eHow UK Scam Part Deux: Or, When is an Answer Not an Answer?

This is what feeds the eHow UK scam and allows it to continue to thrive: members continue to accept non-answers and double-speak for their legitimate and important questions.

For the latest in non-answers to the eHow UK scam questions, we go to eHow’s community rep, Rich Noguchi. An eHow member asked Rich yesterday,

“…I do have a very important question, and it relates to earnings.  Does eHOW plan on changing the WCP thing?  In other words, once this new global site is up, will we writers still be paid like we are today, by ad clicks?  I know there are many who are wondering about this very question.”

And Rich’s response,

“Yes, we will make sure to accomodate to our writers’ needs. However, I must clarify and say that today’s WCP payment algorithm is not based on “ad clicks.” We do not disclose in detail how our algorithm works, but we do indicate in our writer resource page as well as our TOS that many variables are considered when payments are issued.  Thanks. -Rich”

Okay, the primary question is, is eHow going to continue its Writer Compensation Program. It sure doesn’t look like it, the way they are squeezing out residual income writers in favor of prepaid articles, which is why the member is asking.

But that question gets brushed off with, “we will make sure to accommodate our writers’ needs.”

Well, eHow has two kinds of writers, and one of them, which eHow is increasingly favoring, is not paid via the WCP. They are paid small, one-time payments. So what does that even mean?

EHow has not “accommodated” the majority of its WCP writers’ needs in any sense of the word since last August when it launched its mirror site in the US, threw a UK flag on it, and used it as an excuse to bilk WCP writers out of many thousands of dollars–maybe more–for more than six months, and continues to do so.

EHow has not accommodated its WCP writers who want access to change their own personal profiles on its scam UK site, in spite of the members’ continued protests.

But Rich has a real answer for the secret algorithm, to which he devotes most of his response, using semantics yet again to avoid the real issue. We all know that ad clicks are a significant component of the secret algorithm. That’s what it’s all about. But instead of just answering the guy’s question, he zings him on a technicality. Sheesh.

This writer’s questions (mine, actually) on the same forum thread from two days ago have still not been answered:

At least two major issues remain that many of us would appreciate an answer to:

1. Not all of our losses can be accounted for by what the so-called UK site gained. Sure, you estimated what some people’s articles earned there and “compensated” them, but I know for a fact you did not pay everyone for their “UK” views.

But besides that, will eHow compensate us for our earnings losses that can be attributed to our original articles disappearing from the search engines for a time, or falling so low that no one saw them? You caused us damage in more than one way, and still have not compensated everyone. Is there a phase 2 planned for compensating everyone who lost potential income by investing in eHow during this fiasco?

2. What does the invitation-by force have to do with the global community, when the “UK” site is and always was in the US, with US writers’ articles, and that UK residents could not join? I am beyond perplexed, and I know I’m not the only one.

Another way to not answer pressing issues is to ignore them. Good strategy, eHow.

This is the “eHow way” these days. Scam your members, then skate around their questions like you’re Apolo Ohno.

Stay tuned for the eHow UK Scam Part Trois. Or be smart and run like hell.

I hear Examiner is looking for pet writers (meaning writers for topics about pets, not secret forum moderators.)