When I joined Suite101 almost a year ago, what prompted me to apply as a contributing writer was the fact that the site has credible and expert editors. I haven't had issues with them. I took their constructive advices positively.
Suite101 editors aren't the only editors I encountered though. Factoidz also have them. Comparatively, Constant Content have stricter editors - a reputation they are certainly proud of. Other sites also claim to have them, but they appear to be non-existent or more accepting of what writers post on their respective accounts.
Offline, I was able to publish my first (hopefully not the last) book review. The journal editor was a good one, although not that courteous enough. She happens to be someone who does not acknowledge emails unless it's an emergency. I did my piece and was hoping for a positive feedback. However, when I saw her edited version of the article, I wasn't okay with it because the original review's cohesiveness got lost in the modified sequencing of the paragraphs. To her credit, however, she asked me first to let her know what I think about the changes. I thanked her, but also sent a revised version of what she did. Unfortunately, she told me that her changes would stay. I felt powerless after that; nonetheless, I still thanked her for what she did.
