Editorial process has no quality There is no quality in their editorial process as I have seen many people post for money on that site

I've very much enjoyed my time writing… I've very much enjoyed my time writing for HackerNoon. It's given me time to refocus on gaming and my love of gaming and video game writing and reporting. I've received great support and guidance from my supervisors. Also, I've gotten the opportunity to interact and chat with other writers who are incredibly intelligent, classy, professional and supportive. My experience with HackerNoon has been exceptional.

Great details Always impressed with the detailed and latest articles regarding tech.

Venturing into the world of HackerNoon Venturing into the world of HackerNoon, I found not just a content creation platform, but a blossoming haven for creative minds. Whether you're an aspiring writer fervently honing your craft, or a hobbyist seeking a vibrant outlet for your creative spurts, HackerNoon meets you where you are. As a platform, HackerNoon operates with the finesse of a traditional publishing house, but with a digital-age twist. It's the backstage crew, helping you to spotlight your work. Their dedication is truly laudable – they commit not only to cultivating your talent but also to ensuring your voice resonates amidst the cacophony of the web. Navigating through their user-friendly online editor is a breeze – it's like the Swiss Army knife for content creators. The streamlined interface allows you to zero in on your true calling: sculpting quality content. And once you've done that, you can rest easy. HackerNoon steps in to shoulder the promotional grunt work – provided your scribbles meet their esteemed standards, of course. I embarked on my HackerNoon journey just a few months ago, and now? Well, let's just say I've found my digital home. The thrill of hitting the 'publish' button, the anticipation of connecting with readers – it's intoxicatingly addictive. So here's to HackerNoon, for serving as the bridge between creators and readers, for championing the written word, and for its ceaseless dedication to fostering a truly unique digital storytelling landscape. I feel compelled to add that this glowing review of HackerNoon comes entirely unprompted and unaffiliated. I am not in any way sponsored by or connected to the platform; my words are not penned under any obligation or coercion. This enthusiastic portrayal of HackerNoon is purely a reflection of my own delightful experiences and the high regard I've developed for the platform. I write this review as a token of appreciation and a nod to the difference HackerNoon has made in my content creation journey.

This is merely an excessively hyped centralized platform. Dear online community, I wish to share a rather unfortunate experience I had on HackerNoon, and I do so with the broader online community. My primary request is aimed at projects that are already partnered with them or those considering such partnerships in the future, especially concerning their so-called article writing contests. I urge you to explore alternative options. Through my continuous observations as a user, I have confidently concluded that their evaluation criteria are seriously flawed, as they lack the necessary technology to filter out bot-generated traffic. Scammers have identified this weakness and are attempting to exploit it in the following ways, which I will now describe in detail. One of their key rules for evaluating contest articles is that the top 10 articles must have generated high traffic (including bot traffic - test this by disregarding their responses). So, what do scammers do to take advantage of this rule? They create multiple articles from multiple accounts or the same account, generating artificial internet traffic for all their submissions. This way, they secure most of the available slots within the 10-article quota to increase their chances of winning. In 95% of cases, the article with the highest traffic wins the contest. It's disheartening to acknowledge that a significant portion of the funds from such contests likely ends up in the hands of scammers because quality is not a priority. High-quality articles either go unapproved or are severely underestimated by editors who often lack the expertise to evaluate such submissions. If you examine the works of past contest winners, you will be astonished. AI-generated articles and articles with non-functional, flawed code have frequently emerged as winners. Hence, it is not difficult to conclude that the concept of HackerNoon is not inherently flawed, but several factors may eventually lead to its downfall. As an experienced developer, I submitted high-quality articles for their "Unity Writing Contest," but none of them were selected as winning entries. This, I boldly claim, is due to the presence of scammers and their flawed evaluation criteria. Low-quality articles have won, and such articles can be easily found on the internet. Consequently, I decided to withdraw all my articles from their platform and republish them on my personal blog, where they are now attracting decent traffic. My frustration does not stem from not winning but from their erroneous methods of selecting contest winners. Another concerning trend is the scammers who won previous contests gradually changing their bios to match the nature of upcoming contests. For instance, if the contest is gaming-related, they update their bio to claim they are an "Experienced Game Developer." If it's a DevOps contest, they change their bio to "Professional DevOps Engineer." Astonishingly, they continue to win. This might be because editors have no clear criteria for evaluating submissions and are turning to circumstantial evidence in the contestants' profiles. If your bio states "Marketer," participating in a gaming contest will almost certainly result in a loss. My request is simple: if you are organizing a contest in a public forum, please ensure fairness and recognize the hard work of participants. Your announcement writer comes across as extremely rude and fails to appreciate participants who do not win. Consider removing the top ten quotas for evaluating submissions and assuming a less active role in evaluating articles from HackerNoon's Editorial end because their roles should be already there while approving the submissions. Most of the judging responsibility should be granted to the projects launching the contests. Thank you.