Me, Freelance Bidding and Porn

I bet you thought your days of hearing me gripe over Elance were over. I did too. And then I got a shocking email from a fellow Elancer this morning. She was writing to alert me to the fact that Elance was allegedly (I say allegedly because it's been brought to my attention that Elance may not have authorized this ad) advertising its services on a site that had pornographic banner ads emblazoned across the top.

Why was she writing me, you ask? And for that matter, why should I care? Because guess whose Elance profile was being featured along with these smutty “The YouTube of Porn” banners? Yes, MINE.

Despite the fact that I ceased my subscription to Elance well over a year ago now, my profile remains intact. I have a few good reasons for that. First, it enables me to take advantage of the free bids the site offers—when my time and the quality of projects posted align. That rationale for maintaining it, however, is really just a secondary one. The more important one is that it serves as free advertising for me. I can’t tell you the number of times I’ve been contacted directly by potential clients who see my stellar 300+ reviews there and my portfolio but who want nothing to do with working through the site. Until now, it’s always been worth it for me to keep those threads of association going.

My first thought upon receiving this email was “A$$holes!” My second one was “Now what do I do?” Since I refuse to have any one-on-one dealings with Elance anymore (I still haven’t gotten around to telling that story, have I?), I had no idea where to even begin. Who’s in charge these days and what are their email addresses? Beats the heck out of me.

Fortunately for me, this fellow Elancer was already on her toes, making noise on my behalf. God bless her because she managed to get action initiated almost instantaneously. Had I contacted them, I’ve no doubt I’d have been ignored for days, if not longer. Elance called her directly, expressed deep concern and promised to take immediate action to ensure the situation and any future ones like it were stopped.

Do I believe that? I’d like to, but the honest reality is, no. As of press time, the ad was still up, albeit with a different banner. Click through to see for yourself, as long as you’re prepared for the possibility of X-rated material. Gives Screw you, Elance! a whole new meaning, doesn’t it?

I will add this. The conversation with my former freelance-bidding competitor proved enlightening. The sentiments this Elancer expressed to me privately about her dependency on the site quite frankly saddened me. And it’s one that could easily extend into the content mill sphere. So look for a discussion of that (maintaining her anonymity, of course) in an upcoming post.

The Must-Have Translation Guide for Freelancers

I'm thinking I should be putting Debbi Mack on my payroll these days, but seeing as how Screw You! is a labor of love, that wouldn't earn her very much anyway. So I send out a HUGE thanks to her instead for helping me find all of these freelancing funnies.

Last week, she uncovered this gem, which I think all freelancers will relate to: Translating freelance “Client Speak” into plain English.

The Ultimate Get-a-Clue Freelance Request for the Week of January 25, 2010

Another reader, Susan Cunningham, alerted me to this week's Middle Finger Award winner, which earns the nod from me on the basis of a single word.

Project Description: 20 New York Traveling articles are needed

Specific Project Request: 20 New York Traveling articles are needed, min 500 words for each
article, all articles need to be SEO friendly. This project should be
completed within 5 days. You only will be pay total of $60USD upon
completion of all articles.

PLEASE SEND ME A SAMPLE ARTICLE TO BE CONSIDERED.

Yes, the $60 for 20 articles, the equivalent of 6/10 of a penny per word, is bad. It isn't, however, something we've not grown accustomed to seeing. It was the addition of the word "only" that really rankled me over this one. Sure, it could be interpreted as "We're cheapskates," but it comes across as "This is all you're worth."

Well, guess what? Here's all you're worth, travel article seeker: a BIG middle finger and a "Screw You!"

The Ultimate Get-a-Clue Freelance Request for the Week of January 18, 2010

Reader Leigh Ann Otte brought my attention to this week's Middle Finger Award winner. It's not just the abominable pay rate that makes it Screw You! worthy. It's also some of the language the job poster chooses to use.

Project Description: Post a similar project in this category $0.80/article 500 words article writer needed

Specific Project Request: I need 2 fluent article writers who would be able to undertake 4 articles per day. When I mean fluent I mean fluent. They need to be perfect in their spelling and grammar usage, and should be able to handle a few complex topics (complex topic would be rare but they would exist). Payment would be made after every 10 articles. Please include the phrase 'I am responsible', so that I know you have read my instructions. The first payment would be made immediately after submitting the first four articles, and the next would be made after completing the whole set. Going further (after the 35 articles are over) payment will be via paypal on 8th and the 23rd of each month.Please bid only if

$0.80/article 500 words

1) You have at least 3 months experience in content writing
2) Are aware of the importance of delivery quality, plagiarized free articles on time.
3) Can handle 4 articles per day (2000 words/day)
4) Willing to work on a long term basis (I don't want people to work on a short term basis)

Listen, bud, when you receive my response to this job offer, please include the phrase "I am a cheapskate idiot" so that I know you understand that's exactly what you are. And when I say idiot, I mean idiot, too. I don't want to work with clients on a long-term basis who aren't willing to rectify said idiotness. And oh yeah, Screw you!

My Short-Lived Experiment with Demand Studios

A while back I indicated that I was working undercover for Demand Studios. I took a lot of flak for that statement on other blogs by some of the irate cast of characters who have populated this debate. One in particular accused me of making the whole thing up to increase traffic to my blog. For the record, to date, I have earned $0 from this blog, thereby rendering that accusation null and void.

In any event, I did go undercover with Demand Studios last fall, rather unintentionally I might add. At first, I had no idea the job ad I responded to led back to the company. Then, when I received a reply, the opportunity presented itself and I took it. It was not done mean-spiritedly, or even under false pretenses. I used my real name and my real credentials.

Now this assessment you’re about to receive involves editing of article titles. I have never and will never (unless the company quintuples its current rates) write articles for Demand Studios. I also have no insider experience in editing full articles, which I understand are paid at the rate of $3.50 apiece.

Anyway, to secure this position I had to take a short test in which I edited somewhere around 15 titles. I was immediately accepted and put to work, and so the experiment began. In my first hour and a half I earned $9.00. For my math-challenged readers, that equates to $6.00 per hour.

I stopped there, engaging in this ill-paying undercover operation of mine only when openings in my schedule permitted. The next day, I received feedback regarding one particular title and strong encouragement to keep up the good work because there was a big backlog of titles that needed good editors like me.

So, during my next spurt I decided to dispense with the anal-retentive accuracy and concentrate on speed, which goes against every editorial grain in my body and the real purpose of editing. I knew I was in for a challenge when I was met with a managerial note along the lines of (I’m paraphrasing here): “Some of our editors are expressing difficulty maintaining a level of output equating to $10 per hour (apparently this was the rate DS was advertising as the one its average editors were making). Here are some tips to increase your performance …”

I tried to ignore all of that and got on with my own speed-building strategy. This time around I managed to earn the equivalent of $7.50 per hour. Other than a quick login to secure some examples for my readers, that was end of my not-so-covert sting. Even if I could manage to earn the $10 hourly rate the company thought its title editors should be earning (which I can assure you would be quite the challenge), that’s not exactly the kind of rate I’m going to be busting my butt for.

Here’s why, at the rate of $0.02 per title, I contend even that paltry $10 per hour would be extremely difficult to achieve.

Example #1: Learning Centers for Pdd-Nos – Unless you happen to specialize in the subject matter, you would have to Google Pdd-Nos to learn that it should be all caps and that it stands for Pervasive Developmental Disorder – Not Otherwise Specified. I don’t know about you, but I could never finish 500 Google searches (the equivalent of $10 per Demand Studio hour) in any single hour.

Example #2: Kleinfelters Hotel Pennsylvania – Again, you could assume that the hotel name is spelled correctly and that it’s actually located in Pennsylvania. Making those assumptions would undoubtedly increase your speed, but it would also defeat the purpose of an editor, which is to ensure correct spelling and accuracy.

All that said, if you’re really lucky with the titles that are funneled through to you (meaning they don’t require a Google search), then you could conceivably earn $9 per hour editing titles for Demand Studios, but I’d say no more than that, and we all know you’re not going to get that lucky all the time. In all fairness, I’ll admit this. I undertook this experiment while contending with a family medical emergency that kept me for long hours at the hospital. I was able to log in to the DS server when and for as long as time allowed. Under such circumstances, I conceded that $7.50 per hour was better than $0 per hour. I would, however, never make a long-term habit of it. I will also give DS points for always paying in full and on time.

If $9 per hour or less is acceptable to you, then be Demand Studio’s low-paid guest. As for me, it doesn’t surprise me that I discovered this notice from the company the last time I logged into my title editing account:

Editors! We need YOUR help. There is a backlog of titles in the Title Editing queue right now. There is literally over $3000 worth of titles available for edit, and it all goes on a first come first serve basis! Good luck and happy titling.

Now I’m sure I’m going to be attracting all the Demand Studio advocates to my blog with this post, but I won’t debate you. This is one person’s experience with the company, and it’s a fair and accurate one.

The Ultimate Get-a-Clue Freelance Request for the Week of January 11, 2010

This Middle Finger Award winner came straight to my inbox last week. I didn't even have to go looking for it.

Project Description: Required - Freelance Copyeditors & Cold-Readers

Specific Project Request: Hi,

Hope, you’ve true spirit while reading this email.

We're a leading company in pre-press industry and have huge amount of work for copyediting and cold-reading on regular basis. I've got your brief details from web and would like to see if you're interested to associate with us. The major subject would be Science, Technology and Medicine for Books and Journals. We're dealing with International clients only so they need very high standard of Quality and on time delivery so there will not be any compromise on these front.

The proposed rates are as under...

Copyediting - $0.80 per page

Cold-reading - $0.50 per page

There will be a non-compete agreement between us before starting the live project. Payment criteria would be one month and you should raise your invoice on monthly basis on/or before 10 day of each month.

I can clarify further if you will have any doubt on this.

Waiting for your positive response.

Best,

__syed abdi


Apparently I wasn't the only one who received the email because my freelance writing/editing lists were all abuzz about it. And apparently, I wasn't at the top of the receipt list either. The first group of people to receive it were instructed that they'd have to sign a "noncompetent agreement." For $0.50 to $0.80 per page, I'd say that's about right.

You know you're in for a load of B.S. when an email from a editing firm clearly hasn't been edited, at least by someone who speaks English anyway. I'm betting this company won't be around for long. A GIGANTIC Screw You! to you Syed.

Freelance Funny of the Day

I saw a link to this "I Can Has Cheezburger" post on one of my mailing lists and thought it was the perfect way to end the Screw You! work week. Too cute: Editor Kitty!

New Way of Doing Things Not So Fortunate for Freelance Writers

I'm thanking Debbi Mack (whose book Identity Crisis I finally finished and really liked) a lot these days for leading me to interesting freelance-related items. This time around she's brought to my attention the Los Angeles Times article Freelance writing's unfortunate new model.

And what is this "unfortunate new model" of which the newspaper speaks? Why that employed by our good old friend the content mill of course. The article is kind of long, so I'll stress the juiciest points here.

1. Publishers are using sparkling language in their job ads that really means "working for nothing."

2. "What's sailing away, a decade into the 21st century, is the common conception that writing is a profession."

3. "Freelance writing fees -- beginning with the Internet but extending to newspapers and magazines -- have been spiraling downward for a couple of years and reached what appears to be bottom in 2009." (Oh Lord, we can only hope they won't go any lower.)

4. "Today's reality is that much of freelancing has become all too free."

5. One anonymous writer, "who once could make $70,000 a year or more, said she is now working harder to bring in half that much. 'It's just not a living wage anymore,' she said."

Somehow I'm betting none of this sounds new to you. Heck, I think many of us beat the Times to the punch months and months ago. The fact that the situation is now making national news in a major publication, however, doesn't strike me as comical -- not in the least.

I do, however, like the note on which the article ended: "It's hard to say if any, or all, will succeed. But the sooner they can take the free out of freelance, the better."

And if they can't or won't take the free out of freelance? Well, screw them! They deserve to be getting paid with "personal branding," "showcasing of their work" and "influencing others." But let's see how long they can survive on that.