Following are all the pertinent posts made to the HATT list during the RoboDemo incident.
|
From: "drainaud"
|
| From: "Snowden, Jim @Cimage" Date: Thu May 9, 2002 11:43 am Subject: RE: [HATT] RoboDemo Looking at the screenshots on the ehelp website, RoboDemo *looks* to be identical to Flash Cam (http://www.nexusconcepts.com/flashcam/index.htm). Identical menu items, toolbar button icons, screen layout etc. Maybe it is Flash Cam? Jim
|
| From: "David Knopf" Date: Thu May 9, 2002 11:50 am Subject: RE: [HATT] RoboDemo Snowden, Jim @Cimage [mailto:jims@c...] wrote: | Looking at the screenshots on the ehelp website, RoboDemo *looks* to be | identical to Flash Cam (http://www.nexusconcepts.com/flashcam/index.htm). | Identical menu items, toolbar button icons, screen layout etc. | | Maybe it is Flash Cam? Dunno, but you know what they say: if it walks like a duck and it talks like a duck ... Sure would be interesting, though, given that FlashCam costs $79, and RoboDemo is priced at $899, according to eHelp's press release. I'm sure we'll get to the bottom of this eventually, mad HATTers that we are. Cheers,
|
| From: "Snowden, Jim @Cimage" Date: Thu May 9, 2002 12:05 pm Subject: RE: [HATT] RoboDemo Looking at the output formats (.exe, outlook) RoboDemo would correspond feature wise to the Pro version of Flash Cam which is $149. There is a corporate (5 license) version of Flash Cam for $699. Jim
|
| From: "David Knopf" Date: Thu May 9, 2002 1:13 pm Subject: RE: [HATT] RoboDemo Ron Miller [mailto:ronsmiller@a...] wrote: | I haven't see the RHDemo product, but it sounds like they repackaged the | old RoboHelp video program (that used to come free with the product) | and are charging an awful lot of money for it. Nope, I'm sure it's not the old Software Video Camera. For one thing, that's still included with RoboHelp Office and RoboHelp Enterprise. For another, the Software Video Camera could only produce .avi files--certainly not .swf's or .exe's. I think Jim had it right that this is just FlashCam in an eHelp box. I don't have any inside info about it, though, so I can't be 100% sure. I'll look forward to seeing the actual product, though, once it's shipping. | CoffeeCup has a Flash-like product called FireStarter for $49.95. See | www.coffeecup.com. Also, there's camtasia from techsmith | (www.techsmith.com), the makers of snagit, which is available for $149.95. Interesting. I didn't know about the Coffee Cup product. So here's the line up (so far): - FireStarter (CoffeeCup) @ $49.95 - FlashCam (Nexus) @ $79.95 - FlashCam Pro (Nexus) @ $149.95 - Flash (Macromedia) @ $499 - RoboDemo (eHelp) @ $899 I don't know what to say except "Gosh!" :-) D.
|
| From: Sean Brierley Date: Thu May 9, 2002 1:31 pm Subject: RE: [HATT] RoboDemo Hey, maybe eHelp is using Flashcam's code by . . . err . . . legal agreement ;?). Moving right along, is this all similar to Techsmith's Camtasia product: http://www.camtasia.com? Cheers, Sean
|
| From: "leland_dieno" Date: Thu May 9, 2002 2:43 pm Subject: Re: RoboDemo The only thing concerning about this situation is that people will actually pay the money for this application when FlashCam can do the same for a whole lot less. You could purchase FlashCam and Macromedia Flash for cheaper! You can export swf's from FlashCam, and then import them into Flash, which allows you to work with action scripting and user interactivity. From a ELearning Perspective, this is a very great thing! The hardest part about doing the demos is the control, which does the physical screen capturing. No Matter how great RoboDemo was, I wouldn't purchase it. I have been using FlashCam's demo to test it for an upcoming project. It is a great program and once you teach yourself how to use it its great! Plus, I can't express enough how much I like the idea of exporting a swf from FlashCam and then importing it into Flash. Now, If RoboDemo supported Flash Actionscripting, and was a couple hundred dollars cheaper it would be worth looking at. After seeing the way RoboHelp manipulates my html code, I could imagine how bad it would change the backbone to a swf file. (Maybe importing it into Flash would be hell!) I am a full supporter to FlashCam, and if any of the employees of that company subscribe to this list - Way To Go!!! Great Application! Leland
|
| From: "Cline, Dana (Dana)" Date: Fri May 10, 2002 10:53 am Subject: RE: [HATT] RoboDemo >>the RoboDemo product is exactly the same as Nexus FlashCam Pro. Hard to believe, given the *vast* price difference, yet there it is. It just keeps getting funnier and funnier, doesn't it? What's next? A rebranded HomeSite for $499? Dana Cline
|
| From: "David Knopf" Date: Fri May 10, 2002 12:46 pm Subject: RE: [HATT] RoboDemo Well, I still haven't spoken to anyone at eHelp about this, but I have been in touch with a few people likely to be "in the know." Here's what I've found out. Apparently, eHelp has *acquired* Flash Cam. Apparently, current Flash Cam users will receive a free copy of RoboDemo once the acquisition is complete. Apparently, the acquisition will be completed *very* soon. Apparently, once the acquisition is completed, Flash Cam will no longer be available from Nexus. Note my careful use of the word "apparently" at the beginning of each of the preceding four sentences. I have done this because I cannot say *for sure* that this information is accurate. That said, it would appear that if you want a copy of Flash Cam and if you would prefer to pay the Nexus price instead of the eHelp price, it would be a very good idea to place your order with Nexus immediately. Like today. Regards,
|
| From: Bill Swallow Date: Fri May 10, 2002 1:27 pm Subject: Re: [HATT] RoboDemo *IF* eHelp is buying FlashCam Pro and *IF* it's the same tool under a new brand, what justifies the 6x price increase? Given that there are other tools out there that do similar stuff for a lot cheaper, why would it make sense to sell a product that is already at a very competitive price at such a humongous markup? To me, it just doesn't make economic sense. It'd be like buying a Ford Fiesta, removing Ford's blue oval branding, replacing it with the Mercedes branding, and charging $85,000 for it! Dunno, it just doesn't make any sense. I don't know... it seems like eHelp might be driving itself into the ground by continually inflating prices on products that have more reasonably priced competitors. They have the "standard in Help Authoring" flag to fly because they were one of the first to market and made sure to grab a majority of the user base, but given the advances in Help Authoring, the diversity of needs and desires for output, and the price of the competition, I think inflating prices is the last thing they should be doing. Seems to me that they have very strong products geared for specific tasks. It'd make more sense to lower the cost to compete with the other vendors and increase the value added by customer support and feature-rich products... That'd get my dollar! And it'd get money from many who need to produce but don't have the budget for such steeply-priced software. All in my opinion, of course.
|
| From: Sean Brierley Date: Fri May 10, 2002 2:26 pm Subject: OT: (aren't we OT) [HATT] RoboDemo Shuuuure it does, Bill. That's how it works. A $40,000 Jaguar is really a re-badged $20,000 Taurus. And, if FlasherCam was so well-priced before, how come they are allegedly being bought out--or was that the plan? Maybe they didn't charge enough to cover their development costs and marketing, and so were ripe for eHelp to make a move? At least now marketing won't be an issue! Besides, now that the market is more than mature, the creativity is in acquiring and streamlining, not in developing nifty new stuff. As for me, I'm going to do the right thing, buy the eHelp product and 10 years of upgrades and support! Cheers, Sean
|
| From: "Srikonda, Sanjay" Date: Fri May 10, 2002 2:43 pm Subject: RE: (aren't we OT) [HATT] RoboDemo THIS IS JUST MY OPINION you guys are all so cynical. what could have made you so? Honestly, I think this is just a cash infusion from ehelp to help out a fledgling company. I'm sure ehelp will not even try and rebrand the product, roll it up into a disparate piece of software they already own, market as their own, change the logo, screw up the code, and then bundle it with 16 other components, none of which work together but can be sufficiently called a Suite and then sell it to every unsuspecting person and then insult them with no tech support, never answer their emails, and then try and sue them when they publicly say so. Honestly, what's wrong you all, hang your heads in shame. I would never have thought to see such shameless denigration of such an altruistic oligarchy as ehelp. THIS IS JUST MY OPINION BUT YOURS MAY VARY BASED ON YOUR OWN OPINION.
|
| From: "Cook, John" Date: Fri May 10, 2002 2:51 pm Subject: RE: (aren't we OT) [HATT] RoboDemo Once upon a time, 3Dfx (the legendary video card company) ruled the consumer graphics world with an iron fist. They were unsurpassed and unassailable. They had it all but started to believe their own hype and assumed that, because they ruled the world at present, they would *always* rule the world. A year later, they were out of business and had been bought by a young, upstart company, their only real competitor. In the tech business, hubris can turn your company to ash in record time. This thought terrifies and comforts me at the same time.
|
| From: "sue_heim" Date: Fri May 10, 2002 3:22 pm Subject: Re: RoboDemo MY OPINION... can you say "monopoly"? MY OPINION... I just LOVE how the price is increasing considerably. How much do you think will be added to increase the value of the product? MY OPINION... I think eHelp is pricing themselves outta the market. MY OPINION... yes, Sanjay, I can and do! ...sue
|
On May 15th, this incident took a twist that may have been expected. I received the following emails from David Knopf to start it off:
| --On Wednesday, May 15, 2002, 8:52 AM -0700 David Knopf wrote: Hi David, Well, here's the latest installment in the eHelp saga. They just called me to let me know they are revoking my status as a RoboHelp MVP and as a Certified RoboHelp Instructor. Apparently, they have been unhappy with my recent behavior online. They specifically mentioned my comments about RoboDemo, though I'm sure it's much more than that. I will post an announcement later today on HATT. Please keep this quiet until I do. Cheers,
|
| --On Wednesday, May 15, 2002, 9:21 AM -0700 David Knopf wrote: Well, it turns out to be a little worse than I'd thought. Char [James-Tanny] and MJ [Plaster] have now received the same phone calls. Still developing ... D.
|
| --On Wednesday, May 15, 2002, 9:26 AM -0700 David Knopf wrote:
Char's a CRI, not an MVP.
|
Shortly thereafter, I watched as his name was deleted from the RoboHelp Community site's MVP page.
David presented to HATT a complete explanation of what's happened to him later in the day:
| --On Wednesday, May 15, 2002 2:24 PM -0700 David Knopf wrote: Dear fellow Help authors, This morning, I got a phone call from the managers of the RoboHelp MVP program and the Certified RoboHelp Instructor program calling on speakerphone. They were calling to fire me as a RoboHelp MVP and Certified RoboHelp Instructor (CRI), effective immediately. Other CRIs and MVPs got similar phone calls soon after I got mine. I suspect you'll be hearing from them shortly. Apparently, because of my recent posts to the HATT list, eHelp has concluded that I pose some kind of threat or danger to them. In fact, I was fired effective immediately under the terms of the contract that all CRIs sign, one paragraph of which allows eHelp to fire a CRI "immediately" in the event that the CRI commits any act or statement that eHelp determines is "harmful" to eHelp. My recent posts about the RoboDemo product were mentioned specifically, and I was told that those posts were perceived as harmful to eHelp. Others who were fired got 15 days notice; I guess they are less harmful than I. I do not know what other factors may have contributed to eHelp's decision because I did not ask. I suspect, though, that some of the following may also have contributed: - During the recent discussion of eHelp's advertising campaign (the one that most of the people who replied on the thread considered insulting to Help authors), eHelp's VP of Marketing, Marylin Stompler, contacted me several times both by phone and by e-mail to demand that I, as a HATT moderator, take immediate action to stop the discussion. I refused to do so because I believe that HATT is, and must remain, a free and open forum. I believe that eHelp was unhappy that I didn't toe the eHelp line, despite the fact that my co-moderators all agreed that the thread was neither off-topic nor inappropriate for the list. - When eHelp filed a formal complaint with Yahoo asking Yahoo to shut down the discussion on the HATT list and sent a copy of the complaint to the HATT moderators, all the HATT moderators agreed that the complaint should be forwarded to the list so that all HATT members could see what was going on. I believe that eHelp was unhappy about this action and chose to blame me. - When eHelp made some business decisions that I thought would be injurious to an important part of the Help authoring community, I resigned in protest from eHelp's Advisory Board. I believed that was the ethical thing to do, but again I believe that eHelp was unhappy that I didn't toe the eHelp line. - I periodically make positive comments about authoring tools other than RoboHelp, and sometimes I make negative comments about RoboHelp. For example, I've frequently pointed out weaknesses in RoboHelp's ability to generate printed documentation and its lack of support for multiple authors working simultaneously on the same project. On the other hand, I have on many occasions pointed out the strengths of RoboHelp. Quite honestly, I've found that RoboHelp actually isn't the ideal solution for every user's project, and I've also found that it's *always* best to tell the truth about the tools and technologies that I'm knowledgeable about. No certification awarded by eHelp or any other vendor will change that. But again, I believe that eHelp was unhappy with me each time I failed to toe the eHelp line. I have been teaching people to use RoboHelp since 1993. I have been a Certified RoboHelp Instructor since 1997 and a RoboHelp MVP for the last two years. In fact, MJ Plaster and I were the first two RoboHelp MVPs. I do not expect that eHelp's decision to fire me will have much impact on my personal business, on the Help community, or on my commitment to the Help community. I also do not expect or that it will in any way improve eHelp's products or image. I will continue to support the consulting clients I have that use RoboHelp, and I will continue to support RoboHelp users here on HATT and on the other lists that I subscribe to. I did not begin helping people with RoboHelp in order to gain some "title" from eHelp, and I will not stop doing so because eHelp has decided to fire me. Life is too short for such nonsense. I will also continue -- in this forum and others -- to tell the truth about Help authoring tools and technologies. I would expect no less of any professional in this industry. You shouldn't expect any less either. And besides, whether eHelp likes it or not, this is protected speech under California law (see http://www.politechbot.com/p-02838.html). Though it is only *my* opinion, I believe that the ease with which eHelp took this action raises questions about the entire MVP program. I was awarded MVP status, according to the program's description, "to recognize and reward the hard work and contribution of individuals in online Help communities. These individuals have given freely of their time and resources to provide valuable knowledge of eHelp products to their fellow authors." This has not changed, and it will not change. Regards, David Knopf / Knopf Online / San Francisco, CA / 415.550.8367 mailto:david@knopf.com / http://www.knopf.com WebWorks Publisher Certified Member, JavaHelp 2.0 Expert Group Moderator, HATT & wwp-users
|
David Knopf received massive doses of encouragement and support from fellow members of the HATT list:
| David: Yours has been a mature and reasonable voice the midst of the fray, an impartial one despite pressure from all sides. I am pleased and inspired by your conduct and appreciate you doing the ethically correct thing regardless of the party line. Your input and the input of our fellow professionals has made my decision easier when I was tasked to recommend the purchase of a Help package for our company. As a result of this forum, we made our decision based on the issues and the facts, not on me-to-ism or marketing hype. As a Frame shop, WWP 7 Pro ultimately made the most sense for us. As a result, we are ahead of the game and will have new Help to go along with our new products and product documentation. Our customers and our company will benefit from making a sensisble choice. I daresay I will, as well. You have conducted yourself fairly and rationally. Would that we all acted in as mature a fashion. AS it feels as if you've been ridden out on a rail, one would not fault you for shaking the dust from your sandals, however, it is clear that's not your style. ;) ------------------------------------ the opinion of John Cook, Technical Writer
|
| David, I don't know whether to offer you my condolences or my congratulations. For what it's worth, you know that I think you've made the best decisions for yourself, for your clients, and for the entire HATT community. You also have some knowledge of what I've been through in my relationship with eHelp over the years. Ultimately, it was inevitable that your integrity would clash with eHelp's business practices. The reality is, to paraphrase FDR, the only thing eHelp has to fear... is themselves! It's all for the good, David. Take care-- ____________________________________________________ Ben Weisner
|
| What a buncha wankers. Y'know - its the pettiness of it all that amazes me. How 'bout this? We create our own title. Look, i mean, why shouldn't we recognize ppl on *this* list who contribute above-and-beyond? The only accredidation is through the list, so then - I vote to make David Knopf the first "Help Authoring Tool MVP". All in favor... ? //walter
|
| On Wed, 15 May 2002 14:24:02 -0700, "David Knopf" wrote: >This morning, I got a phone call from the managers of the RoboHelp MVP >program and the Certified RoboHelp Instructor program calling on >speakerphone. They were calling to fire me as a RoboHelp MVP and >Certified RoboHelp Instructor (CRI), effective immediately. Appalling. eHelp started this round by shooting themselves in the foot with the ad that implied help authors were superfluous. When that was not well received, they aimed higher, and kneecapped themselves by demanding that you (as a moderator) suppress list discussion, and then by telling Yahoo to shut the list down altogether. Now they have raised their aim a couple more feet, and as a result, qualify for a "Darwin" award. With this shot, they have removed themselves from the online Help gene pool. ;-) The *former* MVPs have a lot to be proud of. They have shown that integrity really does matter. I salute you all! -- Jeremy H. Griffith
|
| Y'know, our illustrious moderators have done something of this sort on the wwp-users list (and it's drawing on time to vote again, if I'm not mistaken). I think it's high time to do the same on HATT. Bill Burns > ---------- > From: Rosenfeld Walter-W18693[SMTP:Walter@motorola.com] > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 3:38 PM > To: 'david@knopf.com'; HATT@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [HATT] eHelp Strikes Again! > > What a buncha wankers. Y'know - its the pettiness of it all that amazes > me. > How 'bout this? We create our own title. Look, i mean, why shouldn't we > recognize ppl on *this* list who contribute above-and-beyond? The only > accredidation is through the list, so then - I vote to make David Knopf > the > first "Help Authoring Tool MVP".
|
| David, thank you for (once again) keeping us informed. Needless to say, I thank you for all of your nonpartisan discussions about help authoring tools. I particularly want to thank you for "sticking to your guns" and refusing to stop a discussion on a PUBLIC discussion list (albeit one that is a closed list). I am positive that you and the others who have been "released" from you contracts with eHelp will prosper and I doubt that this action on eHelp's part will hurt your business or theirs. You have always played fairly and honestly, and I respect your opinion as I am sure many others do. Suffice it to say that you have my support, and so do the others (from a quick glance at eHelp's trainer page, it's pretty easy to determine who's "out" of favor). ...sue [Heim] P.S. I had another paragraph in this message that I just deleted. It was full of "in my opinion" statements. I exercised admirable (OK, in my opinion) restraint in removing said paragraph. |
Within this discussion, a number of votes came in for //walter's idea for HATT MVP's.
Continuing the discussion ...
| I'll add my "aye" to motion of making David K a Help Authoring Tool MVP. (Surprisingly, agreeing with Walter who, actually, cracked me up with his "term" for the unsaid company.) And I'll add my "aye" that WE really should do something like this (MVPs), seriously. ...sue [Heim] P.S. The following is my opinion only: I really and truly believe that all the fuss would've died down. Instead, eHelp has fanned the flames of discontent yet again. You really have to wonder at the marketing practices (where DID they learn how to market a company?), ethics, and just plain old common sense of the people in charge of this company. IN MY OPINION!
|
| Ok, folks ... Truth be known, eHelp's MVP program was my own idea when I was one of the original members of their Advisory Board. Lemme work on this new thing ... I'll post some thoughts tomorrow. Let's get back to telling The Honorable Mr. Knopf what a great guy he is. :-) David [Liske]
|
MJ Plaster then posted her own story of her firing as an eHelp volunteer:
| Dear Mad HATTers, I, too, was on the Wednesday a.m. hit list. I received a call from Jon Lloyd, Director (recently promoted) of the Professional Services Department. Interestingly, I was "fired" via voice mail. I was simply told that eHelp has "chosen to terminate your Certified RoboHelp Instructor status" in 15 days. "Please call ###-###-#### if you have any questions." A few hours later, I received a second call to inform me that I was no longer an MVP. I guess I'm now an LVP--least valued professional. That's all the information that I have, except that I'm quite certain that the two individuals delivering the messages were only the messengers. I can only assume that I have been terminated "without cause," since termination is not effective immediately, but I don't know for sure. I have a few suspicions about my termination even though no reasons were enumerated: a.. I resigned from the Advisory Board to protest a new policy that will have an adverse effect on many members of the Help authoring community. I could not, in good conscience, remain on the Advisory Board of a company with whom I had such a difference of opinion on such an important policy matter. b.. I suspect that we beat them to the punch resigning from the Advisory Board, before they could "fire" us from that volunteer position. That probably didn't sit too well. c.. I do not look kindly upon the many (in my opinion) shenanigans of the Sales and Marketing Departments; i.e., Jackson Dean, Knowledgebase.net, ad infinitum, ad nauseum. d.. I support other tools (this has been the case since the early 90's), and this was not an issue when I was granted CRI status in 1996 and bestowed charter MVP status in 2000. This has only become an issue recently. e.. I received MY call from the eHelp McCarthy committee*** about the post I made a few months back steering the defense contractor without a budget to DevaTools. I was told this was just a "warning" call--(like what? This could eventually find its way to my PERMANENT record? LOL!). I defended my decision, and stated at that time that I would affirm my First Amendment rights as I saw fit, whenever I saw fit. (I suppose that didn't sit real well either.) Hey, the guy didn't have a budget, and DevaTools was the best tool for the job. I stand by that post even now. It's not about selling ice to Eskimos; it's about offering the best information available to fit the circumstance. f.. I have never toed the company line. ***The eHelp McCarthy committee is my little affectionate name for group of low-level eHelp employees directed by upper management to monitor and attempt to control the flow or speech in public forums, particularly HATT. So, with this ever-growing void in my volunteer work, I guess I'll have some time to smell the roses--a semi-retirement of sorts. Like David, I remain committed to the Help community and to assisting others. And, like David, I am really bothered by eHelp's success in politicizing the MVP program. We were recognized for our commitment to others, and now we have been un-recognized essentially for the same reason. Just as the Advisory Board lost much of its meaning after eHelp refused to listen to our advice, the MVP program will likely never recover from this rather dramatic action. One last note: There are some fine individuals who work at eHelp. When you work for an employer, you accept a lot of baggage. I hope we can all remember that. Of course, everything in this post is strictly my opinion! Best Regards, MJ Plaster World Wide WInnovations, Inc. http://www.wwwinnovations.com/
|
The discussion continued ...
| David (and other RoboHelp MVPs), it sounds like--in your usual fair-minded manner, you'll continue to support your Robo-Help-based customers and continue to contribute expert opinions to this list and other forums about the strengths and weaknesses of the tool and its appropriateness for given tasks. However, I cannot see how these punitive actions will do anything but harm eHelp in the end. Huge numbers of us in the Help-authoring community look up to the MVPs and trainers. We already know how effective HATT is at getting found by newcomers and not-so-newcomers to the Help-authoring community. Every day people are finding HATT and joining; if I'm not mistaken, we must be one of the larger e-communities. As new tools come along, no doubt you guys of the MVP-calibre (and others) will master them and go on to be trainers and MVPs for those tools and companies. And, those are going to be the tools that get the bandwidth in this huge community. By its actions against its unbiased MVPs and trainers, eHelp is potentially reducing its whole entire expert referral base and consequently, customer-base. Without fair-minded MVPs and trainers, eHelp may never die, but it stands a good chance of just fading away--my opinion only, of course. . . eHelp, if you have a shred of business sense left, you'll reinstate the MVPs and trainers you've just fired and issue an apology. You might stand a chance of earning some respect (and, on the slim chance, some business) from me. Otherwise, for the record, I've permanently written off eHelp as a company whose tools I've ever be interested in. Jo-Ski
|
| I sent MJ a private post, but then realized that I wanted to publicly thank her for keeping us apprised of her situation. And to publicly let everyone else know that I also respect and admire her contributions to the help authoring community, and support her 100%. So, to all of you who have been summarily removed from your volunteer positions with eHelp, I salute you. I salute you for standing up for your own personal values (as when you resigned from the Advisory Board). I salute you for standing up for freedom of speech (as when specifically requested by eHelp to stop public discussions). Heck, I just plain salute you all. Or rather, maybe I should bow low and repeat three times "I'm not worthy." Because I'm truly not! ...sue [Heim]
|
| I have a really dumb question (so I've probably come to the right source). HOW THE #$*% DO YOU FIRE A VOLUNTEER? It is not like these MVPs were on their payroll, was it? Somewhere along the line you would think they would like to keep the "names" in this field happy. My decision to go RoboHelp was based upon (1) it works well enough, particularly when I was a one-writer shop, (2) company stability, and (3) having a no one was ever fired for recommending IBM/Microsoft/RoboHelp mentality. That is, this is a decision that would not require major justification to those with pointy hair and control over the budget, whereas buying a copy of FrameMaker was a decision that required justification since management has Word on their desktops. Previous to these events, I considered a large part (not all) of the eHelp bashing to be in the same league as Microsoft bashing. After all, it is always easy to take a pot shot at the leader. Still, who is there with a product after all these years? Now, to "fire" a volunteer that is in a position to swing business to your company leaves me perplexed. As far as hubris, this beats anything I've seen from those that work east of Lake Washington and west of Lake Sammamish near State Route 520. (That could mean Microsoft, Nintendo of America, Safeco Insurance IT, and a few other folks. I'll let you guess.) If they keep practicing this type of marketing, I question whether eHelp will be around as a major force five years from now. I may have made a mistake. Bob Chapman
|
| It looks as though eHelp has joined the ranks of those who never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity. They messed up with the Jackson Dean situation ... they missed an opportunity to recover our respect by apologizing. They messed up with the advertising fiasco ... they missed an opportunity to reinstate themselves with an apology. They messed up by trying to curtail freedom of speech on the HATT list ... they missed an opportunity to reinstate themselves with an apology. And now, they mess up by firing the very people who are most able to help them build their presence in the Help community. Will they also miss an opportunity to try to recover from this by apologizing and reinstating the valued members of our community whom they summarily fired? For shame, eHelp. It's time you learned that continuing your shenanigans will only encourage those of us who use your product to consider other means of getting our work done. Your product is very good. I can't say as much for your business sense. M.J. and David, you both merit HATT MVP status. We are all very appreciative of all the support you continually give to our community. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Gail Gail W. Issen
|
Char James-Tanny then told her own story, and the discussion continued ...
| Hi, all :-) Near as I can tell, I have to stop leaving my house. All I did was go to T-ball practice with my son for a couple of hours and came home to...well, you all know what I came home to ;-) I also received a telephone call today. Unlike David, I only heard from one person. Unlike MJ, I got my news in person. Unlike David and MJ, I didn't lose my MVP status...probably because I'm not an eHelp MVP! ;-) But, like David and MJ, I lost my CRI status. I was terminated without cause, with 15 days notice. (My name has already been removed from the Certified RoboHelp Instructors page, but for another 15 days, I am still certified.) When I asked why, I was told that I had been supporting other tools. And, like MJ and David, this changes nothing. I will continue to answer questions on the lists I monitor and those I receive personally. I will continue to provide the Help Authoring Tools Matrix (and, yes, eHelp products will continue to be listed). I will continue to provide consulting, development, and training. And I will continue to suggest the tool(s) that meet your needs, not force your needs to fit a tool. So if you need a certified instructor in the next 15 days, give me a call...quickly! ;-) And if you need an expert, but one that's not certified (at least by eHelp), call me anytime :-) They may have removed my certification status, but I get to keep my knowledge :-) Char ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Char James-Tanny
|
| And since I so loudly supported David and MJ, I've gotta support Char, too! Char, your expertise is invaluable, and so is your overall knowledge of ALL of the tools available. I thank you, Char, for all you've done within our community and to help me personally. Kudos to you for sticking up for your beliefs and not being pressured to perform in ways against your own personal morals. All three of you! ...sue [Heim]
|
Paul O'Rear of Microsoft then publicly resigned from the RoboHelp MVP program, with Paul Neshamkin resigning from the eHelp Advisory Board shortly thereafter, and the discussion continued:
| Hello friends, Just wish to report that I've resigned my "recognition" as a RoboHELP MVP. From the letter that I wrote to eHelp: "I'm afraid under the current circumstances with some of my best friends and people I admire highly in our industry being treated unjustly by eHelp that I'll have to resign my eHelp MVP status. It's more important to me that I stand with my friends and peers." Paul ________________________________________________________ Paul A. O'Rear Microsoft Corporation
|
| You GO, Paul!!!!!!!!!! I hope eHelp gets the message... we really are one community and we like and respect each other enough to stand up for each other. Wow! ...sue [Heim]
|
| Paul, I admire you not only for your knowledge which you so freely share with us, but also for your high ethical standards. I think really should have a HATT MVP status for people like you who have helped us all so much. HATTers, let's put together a HATT MVP list! I nominate David Knopf. MJ Plaster, Char James-Tanny, Paul O'Rear, and all other former (or soon-to-be-former) eHelp MVPs to the position of HATT MVP status. I believe that those of us in the HATT community who benefit daily from the knowledge of these generous individuals are the most qualified to recognize them as our Most Valuable Professionals. I only wish there were a way we could give these people something more than our heartfelt appreciation. Gail Gail W. Issen
|
| Dear HATT friends, Many of you didn't know that I was on the eHelp Advisory Board (AB), I kept a pretty low profile. After all I used to work for WexTech -- authors of Doc-To-Help. In light of eHelp's latest, sad actions, I have resigned and sent a message to them that contained something similar to the following (I do not want to quote from my NDA forum message). ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I have only stayed around in the hope that the AB group might act as a voice of the Help community, and start doing some actual advising on eHelp's products. Believe it our not, I wanted you to develop great Help authoring tools. Since all eHelp seems to be doing is dissing the whole Help community, and now specifically my friends, I am resigning. You suggest that we all had sworn not to be critical of your corporation, I have no recollection of this. I would never swear allegiance to any corporation. However, I do stand by products that I consider to be worth supporting. Your products are fine products -- especially for what they do well. I was certainly willing to use and support them -- when appropriate. Believe it or not, sometimes even with enthusiasm -- and that's a helluva an admission for a former WexTech employee. As independent consultants and experts in this market, we always recommend the tool we feel is correct for the task. David and MJ and Char have done just that, and you have all reacted predictably and incorrectly by using this as an excuse to remove them. You have got to realize how out of step your corporate culture is. When I worked at WexTech, I never recommended Doc-To-Help when it was not the appropriate tool -- no one who worked with me there would ever have done that -- including Steve Wexler. But your company seems to be slaves to your marketing department, and your senior management seems to feel that there is no limit to what you will do to remove all competition. They are clearly out of control, and that's a damn shame. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ What a shame. Regards, Paul Neshamkin pauln@helpauthors.com MS HTML Help MVP WexTech MVP, Certified Doc-To-Help Trainer (and currently working on ComponentOne Doc-To-Help training materials) The Paul Neshamkin Group http://www.helpauthors.com
|
The discussion then continued the following morning:
| As a digest reader I'm terribly behind on adding my "aye" to the following motions, so consider a yelled AYE to: -- having our HATT list have its own MVPs -- making David K one of these MVPs -- supporting anyone looking for another tool to replace RoboHELP because of eHelp's corporate direction and tactics This is really VERY troubling. Again, anyone out there, I wish some journalist could bring this to light in the Wall Street Journal or someplace similar, in national print. I want to see eHelp be responsible to their community, and the opposite is happening. I feel like we are like the peasants of the French Revolution -- tithed up the wazoo and treated badly for it. If we're peasants, we should throw a revolution. If we're lemmings, we should all lemm (en masse) over to another product. Would I ever love to see that happen at this point. "We want our rights, and we don't care how..."! ; I'm hoping that another product company will step in to help us cross the line. Great product, a scary corporation. Like China -- great people, scary government. What to do but leave the country if you can and bring as many people with you as you can? There would still be time for eHelp to turn this around if anyone there cared. They were doing a lot better two years ago, when all we complained about was the avalance of marketing materials we received. I really think there is something going on at eHelp that none of us have caught on to, some kind of weird secret corporate plan. Because honestly it does seem like they are doing everything they can to alienate us, and in doing so, aren't they burying their own company? I don't get it. All I know is that I am gearing up to look for someone to help me "cross the great ocean" as quickly as possible. I'm allowing myself a few months to make the decision as to WHICH product to move to -- and, honestly, to give eHelp "one more chance" to set things straight. Then, assuming they will not, I will probably do what I did when I moved from Winhelp to HTMLHelp -- hire Knopf Online (http://www.knopf.com/) to help me through the transition without skipping a heartbeat (release update). Once I get there, my clients can follow. I hope I'm not being overly dramatic here or offending anyone by comparing these truly very minor sufferings to those of the persecuted French, Chinese, Afgans, or any society. But the analogy was impossible to ignore; this is after all persecution (of David for example) in a capitalist environment. Just instead of using pitchforks to fight back, we have our little voices and our little wallets. All together, that's one big noisy wallet. --S. [Suzanne Townsend]
|
| Hi All, Speaking (hopefully) for all us on this side of the pond (UK & Ireland), I am appalled by what has happened to David and the other MVP's. I support the HATT group setting up an MVP list...naming all those MVP's that have been 'fired' by eHelp. I would like to add my appreciation for the continued help that people like David give to this list. eHelp have gone way, way down in my estimation...and after the past issues with them...I didn't believe that this was possible! Long live the HATT MVP's! Regards, Mark [Doherty]
|
| To my friends and mentors (MJ, David, Char, Paul N., & Paul O'R.), I am totally shocked at the announcement by eHelp yesterday. I left work early yesterday and come in this morning to find this. Sufficed to say that eHelp has gone to far this time. All of you have helped my wife and I many times over, with your encouragements, knowledge, and patients. To all of you from my wife (BJ) {I feel that I can speak for her on this rare occasion} and I we owe you a very large debt of gratitude and appreciation; and you can add our two votes for all of you being the first official HATT MVP's {keep up the good work!!!}. Also, a special tip of the hat (pardon the pun) to Paul & Paul for their gallantry and chivalry for their actions above and beyond the call of duty. I would award these two a Medal of Honor - but I'm fresh out of medals at the moment; I'll have to run over to the Exchange {here on base} and pick a few up. <grin> {LONG LIVE THE KINGS & QUEEN OF THE HATT!!!!!!!!!!} Joey Joey Morgan, BS A.Ed., MCSE, MCP+I
|
| <snip> This morning, I got a phone call from the managers of the RoboHelp MVP program and the Certified RoboHelp Instructor program calling on speakerphone. They were calling to fire me as a RoboHelp MVP and Certified RoboHelp Instructor (CRI), effective immediately. </snip> My, my, my. Just when you think it couldn't get any worse - and a company couldn't get any stupider. I've already voiced my concurrence with making David K. a HAT MVP. I'll add my vote for MJ, Char, Paul N., Paul. O. and any other displaced former eHelp MVP/CRI. I can (moderately) overlook bad marketing. But when a company tries to force suppression of an open discussion - in flagrant violation of the 1st Amendment - then fires respectable, hard-working professionals because they refused to surrender their integrity, well, that's a little too much for me. David, et. al. have helped me in numerous situations solve problems that brought my work to a standstill. I consider them, and this group, one of my finest resources as a help author and technical writer. They - and everyone else I've met here - are folks of great knowledge, high integrity, and true professionals. It pains me to see a major corporation slander and mistreat the very people they should be trying to court if they want to be considered a first-class organization. Well, this pretty much solidifies my position. I will be looking for a replacement to RoboHelp. Since the revamp of our existing help files has been pushed to a later phase of the project, I have more time to explore my options and really examine the tools I'm interested in. Time to crack open that eval copy of AuthorIt in earnest and keep my eyes open for a demo release of Quadralay's WordHelp. Both of those are no more expensive - and maybe even less so - than my subscription plan for RoboHelp. And since AuthorIt will export to Word and WordHelp single-sources with Word, I won't have to justify the purchase of Framemaker in my recommendations. Cheers to all of you for standing for ethics and integrity. I humbly thank you for all your past assistance. - Mary [Sutton]
|
| <snip> So, eHelp fired people that did work for them for free? That's brilliant, @*&^ brilliant. </snip> I have worked with an Army volunteer program where volunteers have been removed from their positions, but only because the actions they were taking were harmful not only to the organization, but the Army families that the organization was assisting. So while it's possible - and even sometimes necessary - to "fire" a volunteer, this hardly seems to be one of those situations. So, I suppose that Yahoo! can expect another complaint from eHelp and yet another request to "stop this discussion" now that we all seem to be roundly criticizing their actions? - Mary [Sutton]
|
| Gee, Where have the senior management at eHelp been for the last 20 years? Can they say Watergate? Were they asleep during the Clinton Impeachment trial? Stupidity like this never ceases to amaze me. Hey eHelp, the fire is over here! Bring more gasoline! It is examples of extreme stupidity like this that convinces most average workers that the people who are being paid the big bucks are frauds, incompetents, and probably worse. By the way eHelp, have you been looking at the news lately? Did you read about the actions of Enron executives? You must have been thinking that they are good role models. They and you evidently think alike. Scott
|
| > I particularly want to thank you > for "sticking to > your guns" and refusing to stop a discussion on a > PUBLIC discussion > list (albeit one that is a closed list). Yes, I would have loved to keep this list open to all, but due to the amount of spammers out there, we had to eventually deny message archive access to non-members and moderate new members appropriately. As for my thoughts on all this, well, I can't say it any better than David did earlier in his original post. I've been down and out with a nasty head cold that's working its way down to my chest, so I missed this whole new thread (am reading up now). Thank you, David, and everyone else, for providing unbiased information about all the various Help Authoring tools you use. I learned a lot from many of you when I was starting out, and will always cherish this community's willingness to help. ===== Bill Swallow List Owner: HATT, WWP-Users, InFrame Editor, InFrame Magazine <www.inframe-mag.com> WebWorks Wizard
|
| --- In HATT@y..., "Paul Neshamkin" wrote: <snip beginning of his resignation letter to eHelp> > You suggest that we all had sworn not to be critical of your > corporation, I have no recollection of this. I just checked their instructor certification page. And the following statement corroborates what I remember: "CRIs will 'Represent eHelp Corporation and RoboHelp products in a professional manner'" Now, unless I am a total dope, nothing in that statement does it say you cannot say anything negative about the corporation or its products. It merely states that you must be "professional" about your statements. If you make a statement that there are some fatal defects in the product of which you need to be aware (for example, that absolutely attrocious problem with topics being overwritten in RoboHelp *and* RoboHTML), does that mean you are not professional? IN MY OPINION, no. You are simply stating a truth, and a truth that needs to be shared with other users. I love how eHelp can contort the truth to suit their own little world (and their own little reality). I cannot believe that such a large company who is -- purportedly -- a market leader in HATs would be so out of touch with things. Disclaimer: I have not seen a recent version of the CRI agreement, but I suspect that my quote above is not far off. In addition, everything except for the quoted text from Paul N and the quote obtained directly from eHelp's web site are IN MY OPINION only. ...sue [Heim]
|
We then heard from Jerry McCorkle, formerly of eHelp, whom we hadn't heard from in some time:
| Hello HATT community, I haven't been around these parts in quite some time. I heard of the post below, however, and thought I might send a response. Up until 1 1/2 years ago I was in charge of services at eHelp. I launched and maintained the RoboHelp Community and created the RoboHelp Advisory Board and The RoboHelp MVP program. Imagine my surprise to hear that this was actually David Liske's idea. This is the second time in recent weeks Mr. Liske has posted incorrect information. I think the accusations regarding Matthew Brown were withdrawn after Matthew posted correct information to this list. The fact is there are some out there who potentially lose money and opportunities when eHelp pursues normal business opportunities - like consulting (which they should). Seems to me the current backlash is being driven by those who stand to lose and by those who make bashing eHelp a way of life. BTW, how are you Walter? Jerry McCorkle PS - I am in no way affiliated with eHelp or the general "Help" community. --- In HATT@y..., David Liske wrote: > Ok, folks ... > > Truth be known, eHelp's MVP program was my own idea when I was one of the > original members of their Advisory Board. Lemme work on this new thing ... > I'll post some thoughts tomorrow. > > Let's get back to telling The Honorable Mr. Knopf what a great guy he is. > :-) > > David
|
| Eh? Seems to me, the current backlash is being driven by an astonished Help Authoring community as a result of a sleight at eHelp's hands followed by bungled PR moves followed by a wholesale sacking of respected Industry professionals from volunteer positions. Level-headed criticism of frankly bone-headed moves isn't "bashing" anymore than level-headed product recommendation is "pimping". > Seems to me the current backlash is being driven by those who stand > to lose and by those who make bashing eHelp a way of life. [John Cook]
|
| --- In HATT@y..., "jerrymccorkle001" wrote: > Seems to me the current backlash is being driven by those who stand > to lose and by those who make bashing eHelp a way of life. Sorry, but I have to disagree with you here. The backlash started because eHelp used questionable marketing practices, essentially disrespected help authors and the work we do, and then refused to issue an appropriate public apology. The backlash was further continued by eHelp's inappropriate attempt to silence discussion about said company on this list. And then, just when all the discussion WAS dying down, eHelp summarily terminated their MVPs. And... Hello? I've been on eHelp's persona non grata status list. Remember, Jerry? You should know. As long I whistled to the tune eHelp provided, I was lavished with attention. As soon as I mentioned --just once -- in a public forum (ANY public forum) that there were problems with the product, I was blacklisted. I suspected as much, and this was confirmed by several eHelp employees at WinWriters several years ago. Don't give me the BS about sour grapes. The sour grapes are all in eHelp's hands. ALL OF THE ABOVE IS MY OPINION (and a large part based in fact). ...sue [Heim]
|
| Hi Jerry, good to hear from you! This may have been an instance of the same idea happening in two places simultaneously. There was a woman involved with the Advisory Board at the time (I don't recall her name ... maybe Sherri?) and she had asked the Board how eHelp might recognize certain contributors. It was at that point that I emailed her and mentioned setting up an MVP program similar to Microsoft's. She emailed me back for details, which I provided to her at that time. If you came up with the same idea at the same time, that's great .. I have no qualms about that whatsoever. The MVP program under your supervision was a very nice program, and you should definitely be thanked for supporting it as you did. BTW, Matthew Brown using my code without my permission wasn't incorrect information. He did it, and eHelp is still displaying it on their site as theirs while they paid for something else. The page on the eHelp site is http://www.helpcommunity.ehelp.com/robohelp/downloads/winhelp/ and the sample is the one labeled "VB6 WinHelp Example.zip". The top of the page reads "All samples provided by Steve Rossell in Technical Support unless otherwise specified." My name is neither on the page near the sample nor is it within the sample itself. My mistake with Matthew was in assuming he was responsible for it still being there, and for that I apologized. eHelp is responsible for still supplying code they didn't pay for while not supplying different code which they did pay for. As I stated before, this is similar to a publishing company stopping publication of a book that's under contract and then publishing a similar book from the same author without having permission. As for "bashing" eHelp, my position is well-known and is available on my site for all to read: Good product when I used it, but the well-documented problems with the company itself still exist. Fact is, I don't make any money whatsoever from help systems. For me at this point, help systems are nothing more than a hobby. Everything on my site is free with the exception of FAR, and what I see from that are CD's and videotapes from Amazon ... no money comes to me at all. And I'm currently doing zero consulting, which is fine with me. eHelp is a problem and needs to straighten out their act. I see my friends having problems with this company and I get a bit ticked off. But I'm not in it for the money. I'm in this to, hopefully, see eHelp become a healthy company once more. David [Liske]
|
| > Seems to me the current backlash is being driven by those who stand > to lose and by those who make bashing eHelp a way of life. Oh? I stand to make nothing. I'm not a consultant; I'm just a lowly tech writer who sees a company with a decent product making idiotic decisions and alienating their customer base. I've stuck with RoboHelp because a) my stuff is already in it b) it works well enough, and c) the subscription plan fits my budget, but there are definitely things I wish the product would do - like single-sourcing or better print output. It's a case of "I'm okay with what I have but I wouldn't say no to a product that made my job easier." To me, a company is judged not only on the quality of their product, but the quality of their practices. While my 2 experiences with eHelp tech support were good, many here have had poor experiences. I remember the days of advertising avalanches - seems a week didn't go by when something didn't show up, despite the fact that I already *owned* a license. The marketing department definitely seems to have its collective head somewhere (I can only imagine what our users would say if we implied that you didn't really need fund accountants because our software was so good any IT goof could provide financial data). And the callous disregard with which eHelp has recently treated high-quality professionals like David K., MJ, and Char shows me that they really don't value any person. It is not a jump to think that if they can dismiss professionals who are certified experts/trainers, what kind of regard to they have for me, the ordinary user? No, Jerry - you're barking up the wrong tree on this one. I have absolutely nothing to gain by eHelp's demise, nor do I have much to gain by staying where I am. I'm starting to think I've got an awful lot to gain by looking elsewhere though - including solutions to some of my workflow headaches that eHelp just isn't providing. All JMO, of course. - Mary [Sutton]
|
| --- sue_heim <sue_heim@msn.com> wrote: > --- In HATT@y..., "jerrymccorkle001" <jmccorkl@a...> > wrote: > > Seems to me the current backlash is being driven > by those who stand > > to lose and by those who make bashing eHelp a way > of life. > > Sorry, but I have to disagree with you here. The > backlash started > because eHelp used questionable marketing practices, > essentially > disrespected help authors and the work we do, and > then refused to > issue an appropriate public apology. The backlash > was further > continued by eHelp's inappropriate attempt to > silence discussion 1) This all began because of some piss-poor marketing by eHelp that put-down help authors. 2) This was compounded by eHelp issuing an apology that was demonstrated to be two-faced. 3) Following up on that, eHelp tried to stifle the discussion, though seemingly only half-heartedly and they botched it. 4) Finally, they dumped their MVPs, all highly respected folks around here. Those MVPs earned our respect, whereas eHelp has earned our disrespect. This final act, be it ill-timed or deliberate "punishment," sort of rallies the community. I'm surprised eHelp did not make a positive push to use truth and open-ness in conjunction with generating good will via their MVPs . . . but, hey, I've been unable to predict eHelp's decisions since the get-go. 5) I agree, some are more critical of eHelp than others, but an honest, forthright approach to the situation by eHelp would have fixed this early. Silence by eHelp would have been almost as good. Subterfuge and deceptions was a bad plan from the start and has snowballed. 6) The final result seems to be that a few ex-eHelp employees are stopping by--at their own behest or at the request of others--to snipe at particular parts of the general ill-will that eHelp has actively fostered. And, while these ex-employees might have valid points or reasons here and there, these local and limited-area counter-arguments are really fueling the larger fire. Instead of sniping at perceived, small inaccuracies, perhaps a better approach would be to fess-up to the larger problem, a big mea culpa, some openness . . . heck, I dunno any more. I figured eHelp could handle this early, but now the problem is much larger, I am unsure of what eHelp can do. Cheers, Sean [Brierley]
|
| Hi Everyone, Just signing back on after a long weekend out of communication. Thursday-Friday was the Jewish holiday of Shavuot and Friday night to now was the Jewish Sabbath. I'd like to explain something to you - which I'm not ready to do on HATT. Basically, I wasn't "fired" as an MVP. Reasons? Well, as near as I can guess (and by the way, I haven't caught up on the emails so, maybe I was fired...decided not to look like a fool and so I just spent the last hour catching up...and no, I wasn't fired). So, why wasn't I fired? As near as I can figure, it comes down to a difference between marketing and Sales. David, MJ and Char were connected to Sales via the CRI program. This marked them as targets. I was only connected to the lowly technical support department as an MVP and so was "spared". I'm not sure what I am going to do. Being an MVP does have an impact on my livelihood here - it helps being the only MVP in Israel (not to mention the Middle East and possibly Europe). So...I'm left (once again) not sure what to do and for now am choosing the silent path while I review my options. I will continue to support RoboHelp on the Israeli list and possibly on HATT. I will certainly support more general questions on HATT as well. In terms of the HATT MVP list - 1. I'm honored and 2. Despite being nominated, I think it is a great idea. Off-the-record, I can tell you that eHelp's opinion of HATT is that it is made up primarily of independent contractors and therefore this discussion will have little impact on their business. FWIW, I think www.hatt.com is a great idea. If you want, take a look at www.techshoret.com. We started it about 6 months ago and it has been growing since. We now host a Resume Database of technical writers. They pay $15 for a year's listing. We also charge about $15 per month for companies to place their logo on our site. HATT.com could charge quite a bit more probably - enough to cover the hosting of the site or the registration fee, or whatever. To give you an example of response time - someone posted a question (OT) asking about charities for victims of the Intifada for his brother-in-law in the States. I was afraid of it becoming an onlist political debate, so I told the poster to gather answers off-list and I posted it to the site. I've wanted to do a lot more, but haven't had the time and resources. In any case, I think both the Web site and the MVP program are very helpful to the community, and yes, I think it should not be specific to tools, but to help authoring in general. Still have more emails to go through... Paula [Stern]
|
| Go away for a few days to a conference (ASI - American Society of Indexers) without email or web access (partially on purpose) and I come back to a radically altered landscape. For some, this problem of sticking one's foot in the wrong places seems to getting worse instead of better. Not to rehash the outpouring over eHelp's decision to terminate three of their CRIs (two of whom were also MVPs), but I would like offer my public condolences to Char, David, and MJ and also offer a few observations from the rim... These continuing mistakes are not a product of eHelp as a whole, but of a couple of people (at least in my uninformed opinion), which are the source of most of the issues over recent months, not just those things that members of HATT have heard about. There are many good people within eHelp being tainted by association with these bad decisions. You might ask why they put up with it, but in tough economic times it is not easy to rock the boat on principal, no matter how much you would like to. Several of the remaining CRIs (of which I am one) are having to face this issue head on, since for a few of the concerned CRIs a major portion of their yearly income (not true for me) is derived from RoboHELP training at the behest of eHelp. Sometimes the protest you would like to make is not as simple as you would wish it would be. It is easy for someone else to say that you should put your family at risk. That said, everyone should know that this will not go away quietly, and that the ill will these cascading events have spread is not going to die out on its own now, instead it is growing beneath the surface. The only saving grace for eHelp and their good employees is that there is not a truly viable alternative immediately acceptable to the majority of clients. If there were, they would be in serious trouble right now. However, things are on the horizon that will make these kind of mistakes difficult to recover from in the future. I have no doubt that the strong undercurrent of ill feelings toward eHelp will become a factor in future purchasing decisions as alternatives mature and become more readily available. We can only hope that somewhere inside eHelp there are discussions going on to turn this mess around in an honorable and proper way and then not repeat them in the future. We can hope, can't we? A few thoughts from almost beyond the rim... William Meisheid
|