Freelancing at Home

My newest love affair on the internet is WebAnswers.com. One of the questions that is asked at least once a day is ‘how can I earn a living online?’ or some variation thereof. So I thought I would go ahead and list all the places I work at online right now. Sort of as a reference for myself, because I work at so many places it’s easy to forget them all.

I will regularly update this when I add more sites that are similar to the list so bookmark this if you want to keep up-to-date with the workings of the web and my income.

Some sites may be repeated multiple times as they either have multiple ways of earning or I use them in multiple ways. I’m sure you can figure it out as you go and I’ll try to give descriptions of each one on a basic level.

Buckle up, this is going to be a very long ride.

Freelance Writers Wanted:

Revenue share sites -

Infobarrel.com: This site offers minor vetting of articles - the first 10 are looked at by moderators before you are set free into the system to wreak havoc as you please (but please don’t, I kind of like this site) - and a 75% revenue share from Google Adsense. There is also a share of Chitika ad clicks available. For even more earning potential, as if Google and Chitika combined isn’t enough, the Amazon affiliate program is built-in. PR 4.

Bukisa.com: I didn’t used to like this website due to the fact that I was bombarded with referral link after referral link, but that is all in the past and Bukisa no longer even has a referral system. They now offer revenue share from Google Adsense or Chitika - only one or the other, not both. Adsense share is 60%. Nothing says a percentage for Chitika so I assume it’s 100%. That may sound like the better deal, but remember Chitika earnings per click are very, very low. PR 5.

Xomba.com: Xomba is one of my least profitable Google Adsense revenue sharing sites I’ve used since it only offers a 50% revenue share on your content. This is the lowest I’ve seen anywhere on the web. This site used to be useful for bookmarking purposes, but since it has done away with that potential, I’ll probably be removing it from my freelance writing resume. PR 4.

Seekyt.com: Seekyt is a new freelance writing website that offers 70% revenue share. Like Infobarrel the ability to earn with the Amazon affiliate program is built-in. PR 0.

Blogger.com: Create your own blogs and earn 100% revenue off any ad clicks with any ad programs or affiliate programs you choose to use.

Flat rate sites -

Demand Media: Pay varies based on the type of content you are writing. How to content for eHow.com runs at about $15 per article on average. Tips sheets are $3 and there are lots of price ranges and article types in between. Tips sheets are probably your best bet if you want the money to come in fast and easily. Quality control is stringent and editors seem to be a little nuts sometimes, introducing more errors than they had you fix, so don’t connect your real name to your work here. Pays every two weeks through Paypal.

Break Studios: $8 per article may seem like it’s lower than what Demand Media promises, but the quality control at Break Studios is much lower. The chance of a re-write is very low and in the time it takes me to do one Demand Media article worth $15 I can do two articles for Break Studios. That may only be $1 extra an hour, but I’ll take it! Pays monthly through Paypal.

Associated Content: Associated content has a variety of ways to earn and if you’re looking for some flat-fee payment, they will deliver. Payment is determined after submission and normally ranges from $2 - $15. You can also choose from article titles they want with prices already listed.

Seed.com: Seed is a competitive site for freelance writers. It’s competitive both in the price paid per article and in the fact that only one article of all those submitted will be accepted and paid for. Those who are not accepted and paid for will retain the copyright to their content so you can easily take the article and place it on a revenue sharing website instead. I see this as a good opportunity, but many freelance writers are put off by the competitive nature of the site.

Secret algorithm sites -

Ehow.com: Now defunct. eHow is no longer open to new freelance writers or new content. You must go through Demand Media to write for eHow.

Listmyfive.com: Create short top 5 lists for a share of the revenue based on a variety of factors. This is pretty much a rip-off of the original eHow WCP so it can definitely be comforting to those who were left out in the cold when eHow so rudely slammed the door on our noses. Minimum payout is $10 paid through Paypal the month after you earn the full $10. PR 0.

Examiner.com: Views seem to be the biggest factor in earnings and pay has plummeted from the original ~$1 per 100 views to a whole 62 cents per 100 views on average. This can fluctuate a bit, but doesn’t seem to change up or down very much between freelancers. Local examiners can earn an additional $2 - $4 a week by publishing between 2 and 4 qualifying articles in the same Sunday - Saturday period. Minimum payout is $25 paid through Paypal on the 20th of the month after you earn the full $25. Must post once a month or lose all your accumulated earnings. To help me out, tell them I sent you with the code: 18887. Thank you. PR 3.

Squidoo.com: Squidoo is another site that is based mostly on pay per view but there are other factors that come into play, such as people liking your article, clicking links within your article and e-mailing it, etc. PR 7.

Demand Media: Demand Media, like Associated Content, has a variety of pay options. After experimenting with the eHow WCP, they decided revenue share articles were profitable to both them and the writers. They now use the same - or the employees say it is the same - secret algorithm the original eHow WCP used. PR 8 on eHow.

Pay per view sites -

Associated Content: Content written for Associated Content does not have to be accepted for a flat-fee only as I write about above. It can also earn based on views. This per view payment can vary based on which websites Yahoo! chooses to feature your content though so I can't give definitive numbers. This is in addition to the upfront fee listed above!

And now that we’ve covered all the places I write, you might also be interested in:

Different Ad Programs

Favorite Affiliate Programs

Social Bookmarking

Top Paid Surveys

Other Work Online

After doing my last post about Examiner.com almost being a scam, I have found myself skyrocketed into the top 5 of my local examiners. No, the post had nothing to do with this raise, it just happened to happen. Halloween is what is giving me this raise, as I have a variety of Halloween articles on Examiner, including How to do Punk Zombie Makeup.

What I wanted to talk about was my earnings while I have been in these top 5 examiners within my area. Because what I'm seeing really makes me cringe, not to mention doubt all the people who claim to easily make the $25 payout each month. Oh, I'm sure many national examiners do, but unless my area is unusually low in receiving views from other areas, not as many people who claim to make payout are doing so.

Usually it takes me two months to make $25 with 51 articles.

Now that I'm in the top 5, I'm on target to make about $30 for October. Yes, I have made payout, so it's at least something to celebrate. However, check out my earnings page.

Yes, a whopping 252 views for one day and only making $1.63. This is from a few days ago when I first got onto the top 5 in Pittsburgh list, but the views have only gone higher while the money has stagnated. As of today, I got 435 views and only $2.30 in earnings.

As if that weren't enough to make you sad, I want to point out that since I'm in spot 4 - spot 3 now - that means I am earning more money than everyone from spot 5 down. Since I, in spot 4, am just slightly over payout, that implies that most people in the Pittsburgh area are not regularly making payout.

I've blacked out the title of the article, because that's not really anyone's business but my own, and sorry for the gray marks over the stats; I had it highlighted when I did a screen shot and it came out with the highlighting intact. Oops. Either way, here it is. Views, comments, star rating and earnings. Clearly we make more than a penny a click or a penny per view or whatever it is people are currently theorizing we make.

This article earned 28 cents on its third day of existence. A friend told me he clicked an ad - after some serious probing and questions of 'how did you find this nifty website' and answers of 'one of the links on your article' - and so I watched to see if anything ever showed as significant earnings on the article. Two days after he clicked something, 28 cents appeared, which is within norms of an ad click on this particular keyword phrase. The article was still displaying only one view.

Over the next few weeks, the article has only accumulated a handful of views and only 2 more cents.

No matter how you slice it though, there is no Earthly way this article was earning a penny per click - which would require the amount earned to be a good deal less than the views. Instead, I have 11 cents more in Listmyfive earnings than the number of views on this article.

Listmyfive has remained silent about earnings, but I suspect they will continue to do so, and I only imagine them breaking silence to say, 'please see our FAQ which lays out our payment algorithm' which is the most annoying non-answer ever. If they wanted the algorithm to be transparent they would have made it that way to start with.

Edit: LM5 staff updated information available shortly after I made this post. My theory about Listmyfive earnings was confirmed.

Payments - why do I see a penny here and a penny there? We have explained this a couple of times before, but let me make it a bit more clear. We pay a percentage of the clicks that google adsense reports to us. If they don't report a click, they must have deemed it a fraudulent click. Some clicks are a penny, but most legitimate clicks are much more than that. We don't only pay on clicks though. We use many other variables, it is not a trivial algorithm, it is well thought out, and benefits those that benefit LM5 the most. If you see a penny here and penny there, you were most likely paid from the algorithm and not an ad click. The algorithm can pay much more than a penny here and there as well. Also, the views you see, are not used in the algorithm, they are views for your convenience, to see traffic increases through your online efforts. As you all know, we are a new site, and the amount of traffic we receive from search engines is still relatively low, but it is definitely increasing steadily. With time, as many of you have mentioned and deduced already, search engine traffic will increase dramatically. We need strong solid users initially to make that a future reality. We feel we have a great core of users, and we are very grateful for them.

Okay, Examiner.com is not really a scam and probably won’t ever be an out-and-out scam because they still pay, but over the year I’ve been writing for them, my earnings per view have dwindled. In the beginning, Examiner.com paid almost a penny per view. Then they recalibrated the payout to include some other factors, but it still came out to close to a penny. Now, a year later, I’m down to half a penny per view, if I’m lucky.

Sites can recalibrate their pay all they want, but while Examiner.com is paying less and less per view than ever, they are adding more and more ads than ever. There is a pop-up when you go to login to the site, a Clicksor ad, I believe, and even a bottom banner pop-up when you are trying to publish an article. I should be compensated for being bombarded with ads while trying to work for this site, not earning less than ever before.

On top of that, Examiner.com holds its writers hostage to this pathetic pay. After a year, I have gained a rather large library of articles - not the 300+ that some have, but extensive to me - and the option to leave and just keep earning residual money no longer exists as it did when I joined. Examiner.com now demands that writers post once a month to remain active or Examiner.com doesn’t have to pay you anymore. And if you choose to quit and no longer post, Examiner keeps the articles you have published and the money for those articles rather than paying it to the author.

If you have a large number of articles it feels really bad and stupid to just leave all that behind and any potential money it’s earning. You might as well just flush all your time and money down the toilet at that point.

Examiner.com is going the way of eHow as far as bugs and glitches go, too. Not only do we get a severe pay cut, about 40%, but we have to deal with broken publishing tools, poorly laid out pages with Examiner 2.0 and broken earning reports.

Examiner may never go the way of the dodo like eHow did due to the need for writers to actually run their ‘news reports’ that are very rarely news, but at this rate, people might be jumping ship pretty fast.

If you have only a few articles, or haven’t started for Examiner.com yet, then run. Turn tail and run as fast as you can to another site that plays more fair with its writers. Yes, you may leave behind a few articles, but it’s better to get out now rather than be saddled with Examiner.com when they lower their pay even more.

Ever since I started working for Examiner.com they have been doing update after update after update on their publishing tool in attempts to make it more user friendly. The updates have successfully made some things easier to use - like posting at all - but has also made some things an absolute nightmare to do - posting multiple pictures or strategically positioned pictures.
Well, Examiner.com has up and decided to change the entire publishing tool and is going to Examiner.com2.0. The official release date for this is unknown, but Examiner does keep sending e-mails that writers need to back up their work if they have any articles that are in unpublished mode.

Furthermore, the e-mails have stated that any articles that were done using the current publishing tool(s) - there are two - will not be able to be updated ever again. The articles will migrate with you to 2.0 but they will remain as they are forever. This sucks a bunch considering how many articles can be repeatedly updated with the publication of a few more articles.

The solution if you want to continue to be able to write with that article? Back up the article, unpublish it and then publish it when 2.0 is finally released; obviously wait to unpublish the article until the actual date for update is set.

So what's that mean? It means you'll lose your search engine ranking, any backlinks you may have formed, any aging the article has done - as most online writers will tell you, good articles age like wine, not milk.

So you'll have to start from scratch. So... does that article need to be continuously updated or can you abandon that article to leave it as it is and just make something new with the same information once 2.0 is released?

I have a few articles that list a variety of body piercing types, such as this article about curved barbell body piercing jewelry that I used to update everytime I added a new article about a specific body piercing type listed. Rather than losing all the aging it has done, as it was published almost a year ago, I'm just going to let it fall to the wayside. It will continue to bring in whatever it brings in and I'll make a new article to update if I feel I need it.

To your online content I mean. This isn’t some existentialist, religious or spiritual question. I know what can happen to some content. I have stored all my passwords for messenger, e-mail, Facebook, etc. in a safe place so that if I die it can all be accessed and updated/deleted, depending on what the site allows. And that’s all well and good for sites like that, where my existence was minimal at best - I don’t have a big online persona outside of writing content and most people forget I have Facebook or other things (I do too) - and I don’t earn money on them.

But what happens to your content on the sites you write for? What happens to the income generated on that content after your death?

You might be surprised to find out that with online writing, your content and earnings may transfer to the site you submitted to if you didn’t give a family, friend or other loved one the passwords for your accounts so they can go and deleted content. And on almost all sites - every site I’ve encountered so far - revenue share content will no longer earn for you or your family; the money on any content not deleted - or content unable to be deleted due to the rights it was sold with - will be kept by the company.

This is all new ground legally and though you can put your online resources into your will, no company online company really has to honor that, as it would require a great deal of things to be transferred including the copyright of the articles, the ownership of the account you wrote under - which is against the TOS of most sites anyway - and the changing of tax information which is usually stable and unchangeable for a writing site.

There’s been a push on eHow.com by members who want to have all these rules changed, who want to be able to transfer writes and earnings in the case of death. This was brought up many months ago but was virtually ignored save for a half-hearted “I’ll take this to legal” that was then never updated. The thread discussing it was then deleted. But the people will apparently not be silenced when it comes to ways to take care of family after death because it was brought up once again. We still have the “I’ll take this to legal” answer with no update, but at least we know it’s not forgotten.

Start fighting for your posthumous rights, freelance writers of the world! If you own your content and especially if you make revenue share profits you and your family deserve to be able to continue to earn on it!

You may think eHow doesn't have a future for you because they are closing down the WCP forever. But you'd be wrong. Don't pack up your articles and take them to another playground just yet.

Old articles on eHow may continue to earn, but eHow won’t be accepting anymore user generated content. Everything will now have to go straight through Demand Studios. Don’t let yourself get caught up in the doldrums about the eHow and Demand Studios merger. If you were or weren’t accepted to Demand Studios, if you will or will not miss eHow itself, none of that matters. What you need to focus on right now is your own bottom line. Demand Media is doing it so why not you!?

First, you need to publish all you can right now. Don’t just pump out crap, but if you have half finished articles laying around now is the time to make the time. Finish those up. Set aside any other projects that are not absolutely vital and finish any half written how to articles or write up some that you have had in mind for a while and just never got around to. You have until April 13 to get in as much content as possible before eHow closes the publishing door forever.

But what about when that publishing door closes?

Edit, edit, edit.

I always wanted to go through my articles - and I did with a few - and fix up keywords, rewrite murky areas, etc. The ones that I did fix up saw improved earnings in just a month and most have become steady earners.

If you’re going to have all of a lifetime - or at least the lifetime of eHow - to edit articles then why not take advantage of it? Get the most out of what you already have published. Looking at first written articles is usually very helpful. This is content that many people used to cut their teeth; they didn’t know about SEO, about keywording, about backlinking, etc. Well now you do. Go put that information to good use.

What are you planning to do to get the most out of what’s left of eHow’s WCP?

Last week, eHow released a thread on the forum where a community manager, Julie, gave some dates for eHow site fixes.

Well nothing was fixed at the end of the week as the timeline said. And when I say nothing, I mean, absolutely nothing was fixed as promised.

So the date on the thread was changed to be for the week of the 22nd, and all the issues and their promised fix dates were left exactly the same:

Photo Upload Issue (problem with image upload tool and photos disappearing from articles) - fixes to be released by the end of this week

I Did This (problem with editing IDT or Save & Preview) - fixes to be released by end of this week

Unavailable Article Status (excluding Unavailable Status due to edits) - fixes to be released by end of this week

Edit/Publish Article then page that keeps redirecting - fixes to be released next week

It's Friday once again and not a single one of the 'by the end of the week' fixes are out.

So I guess they'll just be changing the date and leaving everything the same as before. Last I checked, by the end of this week is supposed to mean by the end of the first week you posted it, not by the end of whatever new date you choose to put on it. At least hold yourselves accountable, eHow, for fixing one thing on the 'by the end of this week' list.

Sorry I missed this at the beginning of the week when it was published. eHow's forum is harder than ever to navigate with all the bugs and with almost no communication - other than poor, lone Julie, eHow community manager, trying to put out fires left and right - I wasn't really looking for anything like this.

This was posted on Monday, March 15. So keep in mind, the end of this week means March 19, Friday, when eHow staff gets off work.

Photo Upload Issue (problem with image upload tool and photos disappearing from articles) - fixes to be released by the end of this week

I Did This (problem with editing IDT or Save & Preview) - fixes to be released by end of this week

Unavailable Article Status (excluding Unavailable Status due to edits) - fixes to be released by end of this week

Edit/Publish Article then page that keeps redirecting - fixes to be released next week

So tomorrow is the end of the week and I have not seen any of the 'by the end of this week' fixes rolled out. So that means tomorrow, probably right before they get off work, they're going to try to roll out the three patches to the system. Whether it works, they probably won't care until they get into work again on Monday.

Last week, I did a post about Mahalo wanting freelance writers, specifically how to writers from eHow.

Well I got an e-mail at 1:00 AM on March 4 (six days after publishing) saying my task was rejected. Apparently all tasks need to have citations within the text - which was not stated anywhere on the how to make a how to page. It only said to use them if they were not common knowledge - or if you were quoting something - and everything I wrote was common knowledge that can be found on dozens of websites, on any handout from a body piercing shop and a variety of videos on youtube. You do not need to cite things like that because they are so widely said, they are common knowledge.

I really can’t say I’m broken hearted; after putting all that work into the page and knowing that I was going to be paid only M$16 ($12 real world) and that it would significantly drop to only $3.75 and $7.50 for any how to tasks after that point, I wasn’t gung-ho to work for Mahalo. In a sense, I’m relieved. Payout on Mahalo is M$150. Do you realize how many how to articles it would take to get that? Even with the 40% revenue share I’d either have to wait about a year to get that much or write a bunch of how to articles for low pay.

The bonus, the review e-mail I got was very polite. It was very specific about what needed worked on and also said what you did well at.

At this point in time, eHow.com is the place to go for how to content. I just really wish they could get their shit together.

If you want to do longer pages like Mahalo wants, I would recommend Squidoo.com. What Mahalo wants in just a how to page would be a great complete lens on Squidoo. If you want to see how pretty my Mahalo article turned Squidoo lens turned out, check my Caring for a New Body Piercing lens.

I recently did an article about eHow Alternatives that included a Craigslist ad for Mahalo writers. Here's that ad if you missed it.

I signed up and did one of the Rush Week how tos - the one assigned to me through e-mail.

First, let me say, that article was a lot of work for the measly $12 (that's M$16, because Mahalo wants to have it's own money system) and 40% revenue share. A regular Mahalo page, after the Rush Week audition, is only M$5 - M$10 (or $3.75 - $7.50 in real world money). Here's what you'll be doing to get that money:

The intro must be 200 words.

There need to be a minimum of 3 steps with each step needing 200 words as well.(That's 600 words minimum just for the steps).

Find a corresponding Youtube or Hulu video and summarize it in 50 words.

Find five corresponding Mahalo links.

Minimum of three 'tips' for the article's process.

Put brackets - which create links - around all nouns, product names and anything that could make another Mahalo page.

I've now been waiting for 3 days to hear word of whether the article was accepted or not. There's no a preview button before you submit an article; which stinks, because they have weird rules about double brackets making links and # symbols making numbered lists and the 'how to make a how to page' article gave weird directions to push buttons to make things happen, except none of the buttons existed on the page I was on. Is it because it was a rush week how to? I have no idea, but sure would loved to have seen a preview of the article I submitted before turning it in.
I have never before spent hours trying to figure out what a company wanted me to write for them. If this article is accepted I'll probably do just enough other articles to reach payout (M$150) and then quit and just collect the revenue share as it trickles in.

Wow, for those who thought Demand Studios was paying peanuts, look at the hoops Mahalo wants you to jump through for even less than DS pays.

In conclusion, do I recommend Mahalo? Not on your life.

Mahalo Update

And after yesterday's post you thought I was going to be done talking about eHow, didn't you? Actually, so did I. Or at least I hoped I would be. But, Rich, the eHow community manager, came in with an answer to the eHow UK redirections not functioning at all on slower internet connections. From Rich:

Re-directs are a non-issue whether whatever connection you are using. It maybe a little bit slower to process if you're on a 56K connection, but generally speaking that's what happens when you don't have high-speed internet.

But wait! That doesn't seem to answer the question I posed at all. I witnessed, with mine own eyes, the redirection not working on a slower computer. It wasn't that I needed to wait a few minutes longer for the redirection to work - and even if that were the case, why would someone wait for a redirect that they don't know is coming when they are staring right at the whole article on their screen, complete with money making ads (money making for eHow, not for the freelancer who wrote it, since we aren't compensated for eHow UK viewer use). The redirection just timed out! It stopped trying to redirect at all because both the redirect and the computer were too slow. So that left me just staring at the article on the UK page.

So Rich has once again stuck his foot in his mouth and told a bald face lie. Non-issue, my ass! I witnessed the issue firsthand, so don't try to pull the wool over my eyes.

It's always so easy to say something is a non-issue when it's your company stealing those extra dollars and cents all year long.

Will eHow ever stop trying to pull the wool over the eyes of eHow freelance writers? There have been dozens of bugs on the site since I joined in December, many of the worst of which, - such as the publishing tool not functioning properly - have not been fixed at all. Then came the eHow UK scam along with a pathetic compensation for the theft of our eHow content.

Through all these problems the writers at Demand Studios (a flat rate fee site that provides eHow content) have not had the same issues. When you step into the Demand Studios world you would never think they are owned by the same company or that they publish to the exact same websites. One website - Demand Studios - functions, the other site - eHow - does not. On top of that, while pay is low, and I mean very low, on Demand Studios - so low that it's almost a kick in the teeth to journalists or freelance writers that have had to seek refuge there in this down economy - at least the site doesn't take advantage of its writers without letting them know. You see the pay is low as soon as you join, whereas eHow pulls scams to funnel your money, all while smiling and saying this new project is not affecting anyone's earnings.

The newest attempt to pull the wool over eHow freelance writers' eyes? For months and months the featured homepage content has been written by Demand Studios contributors. Previous to this there were regular competitions to feature content of eHow writers, and for those who thought those days might return please don't hold your breath. Demand Studios just released an announcement for the eHow Premium Homepage Writers.

This program is said to have started last month in January, but a participant of the program - in the Demand Studios forum - says she has been participating in this since September/October. The announcement reveals that $80 will be paid to preferred writers within Demand Studios to write content to slap up on the eHow homepage each and every day.

That translates to no more prize homepage spots for eHow writers. Good for Demand Studios writers - so good for you to those who got into Demand Studios - but bad for eHow freelancers - sucks for those of us denied to write for Demand Studios.

So, Demand Studios, eHow, what other plans do you have to bury eHow writers in your own pages? I know you don't think much of us in relation to your cheap, flat rate content, but really, could you stop kicking us when we're down?

Six months after the big eHow UK Scam staff finally started admitting the mirrored site was causing problems. Of course, this was only after at least five or six months of utterly denying that it was causing problems - meaning they flat out lied to their freelance writers. After admitting the problem they told writers they would remove our content from the UK site. Well they lied again - they decided to redirect all content instead.

That would be all fine and good except that the eHow redirects are slow - painfully slow. While using a friend's computer - a computer that doesn't have the same kick as mine - I tried to view an eHow article. The article link was a UK link, but it tried to redirect to a US .com article. The redirect timed out though because the computer was too slow. And rather than going to an error page it sat on the UK article page.

This UK page was set up with the full article, all ads intact and everything else. So if someon else, a real viewer, has the issues that I had, they might find themselves clicking an ad on that article. Guess what that means, eHow freelancer? You aren't going to get your payment.

As long as the articles remain on the eHow UK site in their entirety, there are going to continue to be problems. Of course, eHow hopes that freelance writers won't notice this since we have no access to information beyond a very slow, once a day or less updating of views and earnings.

What does eHow community manager, Rich or other staff have to say about this issue? We'll have to wait and see, but based on the silence to most other questions, I'm guessing there won't be an answer.

Prepare to continue to lose money to people with slow internet connections, those who hit 'stop' when a page is mostly loaded because waiting for all the images to load is annoying or those whose computers are a little overworked.

I was right. Rich gave an answer to the redirect problem on eHow UK and called it a non-issue. I guess everything's a non-issue when it means you can funnel more money from your writers.

Lately, eHow has been getting a lot of guff - and with totally good cause - so you'd think they'd come up with something to get their bacon out of the fire, especially after the absolutely appauling attempt at compensating users for the eHow UK scam.

So they came up with a
Valentine's Day contest.

eHow, let me count the ways you blew it.

1. Unclear rules for a rather awkward contest.

2. Leaving the contest unattended all weekend which meant questions about the unclear rules were left unanswered all weekend (but really, what's new? They don't answer pressing questions about the publishing tool being broken either, so why answer questions about a contest?).

3. Wanting the competitors to compete in public with their finds. Who's going to play after the first person appears to have the right answer? That's boring!

4. Not paying attention to entries, resulting in at least 4 hours of confusion over whether there was a winner or not.

5. Not answer the question that ask for rule clarifications when staff thought there was no winner.

6. And the worst of all, making a contest that could be over in just a couple hours after posting! How are you going to raise spirits when most people haven't even seen the post by the time the competition is over?

So a lot of people are outraged that people are outraged over eHow not giving fair or 'generous' (eHow staff words, not mine) compensation. It doesn't make sense to me how someone who wasn't affected by the eHow UK scam can sit back and say, to someone losing hundreds of dollars a month - as many are, 'shut the fuck up and deal with it or leave'. This isn't an issue of 'I don't like what eHow is doing with the site', this is an issue of being compensated for work that eHow already earned off of and gained other benefits from (do you really think eHow UK would have ranked so highly so immediately after being created if it wasn't for freelance created content? I think not).

I wanted to offer some eHow alternatives to those who are fed up with the crap though. I'll put links to previous posts where applicable so that you can get a full view of what the site is and whether it might work for you.

Flat rate compensation:

Seed.com - A new AOL company that offers flat rate fees for titles.

Revenue share compensation:

Xomba - Seems more popular with story writers, poets and 'rag' celebrity type stuff. Used to use it just for backlinks, but am thinking of trying my hand writing an article there and seeing how it does. Google Adsense share.

InfoBarrel - Offers a variety of templates, including the how to format if you're looking to move your entire eHow library - or if you just need a place to put all those how to ideas you don't want to give to eHow anymore. Google Adsense share.

Pay per view compensation:

Bukisa.com - Not a site I would consider, but some seem to like it there. The pay per view is extremely low, the number of views you will get as compared to better sites like Examiner.com or Associated Content are very low.

Examiner.com - Sign up for a topic of your choosing and basically make a blog. The pay equals almost a penny per page view. Hot topics, such as celebrities or sports, usually do really well.

Combination:

Demand Studios - Owners of eHow.com, but offers a flat rate and a revenue share model for freelance writers. The UK scam that so hit eHow's normal writers did not affect the writers who work for Demand Studios.

Associated Content - Offers flat rate pay and/or pay per view.

Mahalo.com - Mahalo is actually currently looking for people to write 'How to' content. Convenient, right? (and I mean that in the best possible way. Obviously they were watching eHow fall on its face). It's not on their site advertising, so the links is a Craigslist ad for freelance writers. Offers flat rate pay and revenue share.

My personal recommendations would lean toward Seed.com and Examiner.com.

So after the big, long wait and after more than 6 months of problems with the eHow UK scam, including problems that are still not fixed for some members, eHow gave us that promised compensation along with our payment this month.

Might as well have just reached through the computer and slapped all your freelance writers in the face, eHow! That probably would have been more respectful than the 10% or less that most writers earned (that's 10% of a single month's earnings, not 10% of the 6 months our articles were being used without permission and after eHow staff said how they felt we should be compensated generously).

To make matters worse, not only was the compensation a joke, but it was put in with the normal monthly payment. Meaning if you wanted to pursue legal action, you can't just deny the so called generous compensation, you have to deny all of your earnings from January. This forces freelancers for eHow to either accept it and shut up so that they can buy groceries for the month or to deny it all and hope they don't starve (or can't pay their bills or whatever you might spend your monthly earnings on. Mine happens to be groceries).

Yes, you can use Paypal to refund a portion, but since you can't mark that portion as UK compensation it can just be brushed off as anything eHow wants to spin it to be.

eHow, QUIT SCAMMING YOUR WRITERS! Your shit don't smell any sweeter than any other writing sites. In fact, you're the only writing site I've been to that piles the shit up to the waist and tries to act like it's not there.

Just so everyone knows, and I'm being totally transparent here, since the start of December, my earnings have been down by an average of $2 a day and then advanced to being down by an average of $3 a day. After months of this, I got $14 and some change. You do the math. That is definitely not my $2 a day. And even being generous, as December is usually lower earnings on the internet due to holidays, $14 doesn't cover even close to what was truly lost.

I did not even get 10% of my average prior to the eHow UK scam. I got about 7%.

Now, where's the real money I made off those articles? Cut generous and other useless adjectives, I just want the truth.

After the eHow UK redirecting issues were pointed out to eHow staff, it was reportedly fixed this Monday, Feb. 8.

I can't say after all this that I'm happy with eHow or that I can really trust their word that all the eHow UK issues are worked out. After running off with earnings for more than 6 months, only offering compensation after a month of beatings from freelance writers (and with the word spreading around freelance writer circles quickly) and now this issue of articles not redirecting as was promised (actually they were promised to be deleted, but that's also a different matter and a different complaint), I can't say I expect eHow or Demand Studios to act appropriately in the future.

Do you think eHow will ever get this 'international' act figured out? Or should they just drop it and maybe, fix what they already have?

Quick edit: This is not fixed as was claimed by Rich, eHow's community manager. Some articles are now redirecting properly when they were not previously, but many are still not redirecting. Some are also redirecting to "this article does not exist" pages when the article does indeed exist.

eHow writers, you might want to check to see if eHow is trying to pull the wool over your eyes with their lies.

I previously reported that it appeared the eHow UK scam was over but it seems that's not the case. A timeline of three weeks was given to remove all US member articles from eHow UK and instead redirects went up for all US content. Most were okay with this - as they should be since redirecting traffic means you still earn and you have a chance of a UK reader clicking on your article link from the UK site. The problem?

Not all links are redirecting properly. We're way past that three week deadline where we were told content would be removed (not redirected as happened, and no one ever bothered to clarify that that was or was not how it was going to stay) and yet some content is still blatantly being stolen.

People can cry, "You signed the TOU and it gives them the right to do this" all they want, but the fact is eHow admitted that they felt there was a wrong doing and were going to fix it. That makes them liable for it now when things are not being fixed. It was an agreement in writing from eHow staff that we would have content removed and the eHow UK scam problem fixed and it isn't happening properly.

So how is this going to affect compensation? Well, I can't answer for sure since I don't work for eHow, but my theory is that you'll be compensated on those articles that aren't redirecting properly up through January. "But it's still not redirecting so I'm still not making money on it," you may say. I think eHow will simply say 'tough titty' in response (and the milk ain't still good, it's actually curdling).

Rich, eHow community manager, sat down with the general manger of eHow to get around to answering some of the common UK questions, aka the questions they should have thought about before putting all the freelance writer work on eHow UK.

Most importantly it was announced that there is compensation in the works for everyone. Even if you think you weren't affected by the eHow UK scam then you may be pleasantly surprised to find an extra bundle of money in your Paypal along with your January payment.

All I can say is, about time, eHow! This is something that should have been taken care of immediately if not forseen and avoided entirely to begin with.

At the same time, I'm thrilled that it's finally fixed and I can go back to not reading the eHow forum, so thank you, eHow.

And Rich, learn to actually communicate with people like a big boy. You are a community manager, act like one and manage people of the community. Also, please announce when you get answers and post them on the eHow blog. Not all people check the blog.

And now the million dollar question, do I think it's safe to start writing at eHow for freelance writers? I'm not sure. eHow is still experiencing extreme glitches and bugs, including not being able to publish half the time. So it's up to you, do you think the hassle is worth it in light of this mess?