My Idea For A Foolproof Article ReWriter

Why hasn't anyone come up with an article re-writing method that employs people instead of dumb computers? To get ahead of the duplicate penalty regime you need to submit almost fully rewritten articles with the human touch to bypass the increasingly sophisticated algorithms.

The problem with computer generated rewriting is that it's mainly thesaurus-swapping rubbish. And most of the better rewriting software requires that you come up with a stream of variations on every sentence. I've done it, and frankly it is tiring and boring trying to write one paragraph 10 different ways, let alone the whole article.

So if it was only ONE SENTENCE that needed to be rewritten at a time, and if you had a choice and variation of topics to liven up your interest, now that might be different. Easy, bite sized chunks that anyone can do in a spare minute.

Here's how I imagine it would operate and make a pile for the person who gets this to market. You join a group or club with a monthly membership of say $37, or even $97. Maybe the group is called WikiReWriters, WikiWriteRight, ReWriterCentral or something. When you open up your membership page, you see a number of article SENTENCES in a list... some long ones, some containing only a dozen words... from different authors. You select one and start rewriting it. Takes less than a minute or two. Maybe you make the sentence longer, or not - depending on some basic instructions alongside from the author.

When you finish, you post the sentence and it appears below the original, awaiting the original author's approval. The author gets an email with the sentence variation, checks it, approves it, grades you for originality (or maybe there's an automatic Copyscape ranking at the end of your version), and then decides whether they want to put up another sentence or leave that one open for more rewrites.

The rewrite system could work two ways: the variations could stay shown below the original so you can see what others have written and avoid unintentional dupes. Or, each time a variation is posted it becomes the 'original' to work on. In the second method, an infinite number of variations would be posted, each one building unknowingly on the one before it. Who knows what might work better?

The author could have the ability to bold words that have to stay in the sentence, like a trade mark, tech term, or essential item that relates to the article topic.

When the author is satisfied with the number and quality of rewrites, they take all their rewritten sentences and group them back into the article, building every variation into a Plain Jane article compiler without doing any of the work themselves, and without giving away the whole article idea which unscrupulous writers may steal.

Here's the advantage... no money changes hands. For every sentence reconstructed by a rewriter, they have to submit one of their own article sentences. This is the only way they can stay in membership.

OK, there may be a couple of problems. (You'll probably tell me some more)...

Quality: Rewriters could be graded so that the really poor ones never get the chance to submit their own sentences. Maybe the sentence stays up there with the rewriter's name against it and a low author score. Other authors would automatically stay away from the bad boys, so the rewrite standard would be self-policing.

Output: Maybe one author is prolific, and another only puts out 2 articles a month. Maybe you need an advanced membership mode where authors could pay rewriters, or for a fee they can submit unlimited sentences without having to do rewrites themselves.

I don't know all the answers. But there are some very clever people out there who could figure all this out, get the software written and thank me for this idea. All I want in return is free life membership and 10% residual