the Triond For Publishers page states it is in ‘Beta’…

  • Alistair Briggs
    February 3rd, 2012 at 4:17 am

    @ Julian Simmons

    Nope, not seeing any other comments apart from the two that are there. Same thing happened to me yesterday when I tried to comment on a couple of things – I always highlight my comment and ‘copy’ it incase it doesn’t take first time, then I can ‘paste’ it back in and try again. ;)

  • Alistair Briggs
    February 3rd, 2012 at 4:27 am

    Cheers Brenda :)

    @ Jo Oliver

    It is interesting to hear from another person who was an active member of Triond at the time they tried it as it gives a better insight in to it. As you said, and Nathan Doyle said earlier, Triond were asking permission so you are quite right to say it wasn’t anything shady.

    I can understand why some people who read Shelpeare’s article might think the worse (through no fault of Shelpeare really as he merely asked the questions) but those same readers could have looked further in to it and seen that it was ‘much ado about nothing’.

    P.S You’re spelling was fine from the Android ;)

  • avissado
    February 3rd, 2012 at 6:57 am

    thanks for sharing your perspective…

  • Alistair Briggs
    February 3rd, 2012 at 7:16 am

    You’re welcome avissado. I actually tried to comment on a couple of your articles earlier on today but they didn’t seem to take, so will try again later on. :)

  • dave
    February 3rd, 2012 at 9:54 am

    It amuses me no end about the number of people who think that Triond aren’t trustworthy because it doesn’t live up to their expectations. Hahaha

  • honea byrne
    February 3rd, 2012 at 9:42 pm

    Thank You-very non biassed

  • Alistair Briggs
    February 4th, 2012 at 4:02 am


    an apt comment, spoilt somewhat by not posting it through your Triond profile!

  • Alistair Briggs
    February 4th, 2012 at 4:23 am

    @honea byrne

    You’re welcome. :)

  • Tiki33
    October 1st, 2012 at 10:09 pm

    This is some interesting information. It’s not pleasing to think that triond could be selling and republishing our work without our permission. This gives me something to think about.

Leave a Reply
comments powered by Disqus
Click the icon to the left to subscribe to Writinghood with your favorite RSS reader.
© 2009 Writinghood | About | Advertise | Contact | Submit an Article
Powered by