So, I am new here and after waiting ages for the review process to kick in I finally received word back on both submitted cards: We have not approved your card for your chosen categories. Nothing in the image/art nor verse of this general card speaks to the specific occasion.
 
Now, they are blank internal cards without a heading on the front like "Happy Valentines" or stuff like that.  They do have love hearts - one with two skull heads facing and a heart between and one with a tattoo style heart and a place for two peoples names.  I think its pretty clear that they belong in their category.  
 
This just seems like review processing gone mad.  
 
I get that a review process is needed and its a good thing but the general reasons for review processes are :
 
-quality
-appropriateness
 
I think the idea with that outcome is that it would when applied correctly reduce unrelated items 'spam' in a category its not meant for.  I think when we see love hearts as not being related to romance - the process has gone a bit crazy and over zealous.  
 
I am not at all impressed so far with my experience and if I have to put what I see as outmoded verses or generic "Happy Valentines!" titles on my cards I think I may have chosen my card home base incorrectly.  
 
Before anyone asks, **I read in the wiki** and it states that the images should reflect the theme - they do and while they may not be lollies and kittens (not all valentines people are into lollies and kittens), but they DEFINITELY reflect the theme.  I think this was a case of reviewer taste and inability to read an image more than a mishandling of categories on my behalf.  Not at all happy.
 
GCU?  Not progressive - too old fashioned!
 

It can be very frustrating at times.
I have had this happen on numerous occasions and sometimes you don't want to ruin the design of the card by plastering text across the front.
 
Usually a polite explanation to the reviewer can rectify the situation  

Quote from Gillean_137778 on Aug 14^th, 2010, 12:07am:

 
I just wanted to point something out - I emailed them immediately with my concerns.
 
As for my comments, they were honest and based on my experiences so far which have not been great at all.  I am yet to have a good experience with my new account so I am allowed to state that in fact that is what this area is for - comments of all kinds that might let the staff here know where there are some service holes.  Not everyone will be pleased, or be suited to this site (like me) but they do need to know how people like me experience their site no matter how much of a minority I am on here and no matter how much it pains die hard GCU fans. This is how my experiences so far (long wait time, then incorrect review) have made me feel already.  I expect a lot from a place that makes a dollar from me, granted, but I think that expectation is fair.  
 
I do think in all honesty that GCU is a bit behind the times on what a greeting card could be - take a look at some of the wonderful creations on etsy for example or the more progressive crafting and art projects related to cards that are being produced. When hearts are not considered appropriate to a romance category based on the fact theres no text - thats just a bit old fashioned in my opinion. My work is a little different from your usual V day card, but still quite clearly fits the category and the rules. I was surprised to see someone really did not make the connection between hearts and romance. I can say that right?  
 
You call it derogatory, I call it honest criticism.  
 
I'm ok with waiting for a review process that works not too happy about waiting for one for that long that appears to have been based on personal taste and a lack of understanding.  
 
Thanks for the suggestions guys, but I think this place is generally too slow and too old fashioned for me. Might just print my own and sell at my leisure - probably suits someone like me better.  
 
   
 

Hi Cynthia and Danielle,
 
When I first joined over a year ago, I had my own tantrums so to speak about the review process and the wait...and Cynthia you are correct, GCU is not for every artist...but I would encourage you to read one more thing before either of you walk away.
 
One of the most successful artists on this site was kind enough to write a Squidoo lens where she helps explain this very subject of categories.  I'll leave the link for you to read if you wish.  Once I was able to open my mind to thinking about this process from GCU's point of view, life became simple and sales have been incredible.
 
Here is the link, I hope it offers some further food for thought...
 
http://www.squidoo.com/GCU101

Doreen, I have read the Squidoo lens you mention but it doesn't help when the reviewer is totally inconsistent!
 
I've just had a batch of 42 cards reviewed, 6 designs in 7 languages. Nearly all were returned for edits and two were declined.  
 
I've just begun to go through them to change them and the reasons for declining them are simply not true! Where they are saying I've submitted the same design twice, I haven't.
 
As far as the edits are concerned they are totally inconsistent! Certain keywords have to be removed in one language but not another. I was allowed to put a 'Cupcake with a Christmas Tree', in 'Christmas Trees' but the 'Cupcakes with Holly' wasn't allowed in the 'Holly' category. In one language I was told the cupcake was 'crooked' (it was meant to be!) and in other languages it has been approved! I have been told that two of the cupcakes are too similar when they are completely different designs.  
 
In the past I've always gone along with the edits, though often reluctantly because the reviewer has completely missed the point! But this is too much. It's taken me hours already because they just keep referring to the notes with a different card, and I've only done a few! In one email, I was referred to the notes with # (no ID number!) I am being asked to remove 'jolly' from the keywords, when that is the very word that people who've seen these cards elsewhere have used!
 
I worked very hard on these handpainted cards, thought carefully about the keywords and categories and waited patiently for the reviews, only to have a whole lot of gobbledegook come back to me!

Greetings!
 
I wasn't going to comment, but, after reading about Judy's "crooked cupcake" I had to.  That is just too funny!  And I'm laughing because I made a series of cards that have crooked numbers, and I knew that they were crooked because I made them that way.  (This was before the note to reviewer section was added.)  
 
Anyway, returned for edits, and the reviewer's note said something like, "I would hate to see you lose sales because customers won't understand that the numbers are intentionally crooked."  The reviewer was trying to be helpful, but, I sent an email back and said that I wanted the numbers to be crooked, and they did get approved, after I explained that I was going for a 'manly and messy' look.
 
Hearts and love?  One of my first Valentine's Day cards was a pink lacy heart with the text, "Be Mine" in the center of the heart.  The inside was blank.  It was sent back, not allowed in the Valentine's Day category because "Nothing in this general card, image or verse, speaks to the occasion Valentine's Day."  LOL!  I deleted the card.  
 
I even had my first recipe greeting card declined, as in sorry, no chance in heck we're putting this card on the site, because I wrote in my artist's notes:  'You can use a Sharpie (R) or other permanent type marker on the cover of this card.'  I was really pissed about that one!  Apparently using just the word, "Sharpie (R)" is taboo.  But, wouldn't it have been nice if the reviewer would have just written me back and said, "Oh, I had to remove 'Sharpie (R)' from your notes, as it is trademarked."  
 
So, my long and rambling point?  It happens to all of us, some sort of issue with this approval process. My best advice is always to reply to the email from the reviewer and try to work it out.  But, it's frustrating!  And I feel like the artist-reviewer relationship gets very adversarial at times, and it shouldn't.  And I believe that some reviewers are pickier than others.
 
My 2-cents worth of wisdom, gleaned from 2+ years here at GCU.
 
Penny

Judy,
 
I was not suggesting in any way that we should not voice our frustrations...heaven knows I have ranted myself on many occasions  ... That is one of the wonderful features of this forum, our mutual support!  I was only passing on wisdom from an experienced GCU artist that was a tremendous help to me and perhaps more suited to the original posting on this thread.
 
I too have had the frustration of inconsistent review issues, I just don't let them bother me much anymore  

I took a break from GCU over the summer because I was getting overly frustrated with the process.  If you make generic cards, you'll be fine, but if you try to do anything different it seems you will have to explain yourself, usually multiple times, to the reviewers.  I decided to come back and try adding some new cards, mostly in a new style of photography we've been playing with (TTV).  And again, I've got to deal with reviewers that think they know more about this than I do.  Like editing my title and keywords.  It's not a treatment.  It's a style, and no one that is going to look for TTV is going to look for it by using EITHER word, since both make it sound like something done in photoshop when we are actually taking REAL TTV images.  (TTV stands for through the viewfinder-you use a modern digital camera to take a photo through the viewfinder of a vintage TLR, like this one http://www.etsy.com/listing/48538822/vintage-kodak-duaflex-ii-tlr-twin-lens or some people do photoshop a "frame" around a non-ttv image and add "dust" and other effects in PS, which is why I get rather aggravated over the wording making it seem like ours is done in PS when we do the work to do it the "real" way)  I'm starting to think all the cards I have made up in my "to be uploaded" folder should go onto Zazzle instead of wasting my time with GCU anymore.  I work a full time job in addition to running my own business, I don't have time to deal with this each time I submit a card.  If I title it something, I did it for a reason.  If it is a photo taken at a "field days" and I put that in the keywods, I did it because it DOES refer to the subject matter, since that's where it WAS TAKEN (and yes, it says so in the notes).  I understood growing pains a few years ago, but enough is enough already.  I didn't even mind taking a few extra minutes to explain TTV in notes to reviewer, although I shouldn't HAVE to explain myself, so I didn't have problems with rejection because the images aren't "crisp" like a typical photo (and they aren't, it's part of the "charm" if you will, of TTV) but I shouldn't have to expect an argument on each card I create.  That makes it not worth while-at least with the really new and unique stuff.  And I know I'm not the only one that feels this way, which means GCU is going to miss out on really great stuff by frustrating everyone that doesn't want to plaster stupid wording all over their card to make it "fit" a catagory as was discussed above (been there, done that, deleted the cards and uploaded them elsewhere-where they are selling just fine without the "suggested changes") or go back and forth with reviewers whent he artist usually knows more about their work (after all, they are the ones that created it).  I understand that some people DO need help and DO miscatagorize and GCU is trying to maintain a certain "look" and not turn into Cafepress.  But there's a fine line between quality control and killing the creative process.
 
And no, I'm not a frustrated newbie that doesn't understand GCU.  I've been around since right around when GCU went live, way back in 2007.